Author: Kahli

My husband wasn’t back from his business trip.  It was Friday night. I wanted to go out.

After perusing the paper, I decided to go see a documentary at one of our local art houses.  Ah kismet.  I found myself sitting with a handful of people at a showing of Pete Seeger:The Power of Song.
I admit to being a half-hearted hippie type in the day, at least after Kent State, when I finally figured out where Viet Nam was. But I really didn’t know that much about Seeger.

I didn’t know he got kicked out of Harvard for joining the Communist Party.  I didn’t know he fought in World War II.I didn’t know he spent much of his early life bringing labor songs to as wide an audience as possible.  I didn’t know of his connection to Paul Robeson.  Nor did I know that the U.S. government had killed his career for nearly two decades, despite the fact that he had long renounced his Communist affiliation.

There was a quiet dignity to Seeger that came through in the film, whether he was singing or answering questions before the House Unamerican Activities Committee. There was grace in the face of adversity.  There was strength and tenacity without any outward sign of bitterness. His character seemed so rare and so grounded that it took my breath away.

Grounded. Yes, he lives close to the earth in a cabin he and his wife, Toshi, built themselves. He is surrounded by the rainbow family of his children and grandchildren.  There is a sense of peace.

Perhaps most amazing, Seeger’s mission was not to be a star. He was deeply involved in social justice issues and he was motivated by a need to nourish music – music of the people, by the people. He has lived out his mission with joy and integrity.  While black- listed, he spent time teaching music to children in camps and schools.  He quit the successful group, The Weavers, when they decided to make a cigarette commercial.  He did not try to force his values on others; he was too busy living them himself.

Seeger is a man who thrives on building community. During his concerts, his intention is to get everyone singing, raising their voices as one in simple, tuneful songs that resonate in the heart.

As the film unfolded the arc of his life to date, it showed the wars, the unrest, the injustices that Seeger and our country faced.  Sometimes it feels like the crises we are currently facing are unique.  Sometimes it feels like we are facing battles that were never faced before. It may feel that way, but it is not true. People have been standing up for justice for as long as there have been people.

The thing that struck me most about the film was the way that community and art intersected to support and expand the social movement.  We are building communities currently through the internets.  But I must say I miss the physical coming together and I miss the art. Standing together singing the poetry of “Turn, Turn, Turn” or “We Shall Overcome” may seem as quaint as the Geneva Convention these days, but I miss the camaraderie.  I miss the music.

In any case, if you get a chance to see this film, I think it is one you won’t soon forget.

In New Mexico we have wide open skies.  We also have wide open political races this year. Or do we?

The system got a huge jolt when Senator Pete Domenici announced he would not seek another term.  All three of our Congressional Representatives (2 Republican, 1 Democrat) seized the chance to run for Senate, leaving all three congressional seats open.
It sounds great.  A chance for real change.  A chance for newly energized grassroots organizers and activists to flex their muscles.  As Booman has pointed out, regardless of who occupies the White House, our best chance for taking the country back lies in the Senate and House.  There are currently 4 Republicans and 12 Democrats running for the three House seats. On the Democratic side, most of the action lies in NM 03, Tom Udall’s current district. There are 5 declared Dem candidates for Udall’s seat with another 3 seriously considering a run.

This would be a great opportunity for activists to get out and make sure the primary is filled with progressives, except for an odious piece of legislation that passed without fanfare last year.

This bill requires a potential candidate to receive the support of 20% of delegates to the state party convention in order to be place on the primary ballot.  There is NO provision for a candidate to get on the ballot via signature petition.  In other words, if you’re not in, you’re out.  We don’t need no stinkin’ outsiders.

Rep. Campos, who chairs the House Voters and Elections Committee, where former Chairman Edward Sandoval, D-Albuquerque, introduced the measure last year, said the intent was to limit the primary field to “serious” candidates. At the time, he said, he knew of no recent instances in which a serious candidate had trouble getting on the ballot by delegate vote. Afterward, he said, someone reminded him of U.S. Rep. Tom Udall’s experience. Udall, who is running for Domenici’s seat, got exactly the number of delegates he needed to make the Democratic primary ballot in 1998.

