Archive for December, 2008

Dec 27

I Think: The Town Talk Hasn’t Been Paying Attention

Something’s a little off with The Town Talk‘s editorial understanding of the nuances of the proposed power supply agreement with Cleco, and given the fact that they have access to the same exact body of information as I do, I have to seriously question the their understanding and perspective on this story. Their belief that any proposal is being rushed seems to be, well, rushed.

From today’s editorial:

A RARE PUBLIC HEARING on a proposal to end Alexandria’s fraud lawsuit against Cleco Corp. left residents attending Tuesday’s meeting with no commitment from city officials that rate payers would receive money. Pending before the City Council is a proposal, hashed out in private, for Cleco to pay the city $29 million up front and guarantee under-market electricity rates for 13 years. In return, Cleco would gain control of the generating capacity of the city-owned power plant. If approved, the proposal would end the city’s lawsuit, filed June 22, 2005.

WE THINK: It’s disturbing that city officials chose to make residents wait until two days before Christmas for a first chance to ask questions about a settlement tied to a lawsuit that is three-plus years old. The same can be said for the city’s decision to schedule the matter for a yes-or-no vote Tuesday, two days before New Year’s Day. All the more reason to pay attention to this: If the city turns down the deal and takes its case to court, it stands to: 1) lose everything on the table; 2) win something less than what has been offered; or 3) win triple the damages awarded by the court plus court costs plus attorney’s fees.

The first sentence is completely bogus. The basic thesis of the proposed agreement was that the provision of under-market power would immediately provide for savings that could not be realized in any other market, but that, also, rebates could be and should be considered separate from the proposed power supply agreement.

The second sentence is also completely bogus. The $29 million provision for D.G. Hunter represents only a portion of the proposed agreement, and the paper neglected to discuss value of the entire package. BOOS to the paper: The City spent over an hour explaining this, yet, for some reason, the paper still doesn’t get it. (You can watch it all, on repeat, on Channel 4 in Alexandria).

Perhaps the timing and sequence of events did not conform with the newspaper’s ideal schedule, but the paper’s underlying implication (of an attempt to minimize input and exposure based on the timing of public meetings) is reckless and misleading to the public. However inconvenient it may have been to the news cycle, things sped up at the end of the year. You’d think a newspaper would understand a thing or two about deadlines.

And we should all ask: Upon whose expert opinion is the paper basing their hypothetical belief that the City could win triple the damages? Who, exactly, believes this in their expert opinion?

Since the retirement of Mr. Gunn, it seems like The Town Talk hasn’t been paying attention or giving appropriate print space to the Cleco case, and now, they’d like to delay and evoke skepticism as a stopgap measure. And given the significant layoffs in its news room, I can’t blame them for being a little spread thin.

Basically, they’re saying: It’s the holidays. Don’t expect us to pay attention.

Well, PAY ATTENTION.

BE SERIOUS.

But do your homework beforehand.

It’s difficult to understand how anyone could conclude that an entire month’s worth of public and televized meetings would represent an attempt at rushing an agreement.

Dec 26

Slate.com Finally Recognizes Courtade’s Genius

Last week, Slate.com asked for readers to contribute the most bizarre Christmas lights decorations in America, and predictably, the home of my good friend, Alex Courtade, was spotlighted prominently.

Behold, the Flying Spaghetti Monster:

courtadehouse

For those of you who aren’t aware, this beautiful and nationally-acclaimed decoration is a testament to his devotion to the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, while having existed in secrecy for hundreds of years, only recently came into the mainstream when this letter was published in May 2005.

With millions, if not thousands, of devout worshippers, the Church of the FSM is widely considered a legitimate religion, even by its opponents – mostly fundamentalist Christians, who have accepted that our God has larger balls than theirs.

Some claim that the church is purely a thought experiment, satire, illustrating that Intelligent Design is not science, but rather a pseudoscience manufactured by Christians to push Creationism into public schools. These people are mistaken. The Church of FSM is real, totally legit, and backed by hard science. Anything that comes across as humor or satire is purely coincidental.

Dec 25

2 Comments

Politico: Jindal in 2012?

According to Politico, despite statements to the contrary, there are indications that Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal is still considering a run at the Presidency.

If Obama is as formidable then as he appears now, it’s unlikely that Jindal, who would be only 41, would risk an uphill race against the incumbent.

“Tell me where Obama is sitting at the end of 2010,” responded a senior adviser to Jindal when asked about a possible run. “Timing is everything.”

John Maginnis, a longtime watcher of Louisiana politics and publisher of the LaPolitics Weekly newsletter, put it more bluntly.

“He doesn’t want to run against Obama unless Obama is an unmitigated disaster,” observed Maginnis. “In 2016, it will be an open seat with no vice president running.”

Essentially, Jindal’s folks are saying that he’d probably take a stab at it, provided the Obama Presidency turns out to be a failure– or, at least a failure as far as social conservatives are concerned, right?

“He’s the No. 1 evangelist for Louisiana’s turnaround, said an adviser. “He’ll look for big stages to do that.”

And he’ll still do national media interviews, but his advisers stress that he’s turning down more than he’s accepting.

Now, as the state prepares to grapple with the prospect of making unpopular cuts in health care and education, Jindal’s national profile has begun to offer fodder to the political set in Baton Rouge.

One recent cartoon in the capital’s newspaper, the Advocate, portrayed Jindal as saying he’d travel all over the country to convince people that he’s not running for president.

“We’re hoping he’ll stay here more and work on [the challenges facing the state],” said Chris Whittington, chairman of the Louisiana Democratic Party, who predicted Jindal’s popularity would dissipate when he has to make difficult decisions about how to close the budget gap. “We have huge problems on the horizon.”

It may also help to, you know, have an actual record of accomplishments, instead of simply a resume of appointments, media appearances, and constant campaigning for other Republicans in other states.

