American History: Barack Obama is making it

Now I'm not saying Barack Obama is a perfect candidate (lord knows he's too middle-of-the-road for my taste), but the guy is a statesman. He's not just a politician. Politicians only give a damn getting elected, deniability, damage control, demographics.

Demographics. That's racism, sexism, ageism, regionalism -- every -ism you can think of -- down to a science. Pollsters know how to appeal to every little corner of the electorate. You craft a message specially-tailored for each of them and deliver it to them the most appropriate manner for that segment. You might tell another group something different. That's the way it works. Then you gotta hope they never see the opposing statement.

Well, that's not what Barack did. No, he spoke to every single one of us on a divisive topic that many people would rather ignore: Race.

And he's right. Hell, I even disagree with his condemnation of his pastor and I still think he's right. America is becoming "more perfect." We have no choice; under the rule of the Bush regime we have had no choice but to figure these things out for ourselves.

Obama is simply putting what many of us have long known out there in public. And he did it without pointing fingers. I would've pointed fingers at those in the political and economic establishment who use racism as a tool to keep the populace suspicious of each other in order to distract and divide us. But then again, maybe I'm a nut.

Still, I suspect Obama knows this. He just can't blurt it out; the media would crucify him. They're already trying to nail him on Rev. Wright's speech. But Obama has turned the tables and made The Media look divisive and racist instead.

This speech is one of the most important pieces of American rhetoric in a long time. You owe it to yourself and your nation to watch this speech. American history is being written in front of your eyes.

The battle over saggy pants reveals a deepening race and class divide in America

This blog is your leading pants-related resource. Okay, so this is the first time I've blogged about pants, but dammit, with a name like Electric Monkey Pants I better have some pants turf staked out, ya heard?

The Threat
Okay, so some uptight folks are trying to introduce stringent pants regulations when we don't even have decent electronic voting regulations. I guess it's easier to legislate against somebody who can't fight back. Pretty much everybody who wears saggy pants is not in a position to pass laws, which is probably part of why they're wearing the damn saggy-ass pants in the first place.

Check out this article in the Trib:

Proposals to ban saggy pants are starting to ride up in several places. At the extreme end, wearing pants low enough to show boxers or bare buttocks in one small Louisiana town means six months in jail and a $500 fine. A crackdown also is being pushed in Atlanta. And in Trenton, getting caught with your pants down may soon result in not only a fine, but a city worker assessing where your life is headed.

"Are they employed? Do they have a high school diploma? It's a wonderful way to redirect at that point," said Trenton Councilwoman Annette Lartigue, who is drafting a law to outlaw saggy pants. "The message is clear: We don't want to see your backside."

The bare-your-britches fashion is believed to have started in prisons, where inmates aren't given belts with their baggy uniform pants to prevent hangings and beatings. By the late '80s, the trend had made it to gangster rap videos, then went on to skateboarders in the suburbs and high school hallways.

I didn't know that shit started in prison, but it makes sense: That's where our (mostly minority) youth are spending a lot of time these days because of insane, pointless drug laws and a prison-state mentality, with GW as the crooked warden.

It's worth noting that black people face harsher, less forgiving punishments from our draconian drug laws even though the percentage of white & black teens using pot is almost the same.

Shop owner Mack Murray said Trenton's proposed ordinance unfairly targets blacks.

"Are they going to go after construction workers and plumbers, because their pants sag, too?" Murray asked. "They're stereotyping us."

The American Civil Liberties Union agrees.

"In Atlanta, we see this as racial profiling," said Benetta Standly, statewide organizer for the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia. "It's going to target African-American male youths. There's a fear with people associating the way you dress with crimes being committed."

A Few Questions
There are some questions that popped into my head after reading this story. Let me try to answer them as they come:

Are these laws targeted at blacks? Almost certainly.

Are saggy pants a real problem? Fuck no, it's mostly a fear-based response by legislators who are terrified of their own kids.

Will there be more laws like this? Of course. Like I said, those wearing saggy pants are generally not in a position to legislate back.

Are these laws going after a deeper problem? Yes, but they're attacking the symptoms rather than the core issues. The real problem is that our society requires an underclass to clean our toilets, mow our enormous lawns and serve us our drinks.

