Thursday, February 4, 2016

Macklemore's "White Privilege II"

http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2016/01/29/464752853/i-guess-we-gotta-talk-about-macklemores-white-privilege-song?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20160129

First I blog about a Hollywood movie, and now a rap song. I thought it was very well done though, esp. how touchy a subject this is for a white rapper.

The key quote to me was, "What are [white people] willing to risk and sacrifice to create a more just society?"

Critics say that guilt trips won't change whites and only makes them dig in. But sometime there isn't a more comfortable alternative. 

Real change and progress has to hurt, and sometime it is zero sum. Otherwise it's just a BS Oscars speech and telethon. Show you care for 5 min and then return to the comfortable status quo. Remember that some white man had to give a spot to Medgar Evers, Jackie Robinson, Sandra Day O'Connor, Obama, etc. justice means fairly sharing resources, responsibilities, and hardships.

It's not good enough to not be a raging racist. And it's obviously not all on whites. But anyone who benefits from privileges/advantages that are associated with bias - do we have the courage to shun them, in order to expose them and not perpetuate them? 

It's like $100 on the sidewalk. You didn't steal it from anyone, and no one will notice if you take it, and it will make your life better. But the right thing to do is to refrain, because you are not entitled to it, and maybe you can find its rightful owner or donate it to a good cause. But that takes discipline and caring. This is such a hostile, me-first culture; do we have the courage to do this for different looking strangers who are subconsciously associated with all things bad, because of centuries of bigotry? Can our better angels prevail?

I know not everyone can fight against injustice, but everyone has the power to not partake in privileges that are paid for by the pain and blood of innocent victims of prejudice.

Ted Cruz uses Nixon's playbook to win in Iowa

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ted-cruz-facing-controversy-iowa-voter-violation-mailers/story?id=36631257
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/ben-carson-ted-cruz-cheating-iowa-218615
  • Teddy has been a naughty boy!
    • I find this sadly ironic since Iowa is a barometer of Evangelical voting, and they supposedly like Cruz for being "more Christian" than Trump or others (definitely more than that Catholic turncoat Jeb!)
    • So yeah, it's really Christian of Ted to cheat his way to victory, or at least condone unclassy (if not outright unethical) actions
  • An interesting history of extremists in the GOP: http://www.kqed.org/a/forum/R201602030900
  • I am not sure which states Trump is looking stronger in (seems like the Northeast + non-TX/FL deep South?) vs. Cruz/Rubio, but of course the pre-Iowa polls have Trump ahead in all of the early states:
  • Not that I am a Trump fan, but sadly I think he would be less scary for the country/world than a Pres. Cruz
    • Fortunately Cruz is not that electable in a general election (a TP extremist, and you see how few mainstream endorsements he's getting), yet Rubio is, so maybe we should be more concerned about Marco beating Clinton/Sanders?
      • Not that I'm so fired up about a Clinton presidency either
PS - This dude just earned Mexican citizenship with one tomato:

http://www.lamebook.com/andres/
PPS - this is what a coworker found out about election fraud (the GOP should try to clamp down on this crap rather than imaginary voter fraud, but of course they won't - and they shamelessly cite the free speech defense):

Interestingly, the scope for the sorts of federal electoral crimes that a candidate can be accused of is really narrow. Take a look at the FBI page on what it considers to be electoral crimes. Essentially, there are only three things that they'd actually consider criminal:
  1. Illegal donations and financing
  2. Voting by an unqualified voter or abetting such voting
  3. Preventing a qualified voter from voting
Everything else is pretty much fair game. (Obviously, there are state laws, but, since the Iowa caucuses are for a federal office, the FBI would have precedence in this case.)

Noteworthy also is the list of things that they explicitly identify as not being illegal (highlighting added):

What is NOT a federal election crime:
  • Giving voters a ride to the polls;
  • Offering voters a stamp to mail an absentee ballot;
  • Giving voters time off to vote;
  • Violating state campaign finance laws;
  • Distributing inaccurate campaign literature;
  • Campaigning too close to the polls;
  • Trying to convince an opponent to withdraw from a race.
This is extremely sleazy behavior, and yet, when I heard about it, my first reaction was, "Yeah, that sounds like Ted Cruz."