“Serious” apparently means connected.

Fortunately, there are two moves afoot to undo this travesty.

Dov Wiviott, a candidate for NM03, has filed suit claiming the law is unconstitutional and harmful to both political newcomers and voters.

Wiviott said the change limits ballot access to a “well-connected few. … Elections ought to be a contest of ideas, and open and fair to everyone. We shouldn’t seek to restrict debate or cut some out of the process.”

Wiviott, who declined to say whom he meant by a “well-connected few,” said he remains confident of gaining at least 20 percent of the delegate vote.

In a news release, he called on other candidates to join his cause. One of them, Rudy Martín, a lawyer who lives in Dixon, said he might sign onto Wiviott’s lawsuit.

As New Mexico’s part-time legislature prepares to meet for its thirty day session, a couple of legilators have pre-filed a bill that would undo some of the damage. Senate Majority Leader Michael S. Sanchez (D-Valencia County) and Senate Minority Leader Stuart Ingle* pre-filed Senate Bill 1.  Given the quirks of the New Mexico legislative calendar, this will be tough to get through.  The 30 day sessions are meant to address primarily budgetary issues so the law would need to pass by a two-thirds majority in both houses and be approved by the Governor before the state conventions.

To make matters even worse the Democratic Party website makes finding out about the convention and the allegation of delegates almost impossible.  Nor are they inclined to answer email requests for information.

If you have friends and relatives in New Mexico, they can sign a petition supporting a change in the law at Wiviott’s website.

I’m not endorsing Wiviott – I frankly don’t know enough about all the candidates yet – but I’m heartened that he is taking on this fight.

Please watch what is going on in your state.  

The status quo is not going to yield to us without a fight.

For more information you can check out the Santa Fe New Mexican and Democracy for New Mexico.

Bush is going to veto the military appropriations bill.
The Iraqis don’t like it.

…the president objects to a section in the National Defense Authorization Act that would permit plaintiffs’ lawyers to freeze Iraqi funds and expose Iraq to “massive liability in lawsuits concerning the misdeeds of the Saddam Hussein regime.” At least one pending lawsuit reportedly seeks $1 billion or more.

Wait a minute. This bill was essential or civilians would be laid off and our troops would be stranded without so much as a crust of bread to sustain them.

Of course, Dems caved.  If they can’t make a clear case from this action that Bush only supports the troops when it is convenient, then they are well and truly hopeless.

Wishing you all love and creativity this day and throughout the year.

Kahli

All the streets are filled with laughter and light
And the music of the season
And the merchants windows are all bright
With the faces of the children
And the families hurrying to their homes
As the sky darkens and freezes
They’ll be gathering around the hearths and tales
Giving thanks for all gods graces
And the birth of the rebel jesus.

Well they call him by the prince of peace
And they call him by the savior
And they pray to him upon the seas
And in every bold endeavor
As they fill his churches with their pride and gold
And their faith in him increases
But they’ve turned the nature that I worshipped in
From a temple to a robbers den
In the words of the rebel jesus

We guard our world with locks and guns
And we guard our fine possessions
And once a year when christmas comes
We give to our relations
And perhaps we give a little to the poor
If the generosity should seize us
But if any one of us should interfere
In the business of why they are poor
They get the same as the rebel jesus

But please forgive me if I seem
To take the tone of judgement
For I’ve no wish to come between
This day and your enjoyment
In this life of hardship and of earthly toil
We have need for anything that frees us
So I bid you pleasure
And I bid you cheer
From a heathen and a pagan
On the side of the rebel jesus.

Jackson Browne

I’m a girl, and by me that’s only great!
I am proud that my silhouette is curvy,
That I walk with a sweet and girlish gait
With my hips kind of swivelly and swervy.

I adore being dressed in something frilly
When my date comes to get me at my place.
Out I go with my Joe or John or Billy,
Like a filly who is ready for the race!
When I have a brand new hairdo
With my eyelashes all in curl,
I float as the clouds on air do,
I enjoy being a girl!