The Racial Divide
If you're a rich, white person who has his or her Harvard graduation date marked on the calendar from the day you're born, you probably have no idea why someone would hang around in the 'hood all day selling drugs, listening to that "crunk" and sagging your damn pants.

Well guess what, elitists?! They don't fucking want to live in the 'hood and sell drugs to get by, but what other options do they have? Are you gonna hire'em? They're not like you, are they? They speak differently and they have weird customs like the way they sag their pants. (OMG!)

Sagging pants are a way of fighting back against the uptight culture that demands conformity even as it espouses the (vague, far-off) concept of "freedom". They look ridiculous precisely because that's the goal. If it pisses off whitebread America, it's cool. As a way of fighting against the system it's pretty feeble, but that proves my larger point that the underclass has no other options available to them.

For my part, I would encourage people not to sag too low simply because it becomes hard to run from the cops when you're sagging down to your ankles. Am I gonna create a law to fight this scourge? Fuck no; I would repeal laws, starting with our drug laws, which seem designed to permanently disenfranchise our poverty-stricken youth. The upper class can buy their kids out of jailtime, but if you're living in the 'hood you probably can't afford Johnnie Cochran.

Black people are especially fucked these days since the elite is coming down on them harder than ever while the Mexicans are coming across the border anxious to take their jobs, eager to be the new underclass. Shit, due to this competition among the disadvantaged, rich people now get to watch labor costs drop even more than they dared dream; meaning they can get their landscaping done cheaply than before ("yay, Capitalism!"). Of course, that cheap landscaping doesn't pay enough to enable the workers to buy a house and become citizens. Nope; gonna send that money back home (where things are just as stratified by race and class).

The Class Divide
Ah, race and class. Two things Americans hate to talk about, yet the problem stares us in the face every day. Who's washing those dishes in the restaurant after dinner? Who's cleaning those toilets? Instead of paying a living wage and giving the underclass a hand up so that they can join the middle class we seem to be focused on keeping them down.

Then we blame them for their position, as if it was all their fault.

The truth is that America wants an underclass. We need it. We need somebody to do the crappy jobs that nobody wants because we're unwilling to pay a fair wage to the people who break their bodies doing hard physical labor. In many ways slavery, or at least some of the ideas that fed it, carries on today in that the rich like to set up pyramids with themselves at the top. If you're gonna be on top of a pyramid, that means many, many more people have to be on the bottom, and (most important) you have to prevent them from getting up to the top.

The pyramid theory of society has been tried many times and it always fails. Weren't we trying something new in America? Weren't we trying to level the playing field and give everybody a shot? Somehow that got lost as the rich set up their system of control so that a free people became bonded by economic manipulation far beyond their control.

Political freedom means nothing if you have to work all the time just to keep food in your belly. What the underclass wants is economic freedom. It may be too late since the rich already control everything of value. What's left but revolution?

We Know Best
If sagging pants are our biggest problem we should consider ourselves lucky. Surely there's more important things to consider, but these laws against clothing point to some deeper issues. So, should we ban those baggy pants?

I'll tell you what: We can ban saggy-ass pants if those who like their pants baggy also get to pass a few rules and regulations of their own. I foresee an ordinance that requires people wearing suits to loosen those ties. After all, if you wear your tie too tight you risk cutting off the circulation to your brain, leading to an increase of shitty laws like this one.

Apologize to Al Sharpton for your sins!!

Are you white? Are you somewhat sympathetic to Don Imus and his situation? Have you ever said an offensive word? Well, it's time to apologize to Al Sharpton.*

Now that Imus has been fired this little witch-hunt is apparently over. Is anybody else scratching their head, wondering what this little kerfuffle was all about? Obviously, Imus is a moron and used some shitty language, but I have trouble believing the Rutgers basketball team is really crying themselves to sleep at night. Who the fuck cares what he thinks/says?

Despite the thin-skinned temperance of the basketball players, I can at least understand why they are upset and demanding an apology (and groveling, 30 lashes, some ass-kissing and a book deal), but what I'm confused about is why Imus needs to apologize to Al Sharpton? ... I thought Jesse Jackson was the emperor of black people.

