« #tbt Low-rise city | Main | #tbt High-tech Phoenix »

June 01, 2015

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

How was Carter elected?

Ford pardoned Nixon. A great man (Ford) fell on his sword, pretty much assuring that he would not be elected President and most likely, no Republican would be either.

The similarities with Obama are striking; events occur that almost guarantee the incumbent party will not win and we wind up with a real bright but completely ill prepared occupant in the White House.

Sound familiar??

If you want to instruct someone about being a leader, show them the national malaise speech and then tell them to never ever make a speech like that. A real low point in the American Presidency.

Carter was a good man. Moral, bright, ambitious. I would trust him (not I wouldn't trust Bill Clinton).

The real lesson? President is a real, real, real tough job. The skills that make a successful President are difficult to quantify.

One other thing. Rogue writes that Americans prefer a President who would rather lecture than lead.

Well, yeah.

Could that be applicable to anyone today?

My somewhat educated guess is that Nixon had something on Ford (maybe just a promise, but suspect more.) Don't know what made the latter "great."
Just to disqualify my own opinions from the get, I paid very little attention to politics at the time. What interested me in '76 was Mo Udall's run. My take on carter was that he wasn't AS prepared as
Moodall. The latter would have gotten a lot of traction early on and been able to work with congress productively, ideology aside.
I found JC to be sanctimonious and a bit smug. I worked with a guy from Georgia, and he called it as soon as JC announced. " just watch. People will respond to him."
The cultural historian and critic Morris Berman sees JC as unique, and looks at him through his own set of lenses re USA. Here's a summary starting down the page "page 131" failed presidency or failed nation? http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Berman_Morris/Pax_Americana_DAA.html

I think characterizing the Carter administration as a "failed presidency" is a defensible position, for many of the reasons Senor Talton offers.

My only riposte is to point out that anyone of common decency would have a "failed presidency," insofar as he or she resisted the necessary corruption and cynicism.

I'd like to pick up on that "lecture and lead" line that INPHX referred to. Actually, the quote is:

Like it or not, Americans will not tolerate a president who appears weak, who would rather lecture them than lead.

While on the face of it this sounds like a criticism of the vox populi (or the willfully vox-less populi, excuse my French,) it sounds more like a caution for future presidents and their marketing staff.

I second Petro, There was a time the vox populi was considerably less dry on Election Day.

Jimmy Carter was a really nice guy and faith driven. Possibly a prescription for failure as leader of the most vicious country in this universe.

The Question is will Bill ask Caitlyn for a date.

Cal:

Thanks for the laugh on the whole Caitlyn deal. My mom (and a lot of other folks)always said truth is stranger than fiction.

"Former Olympic (male) hero becomes woman"

No fiction editor would fall for it.

INPHX,

Why do you believe Ford was a "great" person? He seemed like your average political suit to me.

Who gave the "national malaise speech" and what was noteworthy about it? Sounds like a right-wing media meme that has meaning only to members of the echo chamber.

Well Jerry was "Greater" than Spiro but not as Great as IKE. I believe Ford was somewhat more like Carter than Eisenhower. But then I think the only "Great" president was Jefferson with Lincoln hard on his heels.

PS, I have acquaintances that believe that Lincoln was the second worst president. In their white eyes only Obama is worse.
Why i dont know but that reminds of the book,
Custer Died for Your Sins.

It still comes down to Carter saying that we had to be reasonable.
Reagan said 'You can have it all" and we bought it.
We're paying the price yet today.
I guess"Presidency" doesn't include "decency."
Out of office, Mr Carter has proven himself worthy to have held the position.

I like what BEARSENSE says.

Reagan, The life guard that stared in bad movies and became a hero to people that would drink a fools kool-aid.

I think the Iranian hostage crisis did more damage to Carter then his so-called malaise speech.

"He signed airline regulation..." which turned the airline industry into a de facto national transportation system, and a wasteful one at that. Low oil prices in the later 80s helped that along as well. No need for a passenger rail system with cheap airline travel.

"appointed Paul Volcker as chairman of the Federal Reserve, who would break inflation once and for all..." Volcker "broke" inflation by putting the country into two recessions that crushed the manufacturing sector and pushed it to the South, then Mexico then Asia. Inflation in the 70s was energy cost driven, and outsourcing was some of the solution, the lower labor cost helping to outset high oil.

The 70s were the end of the America I grew up in.

You nailed it, 100 Octane.

True Octane 100 on Volcker but inflation was out of control. The havoc it caused in the industrial midwest and east was worse for those inhabitants than the Great Recession of 2008-9 was for the US population. You could move to the sunbelt and get work during that time period. No where to turn though during the recent Great Recession.

To paraphrase Plato, you don't want anyone to be king who wants to be king. The greatest strong point of our republic (I don't think anyone thinks it is a democracy any more) and it's greatest failing is that the president is not king. There is no doubt that the president's role is far more than symbolic, but the symbolic elements of the presidency are far more engaging at the moment in time that the president presides than it is in retrospect. My mama used to say "hindsight has 20/20 vision". I think that Carter had a symbolic mission that has been played out since he left the presidency that is a good one. He tried to walk his Christian talk and that was the best he could do. It certainly beats some of the more cynical would be kings that followed him. I know for certain that I would not be up to the foreign policy task that was put before him. I like to think I would have handled the domestic infrastructure issue better, but I doubt it and public administration is my area of expertise. We don't tend to elect presidents who come from the policy implementation side of the house, do we? My long winded point here, in the end, is that it is good and necessary to engage all head of state administrations historically and form judgements. I never thought I would miss Jan Brewer, but I do. Within this context, though, I think it is important to keep in mind that all presidencies are failed presidencies in retrospect. That is how we learn and I personally learn as much, if not more, from the hot messes as I do from those who appear to be models of excellence. It is also important to recognize that "transformational leadership" is, potentially, inordinately dangerous. When it works everyone cheers, but there are no guarantees it will work. Also, Hitler was a transformational leader. Carter was a "transactional leader" and subsequently his errors were in the area of not getting things done and supporting, faintly, the wrong people. He failed, without a doubt, but opportunity costs are treacherously transparent. Other people would have been better and other people would have been worse. I will take his brand of faith based service over the kind that is bought and sold today any day.