At least one Jindal adviser acknowledges that much:

“The best thing you can do to leave the door open for national office is do well in job you’re in,” said an adviser.

Dec 22

11 Comments

Greg Aymond Needs to Apologize

Although I have never met Greg Aymond, a local attorney and the proprietor and operator of the blog CentralLAPolitics, I have spoken with him a handful of times, and despite the fact that, on core political issues, we remain diametrically opposed, I respect his willingness and desire to engage in local governmental decisions, even when I completely disagree with his analysis. Our local democracy requires rigorous engagement and analysis, and it depends on people willing to contribute to the public discourse.

Earlier this year, while I was in Denver for the Democratic National Convention, I had a brief exchange with Reverend Al Sharpton, and when he learned I was from Alexandria, he said, “Great city. Great people.” I know his brief impression of Alexandria was based on his visits related to the Jena Six and his encounters with the magnanimous radio talk show host, Tony Brown. Reverend Sharpton, who has built a controversial career, in large part, by championing causes and cases related to racial inequality and injustice, recognized the strength of Alexandria’s diversity, which, of course (and with all due respect), must have been magnified to him in the context his trip to Jena. And he remembered Alexandria as a great place with great people, in large part, because of our capacity to embrace our diversity.

However, our cohesion as a community is undermined by those who attempt to use race as a wedge in order to divide and distract. As a white man who has benefited from educational, institutional, and societal advantages because of, among other things, his race (and indeed, who has only been made fully-aware of those advantages because of a conscious and deliberate decision to enroll in African-American Studies courses as an undergraduate), I have come to understand the complex dynamics of denial. And as a citizen who is actively engaged in local government, I have also come to understand the ways in which certain individuals, for their own personal reasons, seek to amplify racial divisions in the hope of creating political will.

In his groundbreaking speech on race, President-elect Obama articulated perfectly the frustrations of many white Americans who have refused, on principle, to be held hostage to the specter of white guilt:

In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don’t feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience – as far as they’re concerned, no one’s handed them anything, they’ve built it from scratch. They’ve worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they’re told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.

Like the anger within the black community, these resentments aren’t always expressed in polite company. But they have helped shape the political landscape for at least a generation. Anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own electoral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism.

Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze – a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns – this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.

Some may disagree with me on this point, so please forgive me in advance: But I believe we are blessed and incredibly fortunate to have a President who possesses such an incredibly empathetic and brilliant understanding of race– and perhaps even more importantly, a President who has repeatedly demonstrated his own propensity to speak candidly on this complicated issue. Indeed, the next President of the United States wrote two bestselling books that explore, in detail, the discourse of race and politics in American life.

That said, as much as I admire Mr. Obama’s candidness, I do not believe it’s sufficient to excuse white anger as merely a symptom of economic frustrations. White racism does exist, and as much as we would like to explain it away or unpack its meaning as a symptom of an overarching frustration about economic inequities, racism is actually very simple-minded. (And, indeed, it does work both ways).

This brings me back to Mr. Aymond. On the day after Barack Obama was elected the next President of the United States– a day in which the nation celebrated a profound and historic moment when the racial barrier to the highest office was shattered, despite our country’s shameful history of slavery, Jim Crow, and the bloodied march toward civil rights, a day in which the rest of the world, for the first time in years, looked to America in awe of the realization that our founding promise (that all men are created equal) was not merely words on parchment but a fundamental part of our identity as a culture– Mr. Aymond published, on his website, a piece entitled “The N***a Street Thugs of Alexandria,” featuring the names and photographs of seven African-American leaders and blanketly accusing them of unspecified corruption.

Quoting:

Do not be mislead for one minute. we the citizens of Alexandria are not being preyed upon by a new criminal conspiracy. It is a group of “N***a Thugs” who have nothing more in mind than an opportunity for corruption based on race.

All in the same building, Lawson, Brown, Sanders and Goins, have spread their tentacles with Johnson, Lavardain and Hobbs to weave their way onto the City government to keep us the good white and black residents of the City of Alexandria ever vigilant. We must forever keep watch over this criminal gang and report them at every opportunity to the State Police, the Attorney General, the District Attorney, the Ethics Board, the Legislative Auditor, and the F.B.I. to ensure that we all play by the rules or that those that don’t wind up in the state or federal pen.

Mr. Aymond’s post was immediately picked up by talk radio host Tony Brown, and copies of his post were allegedly distributed during an Alexandria City Council meeting.

To be sure, no one has ever questioned Mr. Aymond’s fundamental right of freedom of speech, however vulgar and offensive it may seem to some. But there remains a glaring hypocrisy: Mr. Aymond attempts to suggest “an opportunity for corruption based on race,” yet he structures his criticism in sickeningly offensive and racist language. And considering his frequent admissions and references to his brief stint in the Ku Klux Klan, some people may not appreciate or understand his plea for residents to be “ever vigilant.”

In Mr. Aymond’s view, African-American leadership is coagulated and commingled, based out of a small building housing an insurance agency and a law office. Notably, at the time of his posting, Mr. Goins and Mr. Larvadain hadn’t even been sworn in, and at no time have Ms. Brown or Mr. Sanders served as elected officials.

Leonard Ford, a friend of CenLamar, responds on Cenla Light:

Here’s the thing. Why is it that when a group of black individuals, especially if they are involved in city government, are looked at more closely and picked apart for coming together to discuss issues that relates to the black districts of Alexandria? That seems to be the norm as of late. When white individuals, who were involved in city government got together to discuss issues relating to the white districts of Alexandria, no one said anything about it. They were seen as the good guys just doing their job. But that’s the way it is here in Alexandria. Black equates to bad, and white equates to good.