Man, South Park totally called this one. Yes, Imus is a fucking moron (as is Micheal Richards), but this whole scenario seems like a media-generated distraction. I mean, Alberto Gonzales lied to Congress and he still has a job. George Bush lied to Congress, America and the world to lead us into war and he still has a job. WTF?

I think our priorities are pretty fucked up in this country. Whatever happened to "sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me"? Apparently, the Rutgers basketball team does not subscribe to this philosophy. Meanwhile, Bush's words led directly to broken bones, shattered skulls, crushed vertebrae, lacerated flesh and all the other attendant injuries related to dying in a fraudulent war over oil. But is the media whipping up a shitstorm over that? Incredibly, no. They are not as fawning as before, but they still treat him with unaccountable respect. He deserves to hang like Saddam, but the MSM is still treating his polices and speeches deferentially. The media could easily launch into a witch-hunt to bring down this administration. It has just demonstrated it has the power, in the case of Imus, despite Imus having the support of 63% of Americans. Bush, meanwhile, has the support of only 30%. That's quite a disparity. Can somebody explain to me how this could happen? Certainly Bush didn't call anybody a "nappy-headed ho" but he did lie to us repeatedly in order to lead us into war, a war that has left hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead, along with 3,000+ American soldiers. Near as I can tell Imus has not killed anybody. What gives?

Does it make me a cynic if I believe this witch-hunt was manufactured by the media to provide a well-timed distraction at a point in time when the Bush regime is increasingly on the run? Or does it make me a realist?
__________

*Apology not necessary if you are black and/or a rapper. If you are a rapper, you can call any woman a "ho" and it's okay. Snoop said so.**

** I can't believe I agree with Michelle Malkin on something. I feel so dirty. I'd better go apologize to Al Sharpton.

Why is pot still illegal in 2007? Could it have something to do with the CIA's sordid history?

David Monson is a North Dakota state legislator who's been trying to get permission to grow hemp for about 10 years. He may finally be getting close, but first he must go through an onerous set of flaming hoops set up by the DEA.

Last month, the state Agriculture Department finished its work on rules farmers may use to grow industrial hemp, a cousin of marijuana that does not have the drug's hallucinogenic properties. The sturdy, fibrous plant is used to make an assortment of products, ranging from paper, rope and lotions to car panels, carpet backing and animal bedding.

Applicants must provide latitude and longitude coordinates for their proposed hemp fields, furnish fingerprints and pay at least $202 in fees, including $37 to cover the cost of criminal record checks.

Johnson said the federal Drug Enforcement Administration still must give its permission before Monson, or anyone else, may grow industrial hemp.

"That is going to be a major hurdle," Johnson said.

Yeah, the DEA are basically a bunch of assholes when it comes to common sense and hemp. They won't give permission unless they feel cornered. Keep the pressure on; some more media coverage would be nice.

But all this obscures the larger and more potent question: Why is "marihuana" still illegal? Certainly industrial hemp should be legal since it has none of recreational ganja's psychoactive properties. But why is cannabis in general illegal? Most people would agree that Prohibition was a titanic failure. But we're still stuck with many of the after-effects of the prohibition mentality, including the idiotic, wasteful, racist and anti-freedom War on Drugs. The War on Drugs is a total failure and a fraud and even many former cops and DEA agents will testify to that fact.

An excellent article called Why Is Marijuana Illegal? tackles that very issue, with some surprising revelations... Or not-so-surprising. I guess it depends on how jaded you are when it comes to politics and business.

America's first marijuana law was enacted at Jamestown Colony, Virginia in 1619. It was a law "ordering" all farmers to grow Indian hempseed. There were several other "must grow" laws over the next 200 years (you could be jailed for not growing hemp during times of shortage in Virginia between 1763 and 1767), and during most of that time, hemp was legal tender (you could even pay your taxes with hemp -- try that today!) Hemp was such a critical crop for a number of purposes (including essential war requirements - rope, etc.) that the government went out of its way to encourage growth.