I enter this fray with some trepidation. I look around and notice the Grand Vizier of Emilstan is nowhere to be seen. Perhaps he's still licking his wounds stemming from imagined lèse majesté. That said, I'm not here to besmirch his caliphate. Rather, I'd like to tentatively agree with the Carter indictment on view here while disagreeing with its overall import.

I detested Carter in the same manner as Rogue. His smarmy self-righteousness exhausted me. His relentless efforts to improve himself was like the narcissism of a TED talk, except on a national level. He was, in the words of pundit Joseph Kraft, "a factionalist of the center". Carter's great career arc crashed on a personality flaw as much as it did events beyond his control. His style of micro-management (most famous for his monitoring of the White House tennis court schedule), deployed the devils of fussiness at the expense of his necessary embodiment of national greatness.

All that said, I think Carter's Queeg-like obsessiveness shouldn't blind us to the overarching scale of the right's advancing interests. No matter who was president, he would have been vilified. Liberalism's tide was ebbing because the Southern Strategy was just coming into its own. By 1980, it had mostly gelled. Working-class whites began to see the culture itself as the nature of their political problem. Lee Atwater and company (including a young Karl Rove) had distilled its core message: it's the darkies' fault. Turn on Fox News and you can see that message hasn't changed at all.

It's fascinating to see the era in hindsight with its full employment, strong middle class, effective government, and economic justice and think "malaise". Really? If true, I'd like some of that in a prescription med. Likewise, it's utterly amazing that the dreadful incompetence of Ronald Reagan has somehow been elevated to a fantasia of Napoleanic scale. Iran-Contra, anyone? I can understand Christopher Hitchens, a bracing if erratic intelligence, might dislike Carter for his mother and siblings, but after Reagan, that dyspeptic memory should be laid to rest. Carter, for all his faults was an adult. Reagan, for all his stagecraft, a virtual moron.

Hitchens is not a good authority in matters like this. He was a full-throated supporter of the Iraq invasion and never took responsibility for his misjudgment. He tended to hide his arguments behind alcohol-tinged attacks on people he didn't like. The Dixie Chicks, for example, were "fucking fat slags" because of their opposition to the war and George W Bush.

Hitchens, at least, was a fully vetted member of our national scream-fest, unlike James Howard Kunstler who is mostly unknown. Still, the two bear comparison, as when Kunstler decided that Trayvon Martin deserved to die at the hands of a racist thug because he was a few inches taller than him. The lesson here is that we shouldn't invest authority in those who are so far outside the mainstream of the national conversation that they only serve to confuse what ought to be clear battle lines.

Carter was wrong in his personality but far less so in his political positions. Calling him a failure weakens the tentative alliance of imperfect creatures struggling to engage this world somewhat rationally. Yes, Ronald Reagan looked like a president much better than Carter did. But Carter was knowledgeable while Reagan was anecdotal. Carter was studious while Reagan was vaporous. History should clarify rather than serve mythology. To see the decoupling of productivity gains from income ought to be an antidote to mindless nostalgia. Ronald Reagan harmed this nation in tangible and ongoing ways:
http://stateofworkingamerica.org/charts/productivity-and-real-median-family-income-growth-1947-2009/

I apologize if I'm intruding here, and apologies to Emil for disrespecting his dominion of correct opinion. There are a million shades of gray here and mine is no better than anyone else's. That said, it's not much worse either.

Knowing RC’s view on POTUS effectiveness in general, JC has got to come in near the bottom. My view on the role of POTUS is different, and JC is merely middle of the pack. My main difference from RC is the aspect of the implementation of sweeping “progressive” programs; for RC this is a good thing, for me bad. Then there’s the issue of involvement in unnecessary or pointless wars. For this reason, FDR and Wilson will always be near the top of my bad presidents list. Since I also believe that the War Between the States was avoidable, Lincoln is also near the top of the bad-boy list. Oddly enough, the Mexican-American War, while perhaps unethical, was a war worth fighting; we wanted the Southwest and California and took it. Ergo Polk is near the top in my good-boy list. While JC may not have accomplished anything “good” (by RC’s definition) and also didn’t do anything atrociously bad. Much the same could be said of Ike; one of my top-five presidents.

I feel too much importance is placed on “style” (for lack of a better word) in retrospective POTUS evaluations. For example JFK was wonderfully telegenic; and by any rational assessment an awful president. FDR was the master of the radio broadcast.

I don’t think history is going to be kind to Reagan or JFK.

Good to hear from Solari. The really good threads started with a one-two-punch combo from RC and Solari.

Soleri, you have been so missed. Thank you for your comments, which are always welcome on my blog. Indeed, they inspire me to continue this effort.

Thank you, Colleen, for your post, too.


Soleri writes:

Calling him (Carter) a failure weakens the tentative alliance of imperfect creatures struggling to engage this world somewhat rationally.

Maybe I can be a little more succinct and a little less pretend therapist:

Not calling him a failure is stupid.


And- are you sure you posted the right chart? The one you posted remains tight up to about the year 2000 and then starts to break; the real breaks occur in about 2007.

And that's Reagans' fault why? I mean, other than your obvious hatred of him ??


And I'm no fan of Kunstler, but I think you're misrepresenting his take on Trayvon Martin.

Here's the exact quote:

CNN covered the trial and its aftermath relentlessly — I saw a lot of it recovering from a Friday surgery — and the narrative there was a largely sentimental one about “a child” gunned down. Anderson Cooper and Don Lemon repeatedly omitted to mention that the six-foot-tall child was beating the smaller gunman’s head into the pavement in the minutes before he shot. Apparently the jury did notice this part of the story.