It appears that ever since the makeup of the Alexandria City Council became majority black, Aymond has been keeping his eyes glued to city government. I guess he has appointed himself as watchdog to keep everybody in line, especially these seven blacks and others that he seems to have disdain for. He fails to realize that those whites in city government also must be watched, as they are not exempt from wrongdoing. I believe that he knows that, but prefers not to bring it to light. Right is right, and fair is fair. If we have “n***a street thugs,” then I’m sure that Aymond knows just as I know that we also have “cracker street thugs,” “redneck street thugs,” and “honkie street thugs.” Why not list their pictures on his Web site?

Mr. Aymond attempted to explain that his misspelling of the n-word was a purposeful act and that, based on the use of the slightly-altered word (spelled differently for colloquial purposes, not as a way of designating a definitive autonomy from the accurately spelled word) in certain “rip rap” songs (as he calls them), he intended readers to interpret a different meaning.

I’m sorry, Mr. Aymond. I don’t buy that, and I doubt your readers do either. And in all seriousness, I question your cultural literacy on rap music and wonder who on God’s Green Earth would believe that although you were seriously accusing people of coordinated corruption, you were only attempting to be playful by misspelling the n-word.

Intelligent and informed criticisms are much more difficult to construct than simply tossing out a few rhetorical grenades. I’ve been called a socialist gimp (or some variation thereof) enough to know the playbook.

Unfortunately, grenades can still inflict a lot of collateral damage and confusion, and in Mr. Aymond’s case, they can obviously exacerbate racial tensions. But they’re only destructive, not constructive.

Your words, on this issue, have been destructive.

Be a man. Apologize.

Dec 21

1 Comment

A Local Illustration of Haphazard Planning

It’s difficult for me to believe that, more than twelve years ago, my father and my mother built our last true family home in a neighborhood that is still considered new and is still expanding and being built out. Last year, my mother sold our family home and moved to the back of the neighborhood, which, considering the pace of expansion, will likely be considered the middle of the neighborhood within the next decade.

Before I launch into this missive, please understand that I am not attempting to criticize or cast blame on any one individual developer or planner and that, as a student of city planning, I recognize that when the subdivision was being developed, its layout conformed with the reigning paradigm: cul-de-sac subdivisions that somehow created a sense of privacy and intimacy.

But now we know of the unintended consequences; dense isolation is complicated, confusing, and counter-intuitive.

As an illustration, consider this:

tennysonlandmark

If you build a house on Lot A, you’d live less than five hundred feet away from House B and House C. However, if your kids want to visit their friends who live in House B, you’ll have to drive over 2,200 feet, and if they’re invited to attend a birthday party at House C, which, in most neighborhoods would be considered your next door neighbor, you’d have to drive over a mile.

But that’s not the only obvious problem: Think about police and fire response. Consider the access to other resources.

Area D is noted because it is ripe for expansion, and anyone who lives in Alexandria will recognize that, when developed, there is a simple and obvious way to connect this area with a major arterial roadway (Jackson Street Extension), which would mitigate some of the accessibility problems currently experienced by families who, like my own mother, have to tack on another five minutes to their daily commute simply to travel to a roadway that, geographically, is less than 1,000 feet away from her front door.

As a side note, I’ve always found it funny that when my mother describes the directions to her new home, she has to instruct people to make “five consecutive rights,” which is like telling someone to make a complete circle.

Dec 21

1 Comment

Congratulations to Dale

Kudos to my friend, colleague, and CenLamar frequent contributor, Dale LeBoeuf– not only for graduating from college last week, but also for the torrent of media coverage he somehow personally received.

Last Thursday, an interview with Dale aired on the 6 o’clock and 10 o’clock news, and this morning, we learned that Dale is now the official face of LSUA.

picture-5

Although I’m a fan of LSUA’s recent decision to name “The Generals” as their mascot, the LSUA LeBoeufs has a ring to it.

Unfortunately, KALB hasn’t uploaded the video of Dale’s interview, but it goes something like this (not entirely safe for work; contains drug use and profanity):

Actual transcript of Dale’s interview:

“I haven’t really completely figured that out yet. I’ve thought about maybe going to grad school or law school. Right now, I work for the City of Alexandria, so, you know, I might stick around here if they can keep me here.”

Dec 19

1 Comment

“We Hate to Say ‘We Told You So’…”

But they told us so.

Earlier this year, only a few months after Governor Jindal took office, Louisianans debated the necessity of renewing the so-called Stelly Tax Plan, which had been a contentious issue for years. The Times-Picayune explains the plan:

The Stelly Plan is nearly a household word, which is quite a distinction for a complex tax code. It is named after its author, former Lake Charles Rep. Vic Stelly, who was a Republican when he passed the legislation in 2002 but later became an independent. The Stelly bills were adopted during Republican Gov. Mike Foster’s administration, and a constitutional amendment was approved by voters in a statewide referendum in November 2002.

The law lowered some taxes and raised others beginning in 2003.

And Matt G. of the Louisiana Tax Blog notes:

Paying for the Stelly sales tax cuts with a hike in another tax was the responsible thing to do– and hiking the income tax in a way that eliminated special tax breaks made the tax system fairer in a number of ways. The burden should be on advocates of Stelly-plan repeal to explain why bringing back these long-dead tax breaks is actually good policy.

This also seems right on: nothing is certain in Louisiana revenue forecasting. The state’s dependence on oil revenues means that the difference between revenue boom and revenue bust (sic) can be a small one. Lawmakers should be mindful of this as they decide the fate of the Stelly reforms.

In late 2007 and early 2008, when opposition to this plan was most vocal, Louisiana had a $1 billion surplus, and because of the skyrocketing price of oil, revenues were also up, which led many to believe that we were obliged to repeal the Stelly plan.