When men say I’m cute and funny
And my teeth aren’t teeth, but pearl,
I just lap it up like honey
I enjoy being a girl!

I flip when a fellow sends me flowers,
I drool over dresses made of lace,
I talk on the telephone for hours
With a pound and a half of cream upon my face!

I’m strictly a female female
And my future I hope will be
In the home of a brave and free male
Who’ll enjoy being a guy having a girl… like… me.
                               Flower Drum Song

Who wouldn’t enjoy it?

Perusing the free press, I found these gems in the last forty-eight hours.

Don’t you dare make a fuss about being gang raped! A Saudi woman’s punishment was increased when she complained that her attackers’ sentence was too lenient.

Watch your balls.  Strong women are so scary/sexy.  Breaking my own rule, I read the emotionally challenged Maureen Dowd and found her portraying Hillary Clinton (and Michelle Obama) as sexual sadists.

There will be no omelet making in Colorado.  The eggs will soon become sacred. A ballot proposal is working its was toward becoming part of the state constitution.

The measure, just one paragraph long, would ask voters whether inalienable rights, due process rights and equality of justice rights as defined in the state Constitution should be extended to “any human being from the moment of fertilization.”

And for those of you considering having a miscarriage, think again. It could land you in jail.

And speaking of eggs…

The price of contraception in campus health clinics and low-income clinics is rising to 5 times its current cost.

I’d love to say more, but I must go get my pedicure!

I wasn’t going to write today.  I’ve got to get to work. But the New York Times Editorial Board changed my mind.
Their poetic reverie about the end of summer and their claim that “if you get choked up on Labor Day, you’ve probably just been eating too fast” made my blood boil. WTF? A labor day editorial about little birdies and wildflowers, not to mention a breeziness that “that keeps you from trying to make the day carry too much weight.”

I guess they haven’t noticed that 6 more miners are buried by the greed of corporate America. Or that our trade agreements are destroying the middle class. Or that a leading Democratic contender for president has a union buster as a trusted advisor.  Or that the producers of Kid Nation took such advantage of children that they may have to film next season’s show in a foreign country because no state will allow them to treat child workers the way they did in New Mexico.

My advice to the Times Board is that they stop between sips of Cabernet and mouthfuls of freshly grilled and slowly-chewed filet mignon, and think about the real meaning of Labor Day.

Oh Dear God.  What kind of country are we?  Our wounds are deep.  Our wounds are many. I wish I had the gift of expression to adequately portray the horror, outrage and despair I felt after reading this.
Bob Herbert’s behind-the-firewall commentary in the NYT shines a clear light on the moral bankruptcy of this nation.

…there was nothing particularly unusual about schoolchildren getting blown away in Chicago’s black and Latino neighborhoods. Since September, when the last school year started, dozens of this city’s public school students have been murdered, most of them shot to death. As of last week, the toll of public schoolchildren slain in Chicago since the opening of the school year had reached 34, including two killed since the schools closed for summer vacation.

Kids.  Nine years, twelve years, fifteen years old.  Getting gunned down in schoolyards, on busses, outside libraries.  

This situation, of course, has been barely covered by the mainstream media. This slow bleed of hope and promise is not as dramatic as the sudden killing of several students at once.  This slow bleed of hope and promise is not as sensational when the victims are black or brown.

We would not be staying the course in the war on drugs if this was happening in Wilmette or Barrington.  In the rich white suburbs, cathedrals and synagogues would be overflowing with mourners and news vans and helicopters would be everywhere. Phones would be ringing of the hook in the offices of politicians, principals, pundits and policymakers.

These kids, these babies, are our children too. The children in Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, Atlanta.  When did we stop caring about each other?  When did we stop caring for each other?

Immigrants, the uninsured, wounded veterans, the homeless. Are we so used to their plight – and so overwhelmed by it – that we accept it as a part of the fabric of our society?

The solution to any one of these problems is complicated and costly – in terms of both financial outlay and brutal assessment of our complicity in the situation.  But no change will come unless we demand it.