I don't think the emphasis is that the "child" was 6 feet tall; I think it had more to do with the whole "beating the smaller gunman's head into the pavement"

Bravo and welcome back Soleri. We3 usually, but not always, agree. That said - likec RC I have missed your persapacity and wisdom.

@RC re: “He frustrated even his chief of staff, Hamilton Jordan, who later became my friend.” I lived in Atlanta during the Carter Years (President not Governor). A lot of gossip was floating around town about Hamilton. Gist of it was that he way having WAY too much fun in Washington and NYC. I know this may cross the “what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas” bro-code, but have any good stories to tell?

As best as I can remember he died at relatively young age.

INPHX, knowing what we do now about George Zimmermann's trouble with the law, impulse control, and overall hotheadedness, it would seem, well, naive to think his version of events are believable. This man by any definition is a racist scumbag. In the aftermath of events, before Zimmermann's sordid history was fully unveiled, it was unsurprising to read right-wingers denounce Martin as the real villain of this piece. His crime? You know what it is. Later, as Zimmermann's history came to light, the defense of him began to shape-shift. Turns out he was a "Democrat"! Yeah, sure.

Kunstler is a bigot. Full stop. I used to e-mail him back in the day and while I'll give him credit for answering me, I was stunned by his utter and astonishing lack of empathy for those less fortunate than himself. You can be a good writer and still lack psychological insight. Kunstler is a gifted polemicist and a not-so-gifted novelist.

Kunstler, like Hitchens, was a devout supporter of the War Based on Lies, which seemed mostly to do with his own Jewish heritage. It was ironic given how much space he has given to Peak Oil, including one entire book (The Long Emergency). I'm not sure why Rogue considers him a liberal but his cosmopolitanism is mostly the residual attributes of a Manhattan childhood. Today, he's pretty much a full-time crank - survivalism, Malthusianism, cultural conservatism, and Ron Paul-level nuttiness about economic issues. His blog's commenters are mostly right-wing and bigoted. I was banned from commenting and I no longer read him, but I recall him with a distaste borne of admiration. I really liked his books on the built environment. They're as good as anything ever written on the subject. But I think his descent into racial and sexual orientation bigotry constitutes the tombstone of a brilliant career.

Soleri:

Trayvon Martin accosted Zimmerman as Zimmerman was walking back to his car. He threw the first punch, and was on top of Zimmerman, pounding Zimmerman's head into the pavement, when Zimmerman shot and killed him.

It only took the jury 16 hours to agree with every other formal law enforcement investigation- that Zimmerman had acted within the law.

You write that it seems naive to now believe that narrative.

To me, it seems paranoid not to.

BRAVO

But as is often the case with "social media" — god, I hate the 21st century — it didn't end there.

Which reminded me of what may win my favorite quote for 2015. From the Tucson Daily Star's sports page, an article about Bob Baffert the local horseman and UA grad going again for the triple crown:

The sudden deaths of his horses a few years ago and the slamming he took online chased Baffert off Twitter. He and wife Jill keep 10-year-old Bode off social media and don’t let him have a cellphone.

“Before, people’s opinions were kept in a bar. Now they disrespect the president of the United States,” he said. “Social media has changed the world. It’s the teardown society.”

The teardown society....

I'm not on Twitter or Facebook. And am so happy and lucky that my race is run and there's no "social pressure" to be on them. I do own some company stock in them however. After all, one might as well profit off the teardown....

I had a feeling this thread was going to get you flat landers all fired up.

While you fling feces at each other from your respective ideological cages, please don't overlook the fact that each successive President over the past half century has been way worse than his predecessor (regardless of party affiliation).

There is no doubt in my mind that the next President will continue the streak.

brilliant good @ soleri...

One other thing:

Soleri accuses Zimmerman of being a "racist scumbag".

Let's focus on the "racist"

First, he was elected to be a watch guard for a community that was about 50% non white.

Second, he identified Martin as black only when asked about the color of the suspicious person. This was his habit when he called the police- only identify when he was asked.

Third. the girl that Martin was talking with said that Martin described Zimmerman as both a "creepy ass cracker" and a "nigga" but that she found neither of those terms offensive. So, there's that.

Fourth, there is not one shred of evidence that Zimmerman had had any racial issues before the trial.

What do we know? We know that every single time someone has been on top of George Zimmerman "MMA punching him" and beating his head into the pavement when Zimmerman was armed, Zimmerman shot the attacker.

Whether that attacker was black, white, brown or yellow.

Does Zimmerman maybe have a screw or two loose? Probably.

Is he a racist?

Sure.

To you and Reverend Sharpton.

If Zimmerman is a racist, I am not sure he is smart enough to understand he is a racist. And is he a scumbag? Most the scumbags I knew understood they were scumbags. Again I'm not sure Z has enough brains to be a real scumbag. I do think that anyone that trusts Zimmerman to be some kind of security guard runs a serious liability risk. I know a guy on this blog that probably would not insure Z no matter how much money he had.

Ruben if we elect Bernie and put Rand in charge of DEA and let Liz bust walk streets balls we could party, toke up and dance around bankers in stockades.

Cal, that would be an interesting team.

Z was told by authorities not to follow Trayvon. He disobeyed that order. Everything that occurred after that moment is on Z's shoulders.

That stand your ground thing. It's been tried already. It was called the old Wild West. Unless your last name is Earp, leave your six shooter at home and just dial 9-1-1.

In Puerto Rico you would dial nine Juan juan.

Strange turn of the thread. We will never know what really happened because there is only one survivor who didn't follow instructions. I am sure Z will go out with a whimper one day.

Nice to see soleri back with a rip-snorting post. I still read JHK but his economic pontifications are laughable (want to make money, go the opposite of his prognostications) and his hard-on against the youngsters with their tattoos and baggy clothing making due in the hell-scape the baby-boomers have left them.

As to Carter, I am ambivalent. He was a good man with flaws. He tried to appeal to a kinder gentler America and warned us in the "malaise" speech of what would come, but instead we took the darker path of 'murika!, intolerance, bible-thumping, racism, and totalitarianism all in the name of freedom embodied in the sour face of a corporate whore named Ronny. I'm with RP, every president since Carter has been much worse.