The Times-Picayune observed back in May of 2007 that, although some lawmakers argued the surplus justified a repeal, others were less than convinced. Former State Representative Taylor Townsend (D-Natchitoches) told the Pic:

Also circumspect is Rep. Taylor Townsend, D-Natchitoches, chairman of Ways and Means. His main concern is that the Legislature will go too far in approving Stelly changes and other tax breaks that will add up to a giant and unaffordable revenue hit for the state in future years.

“Sure, I want the best tax relief I can get and I want a lot of it, but ultimately we have to do what is in the best interests of the state,” Townsend said during a hearing last week.

At the time, Governor Blanco didn’t cave into the burgeoning movement for repeal, but advocates for the repeal believed they had found their solution when Governor Jindal was elected. However, at first, Jindal opposed the repeal. From the Associated Press:

The Senate’s tax committee on Monday approved a big income-tax break, despite objections from Gov. Bobby Jindal’s administration that the state can’t afford the $302 million loss of revenue.

Unfortunately, his opposition was short-lived, as conservatives pressured Jindal to rethink his position, with some even questioning whether or not Jindal was a real conservative. Others, like LSUS Professor Jeffrey Sadow, argued that Jindal’s initial wavering on the issue represented a “big hit to his reputation.” But either way, once Jindal signed the repeal into law, his administration proudly announced the repeal, as if it had been their plan all along:

The passage of SB 87, which repeals the burdensome Stelly Tax, marks our sixth tax cut since taking office in January and marks the biggest single income tax repeal in the history of our state. This puts money back where it belongs – in the pockets of hard-working families in our state.

As reported in the Baton Rouge Advocate, this legislation will “initially cut state income taxes by $359 million per year.” This is great news for the hard working families of our state.

Taxpayer money is not an open checkbook for government to spend at will, and I am a firm believer that people can spend their money better than government. I will continue to work to instill fiscal discipline and responsible use of your money.

Seven months after the repeal was signed into law, Louisiana suddenly finds itself in terrible financial shape. The surplus is gone, immediately spent on a string of infrastructure projects, and due to the falling prices of gasoline, revenues are down.

Today, The New York Times, in an article entitled “For Louisiana, Bon Temps Proved All Too Brief,” describes how hubris about the anticipated sustainability resulted in mistakes, including the repeal of the Stelly Plan, that are now only exacerbating our current budget problems:

His (Jindal’s) fate is tied as much as anybody’s to Louisiana’s overdependence on oil. Severance taxes, mostly from oil and gas, made up just over 8 percent of state tax revenue in 2007, according to Census Bureau data, much less than Alaska’s 64 percent, but higher than Texas’ 6.9 percent. The total take, including royalties and leases from oil, gas and other resources, accounts for just under 17 percent of the Louisiana budget.

But while the leading good-government group here, citing that addiction, warned last May against the Legislature’s plan for a $360 million income tax cut, Mr. Jindal called the tax break “terrific news” and happily signed it into law as legislators cheered.

Matt D. of the Louisiana Tax Blog and Representative Taylor Townsend weren’t the only ones concerned about the future implications of repealing the Stelly Plan. As it turns out, the non-partisan Public Affairs Research Council of Baton Rouge was also sounding the alarm:

“Anybody paying attention knew we were laying the groundwork for fiscal problems, as we cut taxes and raised spending,” said James C. Brandt, president of the Public Affairs Research Council in Baton Rouge, an independent group in Baton Rouge. “We hate to say, ‘we told you so.’ But unfortunately, we seem to be going right down that boom-and-bust cycle again.”

To be sure, the $359 million shortfall we’ll experience as a result of the Stelly repeal represents only a portion of the $2 billion deficit projected for next year, but it’s still significant. And it forces the Governor to make numerous cuts we’d otherwise not need.

Health care and higher education will probably suffer cuts, the latter perilous in a state that regularly bemoans chronic white-collar outmigration, a trend that touched the governor’s own family when his brother moved out of Louisiana. Mr. Jindal recently pointed out that his state was the only one in the South to regularly lose more people than it gained. Now, in the universities that are supposed to be magnets and incubators, faculty positions will go unfilled; academic programs will probably be cut.

There could be some $109 million in education spending cuts alone, and an additional $160 million in health care cuts, much from Medicaid — unfavorable circumstances for the rollout of Mr. Jindal’s ambitious new plan to partly privatize Medicaid in the state.

In fairness, Jindal understands that, although education and health care cuts are unfortunate, the Louisiana Constitution offers him few alternatives; education and health care expenditures are not protected.

Still, the numbers don’t lie. The Stelly shortfall is $359 million, and proposed cuts in health care and education total $269 million.

We are constantly the victims of our own short-sightedness. Louisiana is a poor state, a state that hovers, as Mr. Jindal liked to say on the campaign trail, on the bottoms of the good lists and the tops of the bad lists, and this doesn’t seem likely to change any time soon.

The consequences are real in a state long ago overtaken by regional neighbors more tightly focused on educational institutions. “It reduces the state’s competitiveness in attracting new business,” Mr. Lombardi said. “This is a real economic development issue for the state.”

Mr. Brandt, of the public affairs council, said cutting education would only increase migration from the state. Louisiana, he said. has “gotten by with these resources others don’t have.”

“We’ve not made the decisions we need to,” he said, “to get us out of the high-poverty, low-education cycle.”

It should also be noted that the same legislature who repealed the Stelly plan, even though the Governor was initially opposed to it, also voted to reward itself with pay raises, which the Governor initially supported and balked at vetoing.

With respect to Mr. Brandt, we haven’t only refused to make the right decisions; we’ve refused to acknowledge the problems.