The United States Census of 1850 counted 8,327 hemp "plantations" (minimum 2,000-acre farm) growing cannabis hemp for cloth, canvas and even the cordage used for baling cotton.

But racism may have been the weapon that was used most effectively against hemp and cannabis. Harry J. Anslinger (who looks like a gangster/mafioso to me) led the charge against "marihuana" (the word itself is a propaganda invention designed to draw up racial fears).

Anslinger immediately drew upon the themes of racism and violence to draw national attention to the problem he wanted to create. Some of his quotes regarding marijuana...

"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others."

"...the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races."

"Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death."

"Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."

"Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing"

"You smoke a joint and you're likely to kill your brother."

"Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind."

There were a lot of lies said about pot back in the day. But it's 2007 and we know better, so why is it still illegal? I mean, people don't seriously believe that pot causes "insanity, criminality and death" -- everyone knows it only causes the munchies and drymouth. But we still allow the government to lie to us every year and keep spending millions of dollars to send inner city youth to jail for with harsh mandatory minimum sentences? Pete Guither's article does a great job of explaining how cannabis first became illegal, but it does not really tell us why it's still illegal 70 years after the Marijuana Stamp Act.

Part of the answer to that question lies with the CIA. The CIA has long turned a blind eye to drug smugglers in exchange for a small cut of the profit. These illicit funds can be used to fund illicit wars around the globe. (Wonderful cycle our dear CIA is engaged in, isn't it?) The Iran-Contra "affair" was actually a drug smuggling operation to fund an illegal war (is there an echo in here?):

On October 31, 1996, the Washington Post ran a follow up story to the San Jose Mercury News series titled "CIA, Contras and Drugs: Questions on Links Linger." The story drew on court testimony in 1990 of Fabio Ernesto Carrasco, a pilot for a major Columbian drug smuggler named George Morales. As a witness in a drug trial, Carrasco testified that in 1984 and 1985, he piloted planes loaded with weapons for contras operating in Costa Rica. The weapons were offloaded, and then drugs stored in military bags were put on the planes which flew to the United States. "I participated in two [flights] which involved weapons and cocaine at the same time," he told the court.

Funny how the news doesn't do investigative reports on stuff you might actually want to know. The press could have found a lot more dirt on this scandal, but they steered clear after a limited hang-out. That's because the whole system is set up to demonize drugs so that they will be so much more profitable. Legalization would utterly destroy the CIA's little "fundraising" operation and it would effectively end the careers of many DEA agents, who've become like a parasitic wasp, sucking at our nations' failed and painful drug policy.

It's time to end the lies, the racism and the idiocy of the War on Drugs and declare peace. It needs to end, and there needs to be an investigation. Those who profited from the war by playing both sides should be punished according to their own rules.



The video above is Dealing with the Demon, an excellent look into the CIA's activities in Afghanistan during the war against the Soviets. Perhaps we should not be surprised that Afghan poppy production has exploded since we "liberated" it from the Taliban. How... interesting.

Updated on 1-16-07 with new links, a video and various spelling-error fixes.

Digg this story, man.

Separate but equal: U.S. Freemasons still have racially separated groups in 2006

Boy, those Masons sure are down with the latest trends, aren't they? Apparently, some of the southern chapters are still waiting to see if this whole "equal rights" thing isn't just a passing fad:

Nationwide, Masonic groups operate in a separate-but-supposedly-equal system in which whites typically join one network of Masonic groups, called Grand Lodges, and blacks typically join another, called Prince Hall.

But in the South, it goes further: White-controlled Grand Lodges in 12 Southern states do not even officially recognize black Masons as their brothers — the Masonic term is "mutual recognition" — and in some cases, black lodges have taken similar stands.

This isn't exactly impressive. No wonder the organization has suffered a massive decline in membership over the last hundred years.

But there are fewer names on the membership rolls than there once were: 54,000 in New York, down from a high of 346,413 in 1929. Membership rose again after World War II, rising to 307,323 in 1957 before beginning a long slide.

It seems to me that the freemasons are no longer relevant. They might as well just call it a day, reveal a few secrets and leave it at that. At the very least they need to get this racial division thing sorted out. That's gotta be fucking embarrassing.