Regarding the killings, Arne Duncan, the chief executive of the Chicago school system, said, “That’s more than a kid every two weeks. Think about that.”

Yes. Think about that.  And do something.

Okay, the world is facing one dire issue after another. Activists are overwhelmed, not knowing what to tackle first. So I guess this diary is rather frivolous in the face of all that, but I’m really bumfuzzled by this
NYT article.

CBS and Fox have refused to air Trojan condom ads because they are not specifically tailored to the prevention of STDs and might, gasp, promote the idea of birth control.

The article goes on and on about whether or not this is reasonable. It discusses the presence of erectile dysfunction ads and ponders why Trojan ads can’t be shown on these networks.

But it never mentions the fact that ads for female contraception can be seen everyday – low dose pills, chewable pills, rings, patches. Yes, they can be advertised. But condoms for birth control!!!!! OMG. Could it be possible that men have some responsibility for this? Apparently, Fox and CBS think not.

First I want to thank Carnacki on his diary about the objectification and sexism that women face in the world today.  It was a thoughtful, well-expressed diary and was a welcome addition to the several insightful diaries that Steven D has written about women’s issues.  It inspired me to get off my butt and write this diary which was triggered by a newspaper story I saw on Sunday.
The story by Rob Hotakainen, of McClatchy Newspapers, was about the reintroduction of the Equal Rights Amendment.

Wait a minute.  The Equal Rights Amendment was reintroduced?  How’d I miss that? Surely the MSM was all over that story – or not.

Well, it appears that I was not the only one unaware of this development. According to Sarah Rosenfeld Clark, writing in the Bay Area Business Woman , many people missed it.

I told my mom, who spent the bulk of her career initiating and managing programs to empower women and girls, that the ERA had been reintroduced in Congress. She said, “How come I didn’t hear about that?”

When I mentioned the ERA reintroduction to a member of my church who is active with the League of Women Voters, she said she “hadn’t seen anything about that.” My Mom lives in Boston and my church is in Oakland. Based on my quick personal survey, intelligent, politically-involved women from coast to coast are unaware that the ERA, now renamed the Women’s Equality Amendment, is back on the political landscape.

Imagine my surprise when my research led me to the information that the Equal Rights Amendment has been introduced every year since 1982!

On March 27, 2007, the newly renamed iteration was introduced with many co-sponsors by Carolyn Maloney (NY) in the House of Representatives and Edward Kennedy (MA) in the Senate.

The Amendment reads as follows:

Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.’.

That’s it in a nutshell.  Who wouldn’t want to co-sponsor that?  What Democrat wouldn’t want to co-sponsor it?  What woman wouldn’t want to?

The answer apparently includes Democrats Claire McCaskill of Missouri (darling of the netroots), Mary Landrieu, of Louisiana, Blanche Lincoln, of Arkansas, and Amy Klobuchar, of Minnesota. Oh by the way, none of the five Republican women in the Senate are behind the legislation, either.

Apparently McCaskill isn’t against equality for women — she’s just not sure it is worth the fight.

The ERA — just because of the history of it, just in and of itself — is an incredibly divisive thing, and sometimes I’m not sure that the divisiveness is worth it.

McCaskill’s fearless rationale for not sponsoring the amendment (although she claims she would vote for it) is as follows:

It’s not that I’m against it. It’s not that I don’t support the concept, but frankly we’ve all seen how amending the Constitution doesn’t necessarily get America there. You know, we did a lot of changes to embrace African Americans in this country, and clearly putting it into law doesn’t make it happen.

As for our sporadically progressive Speaker of the House, whose name is not to be found among the sponsors, Nancy Pelosi had this to say:

Women want what men want: an equal opportunity to succeed. Yet in terms of policies to assist women, we are lagging behind. That is why I support the Women’s Equality Amendment. We are working hard to promote this legislation, but until we have significant support for it, we will not bring it to the floor. Nevertheless, I am hopeful that we can get it done.

Wow.  That was truly inspired!

I mean seriously what the hell is going on? Why is this even debatable? Are we willing to allow this to be another pro forma ritual? Or are we going to insist that women have equal legal footing in the United States of America in the 21st century?