Dec 18

1 Comment

CenLamar’s Top Ten Albums of 2008

10. Death Cab for Cutie Narrow Stairs: I’ve been a huge fan of Death Cab since the first very time I heard the album We Have the Facts and We’re Voting Yes, particularly the song “405.” Ben Gibbard, the lead singer of Death Cab, is one of the single greatest talents in contemporary “popular” music, a strange thing to admit for those of us who absorbed his music in the backrooms of small clubs eight years ago, way back when the band was just another Seattle-based upstart attempting to resurrect the scene’s primacy after the suicide of Kurt Cobain, and Ben and his band were the farthest thing away from being popular. But Death Cab is not and would never attempt to replicate Nirvana; Death Cab relishes in sentimentality and in rigorously workshopped lyrics and rhythms.

If it weren’t so mature and self-aware and slickly produced, I’d probably like Narrow Stairs a lot more, but considering my respect for their musicality and musical sentience, Narrow Stairs easily makes my top ten.

9. Cut Copy In Ghost Colours: I normally don’t care for dance or techno music, but this was a particularly great year for the genre and Cut Copy is a particularly fantastic band.

8. Iron and Wine The Shepherd’s Dog: Sam Beam and the gang are easily one of my favorite bands of all-time. He effortlessly composes and performs some of the most beautifully subtle and understated melodies of the past decade. Although their latest album isn’t my favorite in their catalog, it’s still an incredible body of work and a reminder of Beam’s quiet songwriting genius.

7. Ryan Bingham Mescalito: I just can’t shake it. This is my favorite kind of music– the sultry, cigarette-scarred voices of displacement, people who sing about long-lost Louisiana byways, people like Lucinda Williams and Ryan Adams. Mr. Bingham has produced a brilliant album, which, to me, is more remniscient of Bright Eyes’s I’m Wide Awake; It’s Morning than anything in contemporary pop country. And I intend that as the highest of compliments.

6. Fleet Foxes Fleet Foxes: I don’t care what my friend Lizz says.

5. Girl Talk Feed the Animals: I have no idea how many copyright violations this could be subjected to, but Girl Talk is one of the most inventive samplers and DJs in the world.

This is NOT SAFE FOR WORK.

4. Black Kids: Partie Traumatic: I became addicted when this Jacksonville, Florida band leaked their EP on MySpace.

3. Vampire Weekend Vampire Weekend: There’s absolutely nothing quite like disaffected upper-class earlytwentysomethings making snarky music (Paul Simon meets Peter Tosh) about East Coast privilege.

2. MGMT Oracular Spectacular: I can’t say enough. All I can ask is that you listen. If you don’t get it, then you never will. But this is a brilliant and groundbreaking album.

1. Bon Iver For Emma, Forever Ago. Sounds for itself. Here is the entire album:

Flume

Lump Sum

Skinny Love

The Wolves (Act I and II)

Blindsided

Creature Fear

Team

For Emma

Re: Stacks

Dec 15

8 Comments

SNL Slammed for Governor Paterson Skit

A few years ago, as my brother and I were walking out of a concert at the Woodlands in Texas, a group of drunk college students, upon seeing me walk by, began to chant, “Timmeh! Timmeh! Timmeh!” I’ve learned to have thick skin when people make fun of my disability, but on that night, I must admit: I was deeply offended by those idiots. “Timmeh,” for those of you who don’t know, was a reference to the physically and mentally disabled South Park character, Timmy, whose only defining trait, besides his wheelchair, was his constant repetition of his own name.

I didn’t say anything to those college students, but I considered, for many weeks, writing a scathing letter to Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the creators of South Park. I wanted to explain to them that, by making Timmy nothing more than the worst type of stereotype, they weren’t being funny; they were, whether intentionally or not, being hateful. Indeed, they had created an excuse for some of their more impressionable fans to replicate their hate in the real world. So what if they scored a few laughs in the process?

The main problem with Timmy was that there wasn’t anything subtle or nuanced or sophisticated about him, which, in fairness to them, they were able to develop with their other physically disabled character, Jimmy. Jimmy may walk with crutches and talk with a confounding stutter, but he frequently reveals himself to be smart, compassionate, and reasonable. And because of this, we can laugh at Jimmy when he bungles words (I’m thinking specifically of an episode in which Jimmy tells Wendy, “You’re a continuing source of inspiration.” If you haven’t seen the episode, I’ll let you use your imagination) or when he gets into a schoolyard fight.

I ultimately decided not to write the South Park creators, and they ultimately decided, for whatever reason, to phase out Timmy and focus more on Jimmy. But upon reflection, I suppose I learned, from that experience, there’s an art and a balance to writing comedy about a disability. It’s easy to earn cheap laughs, but it’s far more challenging to earn laughs because of a character, not a condition.

Today, New York Governor David Paterson, who is legally blind, made it clear that while he can take a joke, he was offended by the depiction of him on last week’s Saturday Night Live, in which Fred Armisen used the Governor’s blindness as a way of implying that he was aloof, unprepared, and unfit for office.

It was, in my opinion, only superficially funny– the Governor struggling to find his bearings, holding up an unemployment chart upside down, and then bumbling around the set and “accidentally” blocking the camera. And had these been things that Paterson was known to do, perhaps it would be more forgivable. (Remember when McCain blocked the camera during the town hall debate?). But instead, the depiction primarily relied on the device of his blindness as a way of describing his character.

The Governor was offended, and rightly so. From The New York Times:

The governor’s communications director, Risa B. Heller, said on Sunday that the skit amounted to nothing more than cheap ridicule — a surprisingly strong reaction considering that the governor is well known for making light of his vision problems.

“The governor engages in humor all the time, and he can certainly take a joke,” Ms. Heller said in a statement. “However, this particular ‘Saturday Night Live’ skit unfortunately chose to ridicule people with physical disabilities and imply that disabled people are incapable of having jobs with serious responsibilities.

“The governor is sure that ‘Saturday Night Live’ with all of its talent can find a way to be funny without being offensive,” Ms. Heller added.