And the War Between the States could have been avoided -- that's a hoot.

If we looked at an interaction between two people completely independent of race, I doubt there would be any controversy here. A burly thug, a man with a checkered history of domestic abuse and police interactions, accosts a 16 year old boy on his way home from a convenience store. The interaction becomes an altercation and the unarmed boy is killed. Where would we place the onus of responsibility?

It's only race that explains the headlong rush to defend the thug.

Cal, Zimmerman is not stupid. Your average NRA member is not stupid. Your base Republican is not stupid. Stupid is an excuse you're making for the half of America that wants to believe blacks bring all their troubles on themselves.

I don't want to send off the odor of naiveté. I see plenty of black thug behavior. I know how vexing it can be because I take public transit and live a real city. Portland is the whitest large city in America but it still has a substantial black population that is rooted the part of town I live in. Like all of central Portland, it has gentrified but the underclass is never far from view.

A few months ago, I had a black man spit in my face while I was running in downtown Portland. A few weeks later, another black man lunged toward me as if to push me in front of an oncoming MAX train. I mention this because I don't want to sugarcoat the problem. There is a lot of dysfunction in the black community. Anger is based on fear and fear is primal. It cuts both ways.

This work in progress - America - is not finished. It's struggling now much like South Africa struggled in the 1980s with a system that was failing (it's useful to recall the help Republicans like Ronald Reagan and Dick Cheney offered that regime). The cold civil war we're living through is predicated on maximizing the fear and loathing of white people towards blacks.

What Republicans like INPHX do is link arms with white racists, evangelical hysterics, and the right-wing media Wurlitzer to keep the fear and loathing going full blast. This damages the country and all but makes real social democracy impossible. When the subtext is proofread in the reptilian brain, the message is clear: we're not all in this together. Vote for your tribe, not your country.

Demographic trends make the Republican calculus look like a bad theorem. God is culling the herd of old white people and the young people coming of age are less hamstrung by the siren songs of racial purity and cultural nostalgia. We will in time swamp the party of dog whistles, race cards, and tweaked grievances. Even Arizona will eventually throw off its chains. It won't be soon enough and I worry that the damage it's inflicting might be irremediable.

I watched this video this morning. It's about Portland but it has a lovely resonance about America itself. We're not done. You need to look at the old pictures but don't let them hypnotize you. Scan your own horizon and you know the fear that right-wingers peddle is hogwash. https://vimeo.com/127954097?fb_action_ids=850770981627021&fb_action_types=og.shares&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=[829074010517455]&action_type_map=[%22og.shares%22]&action_ref_map=[]

Soleri:

There is a problem with the races in this country. I don't know what kind of dope would not acknowledge that.

But when guys like you (or Sharpton) try to intentionally completely distort and misconstrue what happened in the Trayvon Martin case, it just makes things worse. It pulls people farther apart. It gives more ammunition to the real bigots and it makes those who try to turn it into a racist event look like they have a chip on their shoulder.

It weakens the ability to discuss events where there really was racism.


The ONLY suggestion of racism in the whole case was when Martin told his friend on the phone that Zimmerman looked like a "creepy cracker" and was a "nigga".


Maybe you need to spend some time reading about the incident; I would take exception to your allegation that there is one shred of proof anywhere that Zimmerman "accosted" Martin, at least until Martin was pounding his head into the pavement.


INPHX, you weaken your argument in trying to bring in Sharpton and yoke him to a more nuanced comment which you happen to disagree with. That's rightwing sop and you're better than that.

Colleen's comment deserves repeating and paraphrasing:

"You don't want anyone to be President , who wants to be President"

Look at the world situation.
Look at the state of our nation.
A person would have to be nuts to want the job.

Look at the current growing crop of presidential wannabes.

We always have to settle for the 'least worst' candidate.
This crop is the worst we've ever had.

Rogue:

You're right.

It's an insult to Sharpton to link him with someone (Soleri) who alleges that Zimmerman was a "racist scumbag".

Even Sharpton never went that far.

"reptilian brain," said Soleri,
Stupid said I.
I rest my case.

One other thing on the whole each President is worse than the one before him---

I'm not so sure that's fair. The world is getting much more complicated, messier, and dangerous over the last few decades.

The people may be just as qualified as the ones before them; they're just dealing with a much more difficult world.

INPHX, somehow you got into your fevered mind that you're an authority about the Martin homicide. You are not. You're a guy on the internet with an opinion. Which is all any of us schlubs has. Absent a videotape surfacing, we'll never know the indisputable facts of this case. Your touching defense of Zimmerman is based on nothing more than the color of his skin and the usefulness it offers in keeping the white working class voting Republican.

But we do know this: Martin was an unarmed skinny kid walking home while Zimmerman was an armed man with a checkered history of violence and run-ins with the law. Our sympathy - and, yes, our skepticism - belongs on the side of the minor.

Al Sharpton is not my cup of tea although if I was forced to choose between him and one of the stone-cold racists on Fox News (say, Bill O'Reilly), I'd choose Sharpton in a heartbeat. I dislike inflammatory rhetoric, which Sharpton has used in the past. He's cleaned up his act markedly but he's still speaking on the side of a divide that has far fewer megaphones than yours. It's interesting that you want to guilt me by association. Why would you do that? Just curious.

I appreciate your presence here since it helps to have other side brazenly arrayed in the full plumage of its circus ideology. You are, to be sure, losing this debate where in matters: in the hearts and minds of younger Americans. They notice the antics of the Duggars, any GOP Speaker of the House, full mooners like Pat Robertson, the Duck Dynasty, Ted Nugent, Sarah Palin, along with other teammates in the grotesquerie that is the America right. I enjoy the show you're putting on here even if I think you're not really part of that movement so much as an apparatchik deflecting attention from its various obscenities.

Tooooooo big a world.