There is a lot of good information about the history of the ERA here. A list of states that previously ratified the amendment can be found here. And information about whether or not those ratifications may still be valid can be found here.

Whatever you do, don’t news google the abbreviation ERA – all you’ll get is baseball stats!

Well, this letter by Kim Gandy, President of NOW, was like a kick in the gut.  Yes, I know that NOW is an advocacy group for women, and yes I know that my personal history leaves me with a definite point of view, but this is seriously wrong.
Apparently, several decades ago, child psychiatrist, Richard Gardner thought up a theory called Parental Alienation Syndrome.  This “syndrome” has not been accepted by the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, or the American Medical Association, but it is increasingly being accepted – and now taught – by Family Courts throughout the country.

Let’s start with the basics: who is Richard A. Gardner and what is Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS)?

The late Dr. Gardner (he committed suicide in 2003) was an unpaid volunteer at Columbia University’s College of Physicians and Surgeons. He was a prolific author and lecturer who espoused some rather regressive ideas.

Regarding rape victims, Gardner said that they “gain pleasure from being beaten, bound, and otherwise made to suffer” as “the price they are willing to pay for gaining the gratification of receiving the sperm.”  Victims of child abuse?  “May very well have enjoyed the experience.” And Incest? Not harmful, according to Gardner, only “thinking makes it so”? Gardner also asserted that adult-child sex is normal AND beneficial for both parties as well as for the survival of the human race.

If you haven’t run screaming from the room we’ll move on to PAS.

PAS posits that if a parent (usually the woman) or the children allege abuse against the other parent (usually the man) during a custody hearing, it is evidence that the protective parent is “brainwashing” the children.  If the child is angry, or frightened, or refuses to go with the accused abuser, it is even further proof that they have been brainwashed.

It would be unreasonable to deny that this type of behavior has ever been used in custody hearings.  The problem is that courts are now suspect of all allegations of abuse and usually don’t  fully investigate the charges. Moreover, according to a recent Newsweek article, 54 percent of custody cases involving documented spousal abuse were decided in favor of the alleged batterers. Parental alienation was used as an argument in nearly every case.

The Family Courts often lack the time or the expertise to handle abuse complaints competently.  Judges are often more sympathetic to abusers because they appear more reasonable, often willing to share custody, while the protective parent is adamant that children not be further endangered by contact with the abuser.  Women are also caught in a double bind by societal expectations. If they are emotional in court, they are labeled as hysterical. If they are stoic, they are branded as cold-hearted.

Appallingly, not only do abusers often gain custody of the children, but by painting the protective parent as destructive and manipulative, the court often orders that all contact with the “brainwashing” parent stop. No letters. No phone calls.  No visits.

A group of survivors of abuse by both their parent and the courts has founded an organization called Courageous Kids Network. Their statement is heartbreaking, especially regarding younger siblings who are still trapped in the hell they were consigned to by the court.  

Although there is growing outrage over the effects of PAS on kids, several states have decided to actively promote the theory.  Per the NOW newsletter:

And believe it or not, it seems that nine state governors have jumped on Gardner’s pro-pedophilia bandwagon. In Florida, Indiana, Connecticut, Kentucky, Nebraska, Iowa, Maine, and Nevada, there is now reportedly a whole day officially dedicated to raising “awareness” about Gardner’s theory called Parental Alienation Syndrome, in which the very reports of abuse by a child against a father are themselves evidence that the child is being brainwashed by the mother (and if the child is angry at the father, or doesn’t want to visit, that’s even more evidence) and the only “cure” for this syndrome is to force the child to live with the abuser and deny ANY contact with the protective mother, who has no history of abuse.

If you live in any of these states, please take action. Contact the governors whose states are sponsoring proclaimed “Parental Alienation Awareness” days. Ask them to stop this travesty. Contact the media and ask them to investigate.

No matter how acrimonious things may get between parents, we must all act to protect the children.

For a lengthy, and award-winning, article on this subject, I recommend   Custodians of Abuse by Kristen Lombardi.