I’m sure that, like me, Paterson has learned to roll with the punches and has been conditioned to handle and even dish out stupid jokes about his disability since he was a child, but he recognized the depiction wasn’t really about him. It demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of his disability, and in doing so, the humor relied more on his condition than his character, a condition shared by millions of Americans. The Times continues:

When asked if it had offended him (Paterson), he kept any anger or embarrassment in check and deflected the question with an answer about high unemployment among the disabled.

“There is only one way that people could have an unemployment rate that’s six times the national average — it’s attitude,” he said. “And I’m afraid that the kind of third-grade depiction of individuals and the way they look and the way they move add to that negative environment.”

“I run the place that I work in so I don’t have to worry about being discriminated against, I think,” he said. “But the point is that a lot of people who don’t get promotions and don’t get opportunities and don’t even get work are disabled in our society.”

Paterson, arguably, is the most successful blind man in the United States of America, the chief executive of New York State, but the skit really wasn’t about him being a blind Governor, it was about him being blind. And, in this case, the metaphor of blindness allowed them to seamlessly suggest or imply that Paterson was somehow unintelligent and comically unprepared for the Governor’s Office, as if he himself was pulled “out of the freak bin.”

Some of you may think this is no big deal. It’s a comedy show, after all, known to push the envelope on social issues and hold up a mirror to our collective stereotypes and preconceived notions. That may be true, but in order for it to be successful, the writers and the actors must have an understanding of their complicity in humorously “otherizing” a real human being; there has to be a certain self-awareness. And there wasn’t.

Governor Paterson is an inspiration to millions of disabled Americans, a living example that, in this country, even a condition like blindness does not prevent someone from reaching the highest levels of government. He demonstrates what can happen when you believe in your own abilities and refuse to be constrained or defined by your disability.

Does this look like a man “comically unprepared”? Does this look like a man who has no idea what he is doing?

No, it looks like an intelligent, funny, and dynamic leader who happens to be a blind man, and unfortunately, his blindness, pardon the pun, is all some people want to see.

Saturday Night Live owes David Paterson and the millions of disabled Americans an honest, on-air apology.

Dec 13

8 Comments

Unelectability

I should reiterate this: Unless stated otherwise, the opinions expressed on this blog belong exclusively to me, Lamar White, Jr. I am writing this to prove my own inherent unelectability in the State of Louisiana.

Yesterday, I was informed on another website that Louisianans, outside of the New Orleans area, could never be elected to any office if they voiced their support for gay marriage and freedom of choice. Notwithstanding my criticisms of the construction of this argument, I opine the following:

1. I fully support the right of gay and lesbian couples to enter into legally-binding agreements ascribing the very same rights and privileges as heterosexual couples who become legally wedded as a testament to their commitment. I believe that the purely rhetorical debate over the word “marriage” is preposterous, but, at the same time, I also contend that the “sanctity” of marriage cannot and should not be proscribed by a government agency. Because of its nature, literal definitions, and hermeneutic interpretations, I believe the act of “holy matrimony” or “marriage” should be bestowed by a religious institution. Notably, both terms, in their naked religious context, carry absolutely no political application.

As a society, we run into conflict whenever we attempt to conflate religious sacraments or rituals with legally-defined rights. Certain religious faiths and denominations recognize homosexual marriage, while others do not. It is not and should never be the role of government to become an arbiter of the validity of a religious ceremony. The government’s refusal to recognize the inherent civil rights of gay and lesbian couples to enter into the same type of legal arrangement as heterosexual couples is demonstrably unjust and, in my opinion, should be considered unconstitutional, a violation of the separation between church and state. And, even from a strict constructionist perspective, such legal discrimination, which is religious in nature, violates the notion that the government cannot create or sponsor a certain religious faith.

2. I do not believe that anyone else should be required to accept my own metaphysical beliefs on the nature of life. I respect the diversity of opinion about this issue, which is probably the most vexing, painful, and complicated topic in human thought. As someone who appreciates history, I fully understand the terrors that can be inflicted in a nation unwilling to provide safe alternatives, but as a student of religion and a believer in the sanctity of human life, I can’t help but recognize the validity of the counterarguments. I believe that abortion should be the rarest procedure in the world, yet I understand that we all live in an imperfect world with imperfect people– and that, despite my own protestations and beliefs, it would be presumptuous and imperfect for me to demand that others live under a categorical imperative built on my own beliefs. I recognize the human experience is too complex and too burdensome to demand that.

I reject those who attempt to suggest that being pro-choice is analogous with being pro-abortion, and I find such an argumentative construction to be devoid of human empathy, understanding, and experience. I have never met, read, or listened to someone who is pro-abortion. Although I have encountered people who, perhaps due to their own emotional and intellectual immaturity, have allowed themselves to become devoid of empathy and compassion for a gestating fetus, I recognize that their immaturity and ignorance should not be understood as the backdrop of this incredibly difficult issue, as a way of essentializing the painful struggle that so many others must confront. And, again, I believe this is always a painful and gut-wrenching decision, as it should be, yet this freedom– the freedom to make this difficult decision– is provided and protected by the Constitution’s right to privacy.

There, I said it. I guess I can never run for office now.

Dec 12

Drew Ward: Bah Humbug!

Today, The Town Talk reported that Union Tank Car — our area’s only recent foray into the realm of blue collar manufacturing jobs– has fired 50 of their approximately 600 workers. The official term used, of course, is lay-off, but these job cuts were applied with a caveat that employees would not be eligible for rehire, pending future production increases. I suppose with moving into the blue collar labor market, we get to learn the realities of that market…that is, when the companies don’t need labor, they will ditch our workers quickly.