Soleri I heard a rumor that you were climbing walls in the far east? Any perspective on Nixon, Carter and today with regard to China?

I still think that inphx is the resident adam henry.

How has the world become more complicated? US Hegemony: the root of all economic, diplomatic, political, and military skullduggery.

Jerry, your answer, CIA.
Now arm in arm with the folks IKE warned us about.
Wild Bill Donovan might have said "there was more clarity." And "I sailed the Adriatic with a movie star."

Ramjet,
You guilted a coffee invite out of cal, yet you didn't show?

I don't know who adam Henry is, but please don't ever disparage Henry Adams. That's a damn fine beer.

Cal, my one takeaway from China is that state capitalism has certain advantages when it comes to managing an acute housing bubble. I had never seen so many empty high-rise condo buildings before - really thousands upon thousands in Beijing, Xi'an, Wuhan, and Chongqing. Many of them are still "under construction" although the cranes aren't moving. The reason I think the state has an advantage here is that it can pump liquidity into its major banks to forestall a complete collapse. How did this happen? It's very, very complicated but local governments were, in particular, able to leverage land at inflated values for these projects. When the projects stalled, they simply created new shell corporations to hide the red ink. Somehow, it hasn't crashed even though the national government is unlikely to bail them out absent liquidation of other economic assets or raising taxes.

Aside from that, China is a village with 1.3 billion people. The village is pretty much self-policing. No one appears unhappy and the rules are clearly followed. Watching people cross busy streets without the benefit of traffic signals is a lesson in the subtleties of calculated risk.

The cities are often astonishingly ugly. Many downtowns are low-rent Strips out of Las Vegas, garishly lit up at night while looking hideously woebegone during the day. The charm, such as it is, is usually seen close to historical set pieces like the Summer Palace in Beijing.

The older people appear very content, laughing, smiling, and joking among themselves. The younger people look very American. You can tell they get to see a lot of our entertainment products. My sense is that America really has a strong edge when it comes to social dynamism. China is hamstrung less by its rigid and often corrupt government than by the rules of a cultural gerontocracy. This will change, but it has a subtle effect on the psyche. The Chinese people are truly amazing but I'm not sure their culture would allow a Steve Jobs or Bill Gates to flourish. Rather, you tend to see the flaunting of wealth for its own sake, which is not particularly creative or emboldening. The Chinese love money! But you need more than money to advance to the next level. Right now, it's simply too easy to take money under the table and ship the family off to Vancouver or Hong Kong.

Soleri:

What I have posted about the Zimmerman case is based on transcripts and other factual issues related to the case (the quick jury acquittal, for example).

You, on the other hand, have alleged that Zimmerman was (is??) a "racist scumbag" without one shred of anything even close to evidence, other than your typically nutty (and usually incorrect) views of a world where the Klan is around every corner.

And who DID have access to all the information? Well the jury- they acquitted. And the feds- who decided not to bring charges.

Gee. Did ANYONE with all the information establish that Zimmerman was a racist?


Well, no.

Don't be so lazy. There's incidents out there where racism has reared its ugly head. Go out and find one and maybe we can have a relevant, meaningful discussion on race.

On second thought, that's probably wishful thinking, at least based on the sound thinking you've brought to bear on this issue.

You want to hold hands with Sharpton, knock yourself out.

Just keep your money safe and don't use his CPA; apparently, he's about $5.0M in the hole with his taxes.

OK then. Next week Rogue will have a thread about Zimmerman and we'll talk about Carter.

Bottom line, Zimmerman will die an unnatural and untimely death. It's in the cards. Problem solved. Gene pool cleansed.

There's incidents out there where racism has reared its ugly head. Go out and find one and maybe we can have a relevant, meaningful discussion on race.

I am wondering: Is anybody out there numbering and keeping track of all the "hi nigger boy, I got a rope for you" tweets Mr. Obama has received since he went on Twitter?

It's rather flagrant. Six years ago it would have made front page news and caused a so-called "national conversation". Today? The story was way deep in the newspaper. Why do you suppose that is?

Zimmermann bores me to holy hell. When trouble follows someone around like a servile dog you know all you need to know. At best he is a punk criminal. At worst he is racist punk criminal. Either way he's a loser on a path of self destruction. The planet will be better without him.

But this twitter blizzard of raging racist hell towards Mr. Obama? That is pretty damn interesting, in an appalling sort of way

INPHX,you're a bit of an asshole, so I'm not going to pretend you really have an opinion worth respecting. First off, I really doubt you read the transcripts. If you did, your conclusion was predigested not to mention preordained. You're a movement conservative with an agenda. Pretty much everything you do here is in service of a Big Lie, which is really the only thing zealots like you respect.

When you first came here, Talton e-mailed me that he wanted to ban you for trolling. I defended your opinions as unexceptional bullshit and Talton conceded the point. Since then, I have seen your argumentation more as aggressive point scoring rather any kind of good-faith effort to make a sensible and coherent counter-argument to the ones on view. You do not admit mistakes since that interferes with the machine-gun cadences of your polemical style.

At any rate, if I hang out here, which is more or less contingent on the return of the blog's persecuted troll, I won't engage you. You're full of shit. I already knew it. Now I've said it.

@In Phoenix: a bit of advice; stay on topic. It’s way too easy to get dragged down every back-road and byway of the Left’s discontent. It’s a losing game. Don’t go there.

I actually met Carter once, when he was between jobs as Governor and POTUS. It was at a leadership development conference. Over a period of two days, eight speakers were brought in to opine on leadership and success. It was a really good event. There were only about 20 of us in the “class”. I can only specifically remember two of the speakers (hey this was 40 years ago) one was Carter and the other was the guy who ran IBM’s organization in Atlanta – which was huge. The format was that the speaker would talk for an hour, a 15 minute break, and a 45 minute Q&A.

At least half of JC’s talk concerned Admiral Rickover’s management of the Nuclear Submarine Force. Rickover was obsessive about every aspect of the program. There was a Q-school (sort of like the PGA) for prospective Ensigns. One of the last steps in this Q-School was an interview with Rickover. This was not a 10 or 15 minute “get to know you” meeting. It was an hours long grilling. I guess JC’s point was that details matter and the biggest detail is recruiting/employee development.
Note that this Q-School was just the first of many “qualifying demonstrations” in the Sub Force. As an ensign (O-1) you’d immediately have to start qualifying for O-2. Same for the enlisted ranks too. In fact that were even activities to re-qualify periodically for a rank you already have.

I don’t recall him speaking very much about political things.

I introduced myself during the break period and spoke for a minute or two.
I was all set not to like the guy; I have an instinctive dislike for any politician who has to run for office. I found him to be quite likeable. He’s a soft spoken and terribly non-demonstrative speaker. But you could also see that there was an iron will at the core; one that did not suffer fools easily. None of this would have made for a good sound-bite for the evening news but it was a memorable two hours.

His choosing Hamilton Jordan as chief of staff shows that, while he may be Southern Baptist all the way, he did not inflict his beliefs on others.

Soleri:

You have alleged that George Zimmerman was (is?) a "racist scumbag". When repeatedly questioned on that allegation, you have tried to bob and weave away. You have been stunningly unable to put one iota of evidence behind that statement and yet you won't even consider conceding that the racist part of that allegation is unproven.

And your final dodge is to resort to childish, immature name calling and profanity as you "withdraw" (surrender?) from your previously untenable position.

It really bothers me when people inject race into a situation where it doesn't belong- I guess that doesn't bother you. You'll go with the superficial, shallow, right out of the shooter CNN "analysis" instead of really drilling into the issue.

You write

"Since then, I have seen your argumentation more as aggressive point scoring rather any kind of good-faith effort to make a sensible and coherent counter-argument to the ones on view. You do not admit mistakes since that interferes with the machine-gun cadences of your polemical style"

Gee.

Do you always project this much??

Oh I so love dis fightin in da mud.
Gets me all worked up.
More, More!

The scariest thing about the Zimmerman convo is how people don't seem to really understand how this is negatively affecting the psyche of young black Americans. I was helping run a summer camp for college pre-freshmen when the Zimmerman verdict came: we had kids and counselors crying out of fear, confusion, and anger for days after that. Everyone was scared that something similar could happen to them-even as straight-edge, clean cut college students-because Martin showed that there was nothing we could do to protect ourselves from being profiled nor would there be recourse against those who did so to us.

Martin got killed despite the fact that, initially, he did nothing wrong... like he was walking home from the store and some man followed him. They got into a conflict. He was killed. Even if we assume that Zimmerman was "defending himself," why is it okay that Zimmerman initiated contact? On what grounds? The entire case was about whether or not he had a right to defend himself and not whether or not it was okay to profile Martin. Um, hello! If he hadn't profiled Martin nothing would have happened. How is he not held accountable for that? And that's the point: it's not illegal to profile. And that makes me vulnerable to being discriminated against and profiled. And if things go really wrong, the past few years has shown that the responsibility for the outcome of the situation rests with me-not the instigator.

I can never be sure how I look to cops. Like, I got pulled over a half dozen times before 21-I can't be a bad driver cuz I never got a ticket but... maybe they were all being nice to me? So was it profiling or nah? I want to give the benefit of the doubt... but then I see, week after week, story after story of unarmed black kids killed in dubious circumstances with cops and then I hear (not ALL but enough) white folks come up with excuse after excuse for why these murderers are justified in their actions. And it becomes more and more difficult to give this society the benefit of doubt. Because if society thought it was a problem, we'd stop it. It's not society's problem if I get profiled, it's mine.

When INPHX finds ways to alleviate Zimmerman of responsibility for that situation I turn white with rage. He would rather blame a 17 year old for reacting to someone following him than hold a grown man accountable for initiating conflict with a stranger. He doesn't even say, "well, we couldn't convict him in a court of law, but I find his actions reprehensible and wish we could do something to stop this from happening." He doesn't seem to understand that I am truly scared that any confrontation with an authority figure could cost me my life and I am rapidly losing faith in the justice system to avenge any grievance committed against me. He seems disinterested in doing anything to assuage my concerns; instead, he wants to tell me "don't believe the race mongers." At least they listen to my fears. Like... Don't you get that I'm scared? Can't we find a way to mitigate my concerns? Why doesn't my experience count? Why is it that conservatives are so concerned with defending Zimmerman and not the dead guy?

I have had an increasingly difficult time talking to white folks, liberal or conservative, as I've aged (and I've lived with them my ENTIRE life) because I'm scared they can't see me as their peer. Frederick Douglass had a quote pertaining to the situation:

"The crime of insolence for which the Negro was formerly killed and for which his killing was justified, is as easily pleaded in excuse now, as it was in the old time and what is worse, it is sufficient to make the charge of insolence to provoke the knife or bullet.
This done, it is only necessary to say in the newspapers, that this dead Negro was impudent and about to raise an insurrection and kill all the white people, or that a white woman was insulted by a Negro, to lull the conscience of the north into indifference and reconcile its people to such murder.
No proof of guilt is required. It is enough to accuse, to condemn and punish the accused with death. When he is dead and silent, and the murderer is alive and at large, he has it all his own way. He can tell any story he may please and will be believed. The popular ear is open to him, and his justification is sure.
At the bar of public opinion in this country all presumptions are against the Negro accused of crime."
--Frederick Douglass
--1893

It feels like little has changed since he wrote that. The easiest explanation I've been able to find is that America is, fundamentally, wildly racist. This can't be totally true cuz we have a black president. But the discourse over these dead black bodies is making it harder for me to avoid that conclusion. If anyone has a response to my concerns about the value of black life in America (and not some political pontification about jobs, or the police state, or personal responsibility) I'd love to hear it-especially from a conservative. Because I genuinely don't get how you can say you care about blacks as citizens and defend this:

http://gawker.com/unarmed-people-of-color-killed-by-police-1999-2014-1666672349

PhenixPhenom:

Truth.