So where does this leave us? Well, it leaves at least 50 of us, their partners, families, and friends thinking of January rent or mortgage payments, when they should be thinking of Christmas presents. For the rest of us, it certainly must leave us asking whether this should stand as is. We, as a community and a State, gave UTLX everything short of the kitchen sink (they apparently didn’t ask for one at the time) in exchange for their opening the plant and employing a minimum of 800 employees within two years. They never made that number. In fact, their workforce only approached 75% of their promised level and not all of those were the full-time/benefits/pension jobs they had promised. So, now we have a company that did not keep their end of a golden goose deal, then after weaseling through a reprieve from local taxpayers, they reward us with cutting 50 more of those jobs. Scrooge needs a visit from taxpayers past.

—————————————————————————————

The employment issue we are now facing as a nation is only likely to get worse. How it will all play out is unclear, but there is more to come. This week, Bank of America announced that is would eliminate 35,000 jobs over the next three years. When you think about it, this is a HUGE number. Just within that company, if you divide this up by the number of years (3) and the number of working hours during a year (around 2000) that means that if you spread them out, five Bank of America employees will lose their jobs every single day for the next 3 years!

—————————————————————————————

OK, so what’s this really have to do with us? Well, everything.

We have allowed this situation to develop. We, as a voting, working, and buying public have virtually thrown away all of the labor advances achieved by previous generations in the early part of the last century.

We have some serious problems with our present economic model. We have allowed companies to pursue a Race to the Bottom. This term has been used for over a decade to describe the legal system that allows corporations to move their operations to locales at the bottom of the wage ladder, bottom of the tax system, bottom of the environmental standards…and coincidentally, usually the bottom of the world.

How?

We have lost our willingness to exercise the power of our dollars and of our votes. For decades, government has worked for business, whereas previous generations demanded that government ensure that business work for the people they serve, sell to, and employ.

Businesses pay for political campaigns, give gifts to politicians, and get most anything they want. For a reference, just check the voting record of our own Senator David Vitter. Almost EVERY bill he has introduced during his term in the Senate have been on behalf of business, and many if not most of these have been very targeted bills only serving specific corporate interests.

We keep voting these people into office. We allow a system where there are a dozen gatekeepers between us as voters and actual decision makers in the offices of our elected officials. We don’t demand action on issues affecting us. We don’t inundate officials with mail, email, phone calls. We sit back and watch.

We allow companies to pay workers as little as possible. We allow them to cut benefits, to do away with pensions. We support them in building a system in which their employees absolutely cannot live on what they make. And the whole time, we look at these same employees and hope direly that that won’t be me one day (Wal-Mart greeter’s?).

How do WE do this? We buy products from these stores and companies. We spend $7 of microwave popcorn from them, even though we know they refuse to pay their employees that much per hour. We buy a cheap bottle of aspirin because we can. It doesn’t matter that the company placed such heavy price demands on the aspirin producer that they had no option but to fire all their workers and get those pills from China instead.

We buy the truck made in Shreveport by workers earning a fraction of what they make elsewhere. We go to a store we can jokingly refer to as Old Slavey, even though we know that slavery is actually a reality of that three button polo with the slightly crooked hem…but we buy it anyway because it’s 9 bucks!

We buy into the nonsense that unions are bad. We adopt terms such as right to work even though we know that means the right to work horrible hours for little above minimum wage with no job security whatsoever.

Why?

One of the biggest differences I tell people about between here and Germany is the public mentality regarding jobs. You see, the Germans view every job as valuable. They realize that even the most menial positions are integral to their economy and their way of life. Thus, they pay everyone properly. Socialism…maybe a little, but not really. Social justice is what it’s called.

This isn’t to say that checkout clerks make as much as doctors. But German consumers realize that they cannot eat cheeseburgers (they LOVE their McD’s) if they have no one to make the cheeseburgers for them. At the same time, because making cheeseburgers is that person’s job, they also believe that that person should be able to live off of that job. He likely has healthcare, a pension, receives a yearly training benefit, and can afford an apartment, furniture, a vacation, and school for his children. Amazingly enough, cheeseburgers don’t cost much more in Germany (1 euro).

If you go into a clothier in Germany you will likely encounter a professional salesperson — someone who is trained in the various aspects of clothing, who can help you chose the proper size and cut, and who knows his product and takes pride in outfitting you with what you desire and need. A professional. And he is paid, treated well, and given the opportunity to take pride in what he does.

He doesn’t make minimum wage.

We need to admit to ourselves and each other, that WE have allowed ourselves to become the least important factor in business and politics. Now…are we willing to take control back?

Dec 11

1 Comment

David Vitter’s “Ass Backwards” Remark Makes National News and The Failures of the Louisiana Democratic Party

Update: Shreveport GM Plan Extends Shutdown, Councilman Blames Failure of Bailout Bill:

The plant announced last month that it would shut down for the first two weeks of January. That shutdown was extended this morning to Feb. 15, after a meeting of the plant’s upper management and union representatives.

Shreveport City Councilman Ron Webb, who has worked at the plant for over 25 years, said the shutdown is in direct relation to failure of the auto bailout.

Original:

And provides an excuse for many to continue piling on our Junior Senator.

I, for one, don’t understand why, out of all of the issues in the world that David Vitter could champion, he’d be fighting against an auto bail-out, particularly considering the struggling Hummer plant in Shreveport. From the Gannett News Service:

“Shame on Senator Vitter,” said Morgan Johnson, the United Auto Workers president of Local 2166, which represents workers at the GM plant in Shreveport.

“I don’t know what Senator Vitter has against GM, the UAW or the entire domestic auto industry, but he has got to forgive us,” Johnson said.

By all indications, GM’s Hummer division is headed for the chopping block, and although I personally detest the Hummer brand (which at least one member of my family cherishes), I understand that their plant in Shreveport accounts for hundreds of jobs. Furthermore, I have to admit that- if I were the CEO of General Motors- I would have absolutely no incentive, in these tough economic times, to continue operating a loss leader of a plant in a State in which the Junior Senator is publicly and openly hostile toward intervention.