Ruben,
Scheduling issues prevented me from showing for coffee. Mea Culpa. Cal can tell you who adam henry is. The beer is Samuel Adams not Henry Adams and you are right it is good.

The link between religious Jimmy Carter, Travon Martin and George Zimmerman.

PhenixPhenom, I do not know who U R and will refrain from assumptions. I am Calvin Lash, retired Phoenix cop. Dont know if you ave followed this blog for a while but the short story is, as a white cop I have a lot of experience with minorities (and as a young field worker a lot of experience with minorities) As a cop among my 19 assignments I worked the walking beats in Phoenix housing projects and also Armed Robberies committed by Black suspects (the robbery unit broke down by race in the seventies).

Ruben pegged the Zimmerman problem:
From the get go, he violated a direct communication from the police department, at this point, he seems to be at least guilty of endangerment. Although it appears all the evidence is available to the public, none of us were sitting in on the jury deliberations. But I am sure someone will write that book.

I might suggest for an overview since the late 1800's to today you might read, Carnival of Fury by William Ivy Hair. A book that documents a bad arrest by a white New Orleans police officer of a black man and the shooting at a voting poll of a white voter by another white man. The fury results in the arrested black shooting 27 white people including seven white police officers.
And for the connection between white religion and what you see today I suggest, The Fire next time by James Baldwin.

Ruben and Roger Ramjet, I know where Central and Adams is. I didnt know Henry Adams or Adam Henry. And I do not care for beer so I dont know Samuel Adams.
Cal from the bottom of a Agave soaked Barrel.

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=oculto+beer&qpvt=Oculot+beer&qpvt=Oculot+beer&FORM=IGRE

@RC reviewing the article again came across “Carter might also have done Phoenix an enormous favor had his effort to kill the Central Arizona Project been successful (but that's another story).” I found this at odds with your lauding of Carl Hayden for the accomplishment of CAP. I agree that it’s another story. With the T. Martin issue on the table, there are enough tangents in play. When we get back into water/environmental issues I’d like to reopen this.

Wkg, it's quite possible to admire Carl Hayden while regretting some water projects: Arizona was undeveloped and sparsely populated when he went to Washington in 1922 (or thereabouts), and he was an Arizona booster, so the movement and acquisition of water became his main focus. The most that can be said of any politician is that they at least brought home some bacon, so not much can be said for McCain the carpetbagger.

I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure Carl Hayden never foresaw Colorado River water being used to turn Arizona into the metastatic sprawl-crap of today. Agriculture was a key economic sector back in his day. How things have changed.

A few headlines I read in The Phoenix Business Journal this morning:

Arizona ranks dead last in teacher pay, classroom spending

Phoenix's Silicon Desert still parched for venture capital

Phoenix's future depends on altering problematic present http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/blog/business/2014/09/phoenix-s-future-depends-on-altering-problematic.html

Income down, poverty up in post-recession Phoenix

Census: Arizona posting slow population growth

Phoenix area's sprawl turning off desert tourists

Census report finds that 1 in 5 Arizonans have no health insurance

More than 1 in 4 Arizona Hispanics living in poverty

Phoenix tops for senior moves but not a landing spot for millenials

Arizonas young adults lacking in higher education

Question: why does The Phoenix Business Journal hate Phoenix?

When INPHX finds ways to alleviate Zimmerman of responsibility for that situation I turn white with rage. He would rather blame a 17 year old for reacting to someone following him than hold a grown man accountable for initiating conflict with a stranger.

How dare you say this. INPHX read the transcripts! And, I'm sure, some of his best friends are black! And as far as we know, Zimmerman has only killed one black person, so he can't be a racist. In fact, you must be a racist because......er.......Al Sharpton!

Great post PhenixPhenom. Frederick Douglas is a true American for the ages too. He was not afraid to speak the truth, one that sadly lingers over this nation.

Phenom:

George Zimmerman patrolled the gated community. He had been assigned that responsibility. As I recall, he had called police over 50 times- the total calls to the police were over 400 over about a 2 year period. It ain't exactly Beverly Hills.

He saw a kid, who he did not recognize, who was not walking on the sidewalks, in the rain, who may have been looking in or around the individual units.

He was suspicious.

He called the police, who told him he didn't need to follow the young man.

After that, things get REALLY murky. It is unclear if Zimmerman actually followed Martin after that request. What we do know is that Martin told his friend on the phone that a "creepy cracker" and a "nigga" was watching him.


As Soleri pointed out, no one really knows how the physical altercation started. Zimmerman states that Martin started it; the physical evidence is unclear, and obviously, Martin can't tell his side.

What we do know is that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, pounding on him and that Zimmerman was yelling for help. And it may be he case that Martin saw Zimmerman's gun and reached for it.

And then Zimmerman shot and killed him.

Stop

If anyone can refute any of those statements, I'm listening.


What I've tried to do here is focus on the alleged racial motives of Zimmerman. Remember- he called about a lot of suspicious activity. He saw it as his responsibility to try to keep the complex safe. He did not offer the color of Martin until the police asked him. There is NOTHING in his history to suggest that he was a bigot.

Your write:

"He would rather blame a 17 year old for reacting to someone following him than hold a grown man accountable for initiating conflict with a stranger."

We don't really know who "initiated conflict"
That's one of the problems.

I'll try one more time:

George Zimmerman may have been a real vigilante, Dirty Harry kind of guy, with a chip on his shoulder, just waiting to pull that piece and blow away some punk trying to have his way with the community.

But again, there is not one single shred of evidence to suggest that race was part of his motive.

Stupid? Perhaps. Overzealous? Maybe.

A bigot? Almost certainly not.