Recessions suck, and so do bailouts. Sometimes, though, we have to suck it up. Yet David Vitter, who, along with Larry Craig, remains as someone with which not a single member of the Senate would want to place their name on a bill, believes that, during this current recession, it’s necessary to filibuster a much-needed intervention in an industry that directly benefits hundreds, if not thousands, of working-class people in his own State. If the GM plant in Shreveport closes, mark my words, the ideological intransigence of one person, Senator Vitter, should share some responsibility.

And though I never, in my life, thought I’d feel the need to reference the wisdom of Jay Leno, he was absolutely correct when he pointed out the hypocrisy of an organization in trillions of dollars in debt (the United States Government) attempting to lecture an industry in need of billions of dollars.

Forgive my cold, calculated political analysis, but considering this position represents Vitter’s first major policy foray back into the national spotlight, I can’t help but consider the basis behind his decision. In many ways, this is an attempt to relaunch his political career and his ideological certitude.

First, it’s important to note that this week Vitter officially announced his intentions to run for reelection. For some bizarre and stomach-turning reason, former Democratic Senator J. Bennett Johnston has decided to help make some money for Vitter’s reelection campaign, which demonstrates, once again, the impotence and incompetence of the Lousisiana Democratic Party. They can’t even hold onto one of their most senior members.

I’ve been biting my tongue on this issue for several months, but now it’s simply too much. When one of the most prominent Democrats in the State decides to raise money for the incumbent and scandal-ridden Republican Senator, you know there’s a problem. And despite what the excuse-mongers may have you believe, it’s not because Senator Johnston was a furtive Republican. It’s because the Louisiana Democratic Party needs to wake up and gets its act together. And don’t get me wrong: I do not and would never cast any blame on the new executive director; I think he’s doing everything he possibly can– and doing a great job. But let me try to explain my point by way of a story:

When I was at the Democratic National Convention, I had the unique privilege of sitting with the delegation as they counted their votes for the nomination. I sat directly under the microphone that was used to announce our State’s votes, and, if you look closely on C-SPAN, you can see me hammering away on my laptop as the announcement was being made.

What I didn’t report at the time was this: They were in total disarray. For some stupid, inane reason, they hadn’t even collected or counted their delegates until, literally, seconds before they were expected to appear on national television. They hadn’t even pre-scripted their remarks, instead compiling, at the last minute, right before the Louisiana Democratic Party’s presentation before a worldwide audience, a series of non-sequitors about Louisiana (“(the home of) shrimp and the recovery from Katrina”); they had to repeat their vote tally because of the obvious confusion:

Perhaps the reason for this confusion is because, believe it or not, Louisiana could not account for the votes of 17 of its 67 delegates.

By the way, Louisiana was, with the exception of (I believe) Guam and perhaps one other small contingency (fact check me, if you will), the only delegation that could not account for all of their votes. Nearly every other state had recorded their delegates votes earlier in the day, but Louisiana was still scrambling until the last possible minute. I distinctly recall and even recorded that Louisiana was still counting votes when the State of Kansas announced (and the announcements are in alphabetical order).

You cannot blame the good men and women who simply volunteered their time to serve the interests of the Louisiana Democratic Party. The embarrassment squarely belongs in the hands of party leadership.

It’s not just performance theater failures. It manifests itself in electoral failures.

Don Cazayoux lost because he was opposed by Michael Jackson, a Democrat who rejected institutional support, raised money from Republicans, and ran as an Independent, effectively spoiling the election and costing Democrats a seat.

The Second District was lost, not simply because of the corruption of “Dollar Bill” Jefferson, but because Louisiana Democrats didn’t have the backbone to sufficiently fund and mobilize a primary challenger. Suffice it to say, if Helena Moreno had ousted Jefferson in the primary, she would have been a Congresswoman-elect.

And Carmouche lost, however narrowly, because… well, I’m going to leave that one to Ryan. As he points out, Carmouche’s decision to introduce himself to the Democratic voters of LA04 as a DINO (Democrat In Name Only) and the State Party’s decision (through the DSCC) to endorse the mailer (pictured below), coupled with Carmouche’s rejection of LGBT organizations, may have led to his demise.

carmouche

Again, this mailer, however innocuous it may seem to some, implies that Carmouche’s particular beliefs on these issues (most notably, “traditional marriage”) are synonymous with “Louisiana values.” But what is most egregious is that it was paid for by the Democratic State Central Committee. They calculated that it was more important to neutralize Fleming on social issues than it was to expose Fleming’s crackpot economic theories or his ethically questionable campaign payments to his own Subway sandwich business. As Ryan points out:

Gay marriage was NOT an issue in this campaign. And yet, for some reason, it’s in the mailer sent out on behalf of the Carmouche campaign. When contacted by LGBT groups in Louisiana and Shreveport about the mailer, Mr. Carmouche refused to meet with them, or even return their phone calls.

With all of that said, it’s abundantly evident that Louisiana Democrats have lost control of their party. And so, for someone like Senator Vitter, who in any other state would be shunned into early retirement because of his internationally-known prostitution scandal, it is somehow easy to earn the endorsement and support of a former Democratic Senator and selfishly exploit the auto bail-out bill as a way of earning media.

Archive for December, 2008

Slate.com Finally Recognizes Courtade’s Genius

Greg Aymond Needs to Apologize

A Local Illustration of Haphazard Planning

Congratulations to Dale

CenLamar’s Top Ten Albums of 2008

Drew Ward: Bah Humbug!

David Vitter’s “Ass Backwards” Remark Makes National News and The Failures of the Louisiana Democratic Party

Dimtwitted

Summer Interview Series

Email Subscription

Lagniappe

Today's Top Hits

Crossroads

Recommended Reading

Archives

December 2008
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Nov				Jan »
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30	31

Archive for December, 2008

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Summer Interview Series

Email Subscription

Lagniappe

Today's Top Hits

Crossroads

Recommended Reading

Archives