Hey this has been good.
Regarding Race and this nation and presidents, religion and Bigots here is a book I have not yet read but intend to:
http://www.amazon.com/Laps-Gods-Summer-Struggle-Justice/dp/0307339831/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1433426475&sr=1-1&keywords=on+the+laps+of+the+gods&pebp=1433426476770&perid=1FV3GY1CJVH1T7SFY4HJ

RE: Hayden and Bacon, (He was a kinder, softer politician than many) I would rather Hayden made Arizona a Federal Wilderness and not brought us the CAP.

Re: McCain and Bacon: A foreign corporation screws the Apaches, Again.
http://www.riotinto.com/

from INPHX: "...no one really knows how the physical altercation started...the physical evidence is unclear, and obviously, Martin can't tell his side."

That refutes everything else you said.

C'mon Cal. I am sure you know an adam henry when you see one.

Jerry:

It is Soleri who made the claim that Zimmerman was (is) a "racist scumbag".

When challenged on that claim, he has been stunningly unable to back it up. That's SOP for him; he bleats his insipid views on things and when challenged, he resorts to personal attacks, insults, and, well, er,,, "the Duggars"!!

The ambiguity of the situation doesn't hurt me, it hurts him.

It really doesn't matter. It comes down to his opinion v. your opinion.

INPHX, time to move along to another subject. Add some value.

As for Hayden et al, it is the tragedy of Phoenix and Arizona wanting to survive and grow, and succeeding all too well.

The CAP was sold for agriculture, and also to keep California from taking Arizona's rightful share of Colorado River water. It was a different time.

I have written about this extensively on the 101 posts, including one on Hayden, and also the water posts that nest under "sustainability."

We should understand something very clearly. When someone, an adult no less, inititates an interaction with someone else, a minor, pretty much solely on the basis of his race, and then ends up shooting to death that unarmed child, it's safe to use the word racist. We don't have to quibble about his motivations. Killing someone is demonstration enough. A serial abuser of women and someone with ongoing problems with the police is not someone we'll confuse with a limp-wristed member of the ACLU or, if you will, a liberal. He's pretty much in the tribe that blames Obama for everything, which is what Zimmerman did in fact in the wake of his homicide. Birds of a feather, as they say.

Republicans tend to bend over backwards justifying the killings of unarmed black people. Why? Well, it keeps their coalition together for one thing. Indeed, some have speculated whether this intensification of racial animus will damage Hillary Clinton's presidential prospects. http://nationalinterest.org/feature/could-the-baltimore-ferguson-riots-cost-hillary-clinton-the-12768

All of this troubles me because this nation's history has been lopsidedly hostile to African Americans. And since 1968, that history has been whitewashed to transform the Republican Party into its current iteration, sometimes called the Neo-Confederate Party. It's use of race cards, Willy Horton-style fearmongering, and the politics of hate have distorted our national purpose. Today's Republican Party has devolved into a pity party of aging white burghers calling themselves victims because modernity feels so alien to them.

I don't care if you're a boorish blowhard like Bill O'Reilly or a bright if damaged intellectual like James Howard Kunstler, the right's core principles rest on hierarchy, authoritarianism, and racism. There is no meaningful distinction worth drawing between your average white suburban Republican and the segregationists of yore. Granted, they keep their language cleaner and avoid overt demonstrations of bigotry. But when push comes to shove, they will do what they can to make the lives of black people harder and even shorter. Denying poor people Medicaid in southern states, cutting the SNAP budget, and the "war on drugs" all have racial underpinnings and have been ruthlessly exploited by the right to galvanize their coalition of small and fearful souls who watch Fox News and vote Republican.

I'm tired of assholes like INPHX hedging what ought to be crystal-clear in everyone's mind. This one is not close. It's not in the ballpark of acceptable opinion. What he and others like him do is push the boundaries of acceptable discourse to the right, essentially altering reality to suit their political ends. Killing an unarmed kid is unacceptable regardless of his skin color. I'm sorry if I'm offending anyone here, but George Zimmerman is a horror of a human being precisely because he lives in that most Republican of redoubts, racial fear and loathing.

Cute, Rouge - shifting the thread just when Soleri has been handed his lunch by IMPHX.

Move along, INPHX. There's a new post to comment on. There are Front Page stories you can riff off.

Were two attempted posts of mine deleted?

Thanks

Above--

I mean- Thanks in letting me know if the attempted posts were deleted.

Not Thanks for deleting them

I unpublished them. All commenters need to bring value in their own way. Thousands of readers deserve this. You made your point on Zimmerman. Say something fresh.

It is telling that the two combatants on this thread could not let go of their battle over a minor side issue long enough to acknowledge a profound post by PhenixPhenom, a person who is living the nightmare, day to day.

Only Petro, jerry and cal acknowledged the post.

It shows that most Americans travel through life with blinders. They don't want to see.

The truth is too troubling.

We are a more racist, prejudiced, ignorant country than we've been in the last 150 years.

Racism thrives in ignorance.

Coffee clutches give you vision.

Ruben:

I responded to Phenom's post and Soleri acknowledged it by quoting from it.

There is racism in this country. It's not trivial.

So INPHX u want an invite to the next eye to eye coffee and or beer? And that is open to everyone else!

My apologies to iNPHX and soleri

https://consortiumnews.com/2015/06/05/killing-the-black-panthers/

some stuff

http://www.thenation.com/blog/209185/kwangju-uprising-and-american-hypocrisy-one-reporters-quest-truth-and-justice-korea#

All on Carter's watch (with his approval).

He's a far better ex-President than he ever was in office.

I can't agree with everything you said about President Carter. I do like that you appreciate his engineering and Navy background. He is extremely well read. Too many people like to portray him as a backwoods ignorant peanut farmer. But he definitely failed in some key leadership areas and the electorate took that into consideration, as they should have. As you noted, everyone in the last few decades seems to have rallied to their partisan flags and see the other side as real enemies, instead of fellow Americans that have different political philosophies. Pragmatic moderation, consensus, and cooperation to achieve bi-partisan effective government has become the realm portrayed as fence-sitting indecision, RINO, DINO, treason or worse. I'm thinking it will only be corrected over time by demography.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

My Photo

Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz