The Class Line
What's here:Why the War? Movie: Good German Movie: The Queen Molly Ivins Is There Any Solution? Health Care in New Orleans Christians Matter Gonzales Quits Patriotism Labor in 1946-7 Che Guevara Immigrants and Neoliberalism Movies: Offside Chalk Sicko Rendition The Great Debaters Charley Wilson's War There Will be Blood Music: Anne Feeney's New CD Age of Progress Movie: Before the Rain Movie: The Visitor
All written history, including today's newspaper, is the story of the unfolding class struggle.... In this section, we publish opinions and comments on the class struggle as it continues.
By James Thompson
As I left the theater after watching "The Visitor," I started thinking about all the things we have lost in the last eight years. Loss of civil liberties and justice are a couple of the main casualties that have been delivered to the working class behind the veil of the "war on terror." This movie highlights the human victims of the terrorism that has been used against all of us.
Richard Jenkins is stunning as a stodgy old economics professor who is literally brought back to life by a couple of young immigrants who describe themselves as "illegal." When the young man is detained, you can see the helplessness on the face of the newly revived professor who has his new friend snatched from him by a couple of goons. His pain is palpable and the rebirth of his humanity is visible.
The scenes from the detention center are accurate (I have been inside detention centers myself) and the inhuman treatment of detainees is also dead on.
As in most flicks from the U.S., the emphasis is on individual effort to combat injustice. Our rugged individualism has made us easy prey for capitalists and their henchmen. What is missing is an acknowledgement of the need for mass action to demand justice for immigrants. People are left thinking the only way to support immigrants is through individual legal efforts.
In individual cases, this may be true, but I just attended a Jobs with Justice conference where they talked about coordinated efforts in different parts of the country that are happening to counteract the vicious ICE raids. Groups of people can work together to make detentions and detention centers a public relations nightmare for the government. With coordinated planning and organization, many immigrants can be saved from detention and eventual deportation. Hundreds of thousands of people have marched in the streets around the country demanding justice, dignity and respect for immigrants. Many organizations have taken up the issue and are fighting hard to reverse the negative direction our country has taken with Bush and his wealthy cronies at the helm. With a united effort, we can move forward and set an example for the world to admire in how we treat our diverse population.
PHill1959@comcast.net
By James Thompson
The movie "Before the rains" should be used as an example to illustrate the main points of Engels' work "Origin of the family, private property and the state." Set in 1930s India during the uprising of Indian nationalists, it clearly shows the effects of capital on love and human relationships.
The main character is an Indian assistant of a British spice trader. The Indian assistant seeks to protect his master, for which he receives meager wages and benefits. He lives in slave-like quarters on a plantation while his master dines on fine cuisine and wine in the main plantation house.
One of the most poignant moments in the film came when the British master asked his Indian collaborator if the workers in the village were calm. The complacency of the workers is of utmost importance to the capitalist.
The British master had embarked on a plan to build a road up a mountain in order to harvest the valuable spices of India. It was clear he needed the full support of the native Indian tribes to make this happen. Along the way, he engaged in an affair with a beautiful Indian servant. He glibly destroys her life when she appears to be an obstacle to capital accumulation and enlists the assistance of the Indian collaborator to eliminate her.
The movie clearly illustrates that under capitalism, and particularly imperialism, love takes a distant second place to profits and when love threatens capital accumulation, love becomes expedient.
Buried in the wonderful imagery of the film, which depicts the amazing Indian countryside, was the fact that labor resulted in improvements to the infrastructure. When the imperialists were expelled, the road endured and the people benefited from their labor. The message seems to be that although the people suffer tremendously during capitalist expansion, they gain the tools and resources to overtake their oppressors. Sound familiar?
PHill1917@comcast.net
By James Thompson, Ph.D.
Karl Marx and Frederick Engels ushered in a new philosophical view in their various works. Dialectical materialism became the scientific method which made sense of the universe. It has been borne out in quantum physics and other scientific endeavors including the study of history.
Thomas Paine wrote about the Age of reason in the late 1790s and early 1800s and the Age of enlightenment was also a movement of the 1700s. What followed this was an "Age of progress" which started with Marx and Engels in the mid 1800s.
It is important to try to conceptualize our history since the emergence of viable Communist parties which emerged in Russia, Cuba, China, Vietnam, the U.S. and around the world. These egalitarian, democratic efforts have been met with the most vicious response from capitalist reaction, however steady progress has been made around the world in terms of democracy, human rights, worker's rights and justice.
The assault of Capitalism on working people
Capitalism has used all the terroristic tools available to attempt to crush strivings for economic justice. In the forefront of this effort has been the U.S. The Bush administration has clarified the tactics used by Capitalism in a way not seen before in history. Indeed, the efforts of the Bush administration might be characterized as "The age of confusion."
Perhaps it is the contribution of modern media which makes so much information available to people and has put these tactics on center stage. Although the corporate media strives to soft soap the brutal, terroristic side of Capitalism, new avenues for acquiring information are now available to working people on the internet. This has increased confusion among people due to the massive amounts of information easily accessible. However, there appears to be a dawn of progressive thinking not seen heretofore. Progressive thinkers now have a media easily accessible through the internet which can readily spread people-centered rather than profit-centered thinking throughout the world.
History witnessed a progressive momentum in the 1920s and 1930s which was subjugated to the struggle against fascism in the 1940s. In the 1950s, after the defeat of fascism, a virulent anti-people's agenda took center stage with the full backing of the corporate elite. Anti-communism, racism, sexism, anti-unionism and a permanent war mentality became dominant. Socialism and Communism became the bad boys and people were propagandized and made to believe that it is "better to be dead than Red."
J. Edgar Hoover's book "Masters of Deceit" slandered the Communist and people's movement in a way that has been hard to overcome.
However, people are beginning to recognize who really are the "Masters of Deceit."
In the struggle between the wealthy and the poor which Marx characterized as the "class struggle", it is clear that the wealthy have used deceit to wage a war to make the world safe for Capitalism and ever expanding profits. This has resulted in massive confusion among working people which has served well the interests of reaction. We have seen the use of unscrupulous propaganda which characterized the Vietnam War as a war for the liberation of the Vietnamese people. The ruthless Capitalists waging this war were merely striving for world domination and trying to increase profits in Southeast Asia. This senseless struggle resulted in the slaughter of untold Vietnamese and American working class people. However, many well meaning Americans were confused by the rhetoric and thought that the U.S. working class soldiers brutally slaughtered by Capitalism were "serving their country." In fact, their sacrifices only served to further the interests of their masters, the capitalists.
Martin Luther King was a fighter for justice for working people and was demonized when he opposed the Vietnam War and stood up for worker's rights. Character assassination was followed by assassination de facto. Nevertheless, the principles he stood for live on and are cherished by working people everywhere.
Many others who carried the banner of the people were assassinated or destroyed by reaction including the Rosenbergs, Robert F. Kennedy, Malcolm X and untold labor and civil rights leaders during the maelstrom which resulted from progressive struggles. Progressives were massacred and martyred in the Haymarket uprising merely for advocating the 40 hour week.
All of these acts of terrorism by the wealthy resulted in increased confusion and fear of progressive movements among the general population.
Endless war, racism, sexism and other negative propaganda
Fast forward to the present and we see an administration which condemns communism and unions while extolling the virtues of torture and endless war. The same forces which told us that communists and socialists were enemies of the people have engaged in an unprecedented fleecing of working people to enrich the major corporations. These same forces justified the Iraq debacle by claiming there were weapons of mass destruction. These same forces have demonized immigrants in the most vicious, racist attacks seen since the slaughter of Native Americans and African Americans in this country. Immigrants are being placed in detention centers at an unprecedented rate not seen since the detention of Japanese Americans during World War II. Racist attacks on the African American community are well documented and understood. African Americans are prepared for incarceration from the moment they enter the educational system and serve the "prison industrial complex" in untold numbers.
The Bush administration has attempted to privatize our toenails while simultaneously attempting to dismantle education and social security and any other social programs which might benefit working people. Religion has been enlisted in this massive propagandistic extravaganza and preachers have recently extolled the virtues of Adolf Hitler in serving the interests of Jewish people. Such subterfuge and distortion of the facts has resulted in massive confusion.
Bill Moyers has noted the exacerbation of the class struggle beginning with Secretary of the Treasury William Simon under President Richard Nixon. He maintains that Simon declared class war and called for the wealthy to "take back what has been taken from us." Of course, we see the results of this now with a faltering economy but a greatly enriched bourgeoisie.
What is to be done?
So, where does this leave us in our current state of affairs? In other words, what is to be done? Lenin's question is of utmost importance in the current political situation.
With the recent upsurge in interest in electoral politics, particularly those forces demanding change, and the assertiveness of organized labor, a new "Age of progress" should be declared and fought for.
The foundation is already laid and must be enacted when the new administration takes power. Pressure must be applied to encourage lawmakers to pass the free choice act, a national health care plan and to reverse the anti-labor, anti-people legislation passed by the right wing. Social security should be strengthened and expanded so that people receiving benefits receive a living wage. Scientific endeavor and research should be removed from private hands and returned to the public domain. All of the setbacks dealt to our precious public Education system must be reversed and our Education system must be set on a positive course. Our future depends on it.
Foreign policy should hinge on diplomacy, rather than dictatorial despotism and international terrorism.
In other words, science and rational thinking should become dominant rather than idealistic, mythological, superstitious justification of reactionary policies leading to self-destruction of our people and the peoples of the world. It is time for the working class to become the ruling class. Only with a united people's movement can we accomplish these goals.
PHill1917@comcast.net
Is Anne Feeney irreverent?
As the organ music begins on labor singer Anne Feeney's new CD, the tune is easily remembered. In churches we sing it as, "What a Friend We Have in Jesus," but for Anne, it's just a good tune to be ramped up and re-used for, "Dump the Bosses off Your Back." Track two is the infamous Joe Hill song, "The Preacher and the Slave," to the tune of the religious, "Sweet Bye and Bye." The question rises, "Is Ms Feeney irreverent, or even anti-religious?" By the time we get to track 14, "Brave New Christmas," wherein Santa's elves get layoff notices and all the toy building moves to Mexico, we can be pretty sure she is.
But consider track 11, "Business News/Hallelujah I'm a Bum." I don't think I had ever understood that old Industrial Workers of the World anthem until I heard Feeney's new version. While news announcers give business statistics about piles of corporate wealth, Feeney slowly croons those old lyrics such as "How the hell can I work when there's no work to do?" Sung with almost dirge-like sorrow, the song finally makes sense. And consider track 3, one of the six original new Feeney-written tunes, "You Will Answer." It is as religious as religion gets. Feeney blasts the corporate slave drivers with the finality of eternal judgment before a God that loves workers.
Then the mystery is solved. Anne Feeney is not anti-religious but anti-boss. Her reverence is thorough and complete, but it's reserved for the workers' side!
Anne Feeney spends more time roving the United States than she does in her Pittsburg hometown. Usually, in Springtime, she tours Texas towns while on her way to the Kerrville Folk Festival. At every stop, Feeney looks for audiences among the nation's workers. One might be surprised at how small an audience she will consider acceptable, and how hard she will work. She doesn't look for the most lucrative gigs, but for those that will advance the workers' movement most. In Dallas, she even got up early to promote a community radio station for no pay at all. In fact, she scraped together a donation!
Feeney's voice, on this new CD and her previous five, is clear brass ringing an alarm bell for the workers' movement. All her CD's are available from http://laborheritage.org or by calling 1-800-BUY-MY-CD.
--Jim Lane
I went to see the movie "There will be blood" directed by Paul Thomas Anderson based on the Upton Sinclair novel "Oil!" It was filmed in West Texas and I recognized the landscape without difficulty. It was a visually stunning flick with a great portrayal by Daniel Day-Lewis of the boundless greed, violence and cutthroat competition of wildcat oilmen. I worked for a Houston wildcat oilman from 1971 to 1981 so I have first hand experience with the mentality of these capitalists of the wild west. I found the portrayal to be quite accurate.
Of course, the insight into the oilmen currently running our country is unmistakeable.
Daniel Day-Lewis really captured the mindset of these individualists. At one point, he tells the small town which he bought for a very meager amount that if the oil comes in they will build schools and provide health care, because he needs workers who are educated. However, it becomes clear that he has no intentions of helping the populace because he "hates people" and just wants to get enough money so he can get away from people.
The film does a great job of dramatizing the lack of regard for human life and the deadly working conditions which resulted in many deaths of oil workers. At one point, the quintessential capitalist, Daniel Plainview, argues with a pitiful young preacher, Eli Sunday, over the working conditions and the preacher weakly argues that the deaths could be prevented if the workers were not exploited so ruthlessly. However, the preacher also appears repeatedly throughout the film with his hand out asking Plainview for money for his church. His begging is always met with savagery and brutality by the wildcatter capitalist Plainview.
The movie is flawed in spite of its monumental portrayal of the malevolent power of raw capitalism. There is not a hint of the response from the workers to this belligerent force. In the original Upton Sinclair work, there are two main characters, a capitalist, and a labor organizer. In this version, the labor movement is completely lost. This gives the film a very nihilistic feel and leaves the audience overwhelmed by the overpowering malignancy of the capitalist. My point is that it doesn't have to be that way. Working people, if organized, can defeat the seemingly overwhelming power of capitalism.
--Paul Hill Phill1959@comcast.net
By Paul Hill
I went to see Charlie Wilson's War last night and was surprised that the title was not "The South shall rise again". The movie attempts to glorify an alcoholic, sexist East Texas congressman named Charlie Wilson for his role in funding the Mujahadin. The Mujahadin fought a bloody war in Afghanistan against troops of the Soviet Union who were attempting to support the legitimate socialist government of that country against U.S. aggression. Of course, the film doesn't mention that Osama bin Laden was a CIA backed, financed and trained leader in the Mujahadin. After the Russians withdrew from Afghanistan, the Mujahadin morphed into Al Qaeda and we all know what happened on 9/11 as a result of their efforts.
This fact was not lost on the UK publication The Telegraph. An article by Philip Sherwell on 3/12/07 clarifies the history "It was these anti-Soviet Islamic forces, with their foreign volunteers, such as Osama bin Laden, that later turned into al-Qaeda, the fanatical organization responsible for the September 11, 2001, attacks on America."
The movie is the sordid story of a corrupt Congressman from East Texas. Infamous for his shocking sexist commentary on his all female staff and women in general, the movie depicts Charlie Wilson in various states of alcohol and sex inspired obsessions with anti-communism. Throughout the movie, many people are quoted as declaring, "Let's go kill some Russians." Wilson, portrayed by Tom Hanks, who seems well-suited to emulate a fascist, is recruited by Houston socialite Joanne Johnson King Herring Davis to fund the Afghani counter-revolutionaries and provide them with sophisticated weaponry. At the same time he is under investigation for cocaine abuse, consorting with strippers in hot tubs and other flamboyant behaviors. The reason that Joanne King, a Christian woman, has so many surnames is that she was born into a family affiliated with Kellogg, Brown and Root (subsidiary of Halliburton) and married a string of ultra-right wing, anti-communist, wealthy elite men from Houston. I must confess that I am old enough to remember the Joanne King Show, which was a local talk show in Houston, and I also remember how repulsed I was by it. Joanne King became infamous when her first husband threw a 30th birthday party for her whose theme was "Roman orgy" which was covered by Life magazine.
Wilson and King teamed up with Gust Avrakatos who was a CIA operative and supporter of a fascist coup in Greece (also unmentioned in the movie). The three fascist supporters sought the help of murderous Pakistani dictator Zia Al Huq, a shadowy Israeli black-market arms dealer and other reprehensible individuals from Egypt.
An article by Jeremy Kuzmarov posted on the History News Network sums up the mendacity of the film, "The most egregious misrepresentation of the film is in its portrayal of the Mujahadin as being inexperienced in the handling of weapons and idealistic refugees fighting for the salvation of their people. This obscures that the CIA often shunned legitimate nationalists like Abdul Haq in favor of militant Islamic fundamentalists seeking to impose a fascist theocratic state along the mold of the Taliban. Among Washington's key favorites was Gulbuddin Hikmatyar of the Hizb-Y Islami, who was valued for his hard-line anti-communism in spite of a reputation for abject ruthlessness. Hikmatyar was also a renowned opium smuggler and warlord, and was alleged to have sprayed acid in the faces of women who did not wear the veil…One CIA officer said, 'We wanted to kill as many Russians as we could, and Hikmatyar seemed like the guy to do it.'"
Kuzmarov makes the point by quoting Edward W. Said's book Culture and Imperialism that it can be argued that "Charlie Wilson's War is the latest Hollywood blockbuster to promote underlying cultural stereotypes of Third World peoples and Muslims, while sanitizing the American record and its promotion of imperial violence." He concludes that "By sanitizing and distorting history, and presenting Western militarism as a force for good, films like Charlie Wilson's War ultimately help to perpetuate the ideological mindset shaping continued foreign policy blunders and crimes of historic dimensions, which the American public has yet to fully come to terms with."
Of all the year-end, Academy-Award-contesting movies, "The Great Debaters" wins the prize. It's one of those rare movies where audiences stay to applaud during the credits. The credits include the IATSE union bug.
Our American treasure, Denzel Washington, as star and director, may get most of the credit, but the screenplay woven together from historical events by Robert Eisele should take a large share.
During the Great Depression, an amazing sequence of events took place at tiny Wiley College in Marshall, Texas. The college and town remain today so far in deep East Texas that they are almost in Louisiana. Students of civil rights history will recognize the town as one of those singled out by the early NAACP as the worst lynch towns in America. NAACP publicized the fact that the KKK didn't just hang African Americans, but actually preferred burning them alive. On a map of East Texas, one can find that Jasper, where an African American was recently dragged to death, is only a short drive from Marshall.
Students of labor history will also confirm the film's depiction of early efforts to organize Southern tenant farmers, including the reference to the "Elaine Massacre."
It is also worth noting, though not in the film, that the U.S. Congressman from East Texas during the depression was the notorious red-baiter, Martin Dies of "Dies Committee" fame. A more recent, but just as shameful, East Texas Congressman, "Champagne Charley" Wilson, is currently being romanticized in a different movie. Moviegoers may choose which version of East Texas is the more relevant.
At the center of the events at Wiley college was Professor Melvin B. Tolson, who actually led the depression-era college debating team to astonishing heights. Tolson is an historical giant from the period and from the area. After Wiley, he went on to international recognition as a poet in the tradition of Langston Hughes. To have an actor with the power of Denzel Washington portraying such a champion of civil rights under the most difficult of circumstances is a breathtaking opportunity for moviegoers.
At Wiley, the real Melvin B. Tolson mentored both James Farmer Jr, who started the Congress on Racial Equality and is depicted in the film, and Heman Sweatt, who won Texas' most famous civil rights lawsuit to integrate the University of Texas.
"The Great Debaters" goes much further than its gut-wrenching depiction of racism in East Texas. Through example, dialog, and the speeches of the debate team, it also reviews options for struggle at both the individual and the national level. The issues portrayed as important in 1935 are the same issues we have yet to overcome today, including the debilitating effect of red-baiting within the progressive movement.
V.I. Lenin and others have pointed out the importance of cinema on the public consciousness. A film that rings as true and powerful as "The Great Debaters" may have an effect on 2008 election primaries. One of the producers, TV's preeminent talk show host Oprah Winfrey, is currently promoting the movie and also campaigning openly for her presidential choice. The film, which opened on Christmas Day, is sure to run through most of the primaries and will undoubtedly attract several Academy Award nominations. Will it have a noticeable effect on voters?
Whether we see "The Great Debaters" as a force in elections, a wonderful historical tribute to anti-racist survivors, a profound art experience, or just a rousing good two hours in a dark theater, it's still outstanding. No debate necessary!
--Jim Lane in Dallas
In the 2008 elections, the reactionaries are hoping to divide our progressive class with the immigration "wedge" issue. From what I have seen around North Texas so far, it is working pretty well for them. If one looks at history, it's easy to see how the old pogroms against Jews were cooked up. It wasn't sufficient to have a nasty bunch of violence-prone ignoramuses around, they have pretty much always been around. What's essential for pogroms is encouragement from the ruling class through their government and media spokespersons. The most important signal the bosses send out is that they won't enforce the laws on civil rights and civil liberties. That's the "go ahead" for the brutal racist gangs.
We're going in that direction here, and it could easily get worse during the coming election year as the right wing uses simplistic anti-immigrant rhetoric to desperately maintain their grip on state power. There is an ideological remedy at hand, and I'm hoping it finds regular employment as the situation develops. The remedy is to honestly connect the upturn in the numbers of poor immigrants with the neoliberalist policies of the ruling class, especially those controlling the transnational corporations.
While many American workers may be, and seem to be, confused on the subject of immigration, they are actually quite clear on how much they hate the transnational corporations and their imperialistic "free trade agreements." Those who realize that it is neoliberalism in the United States that destroys the economies in non-industrialized countries and drives their people here have a better understanding of what is happening and what to do about it.
For some workers, it might be easier to understand what is happening in some other industrialized country, because the situation seems to be about the same for them as it is for us. The European transnationals are driving people out of Africa and Asia just as clearly as the U.S. drives them out of the Southern nations. It isn't a matter of "illegal" versus "legal," nor even a moral matter. The question before the workers is this, "How long will we allow imperialism to destroy the only defense we have, our natural unity with the rest of the working class from all nations?"
--Jim Lane in Dallas
Thanks for publishing the Venezuelans' comments about the living legacy of Ernesto "Che" Guevara. There have been a lot of comments here in Dallas downplaying his place in history and his continuing effect on the movements for social change. While they were pretending that El Che didn't matter, though, a Dallas auction house put some memorabilia on for sale. Apparently, one of the CIA operatives who murdered Che was greedy and perspicacious enough to have kept a tiny lock of the dead hero's hair, his fingerprints, a few photos, and Che's battle map. According to the October 27 daily paper here, a Houston bookstore owner paid $100,000 for these tawdry reminders!
--Jim Lane
Book Review: George Lipsitz, "Rainbow at Midnight. Labor and Culture in the 1940s." Univ of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago, 1994.
Even though we can point to a number of promising developments in today's trade union movement, the declining membership numbers nag away at our hopeful attitude. After the General Motors and Chrysler contracts gave a grim edge to our expectations, more and more unionists came to realize that we need to find a way forward.
Before anyone can find their way, they need to know where they are. Even better, they need to know how they got there. Those who study American labor history notice a certain "black box" effect that masks the events of 1946-47. Most of us know how virile and effective our movement was before that time, and we are living every day with the pain of what happened afterward, but we generally don't know much about the post-war events. It isn't in our history books. Even the United Electrical Workers' excellent history, "Them and Us," tends to soft-pedal what happened and lets 1946-47 go by without a meaningful explanation.
I have always thought, and continue to believe, that America's labor leaders, with barely any exception, do not want any examination of what they did in between 1946 and 1950 for one solid reason: they are ashamed of it.
George Lipsitz explains what happened with a clear understanding of postwar class struggle. He explains how the unions and the corporations worked, often together, to win the World War. He explains the abruptly changed situation after VE and VJ day. He explains how the American ruling class chose a long-term course of action, how they decided to deal with their rivals, and how they decided to deal with the union movement. He explains how union leadership reacted. Before Lipsitz finished the book in 1994, it had become clear that the unions' 1946-47 course would lead to disaster unless it were understood and radically changed.
The Auto Workers' new contracts and their avoiding positions on "free trade" issues suggest that the lessons in Lipsitz' book merit our study.
--Jim Lane
By Paul Hill
NEW ORLEANS - I attended the United for Peace and Justice demonstration in New Orleans on October 27 which called for an end to the Iraq War, opposed any proposed military aggression against Iran and supported the long overdue rebuilding of New Orleans. I felt proud to stand next to the Veterans for Peace, Vietnam Veterans Against the War and other peace promoting organizations. What was the source of my pride? I was standing with people who have the courage to stand up to the right wing authoritarian regime headed by President Bush. Many of these people also served in the U.S. military in various theaters of conflict. Many people have contrasted the record of these individuals with that of our President, who dodged combat duty and according to some reports went missing from his plush assignment in the Texas National Guard.
Was it easy being at a protest in the Deep South in the middle of one of the favorite playgrounds of the wealthy and powerful? Absolutely not! Our peaceful protest met with some resistance from the right wing. Several members of the right wing Gathering of Eagles attempted to intimidate participants in the protest. One sported a tee shirt which read "re-defeat communism." Of course, these puppets of the right wing merely appeared to the public as pitiful thugs on a mission for the rich and powerful. They disappeared before the rally was over. No one to my knowledge left or changed their opinion as a result of these goons.
As we marched through the French Quarter holding signs and chanting loudly to express our opposition to the war, we were witness to a display of the brutishness of the rich and powerful. Drunken thugs in suits and ties booed us and made rude remarks from their expensive balconies overlooking the streets in which we were marching. One of the veterans marching near me became upset with their self serving epithets and yelled back, "You don't know what you're talking about! I served over there!" Another member of our march immediately stepped in to calm him and get his focus off the brutes and onto the march.
There has been a lot of talk of treason these days. Such remarks are usually made by the right wing Bush supporters and are aimed at anyone who dares oppose any of the policies of our right wing authoritarian government. A candidate for public office in Houston recently said to me that he was concerned about how right wing judges were throwing the word treason around in the courtroom whenever an attorney opposes their heavy handed treatment of defendants.
After the protest was over, I was waiting to go to dinner with some comrades who happened to be veterans and were trade unionists. We were standing in an area which one of the people informed me was a former plantation according to a historical marker nearby. The African American woman also told me that many slaves had been freed on these grounds. I spotted an old man who was walking on the sidewalk in the cool, crisp New Orleans evening. He was wearing a white shirt which had patches which read "World War II" and "Purple Heart." We struck up a conversation and he told us he grew up in the neighborhood and was back to check it out. It turns out he had two Purple Hearts which he earned fighting the Nazis in the European theater. He now lives outside New Orleans and was there to try to find Purple Heart recipients who had lost their homes in Hurricane Katrina. The organization he was affiliated with is providing grants of money ($5000) to Purple Heart recipients who lost their homes in Hurricane Katrina.
He told us stories of the horrors of war. He told us how his comrades were wounded and had huge pieces of their head blown away in combat. He was not there for the protest and probably had not heard about it beforehand. He was 87 and had a remarkable smile as he told us the stories and told us that he opposes the current War in Iraq and the rush to War in Iran because he knows what war does to people.
So the questions we must ponder are "Who is a patriot?" and "Who
is guilty of treason?" According to our right wing "chicken hawk"
supporters of Bush and Cheney, this old veteran would be guilty of treason
for his opposition to the imperialist war. We need to say in a loud, united
voice that this Purple Heart veteran as well as everyone else opposed to the
war are not traitors. It should be pointed out that around 75% of the U.S.
population is now opposed to the war. Is it more patriotic to have fought
the Nazis or to have been missing from a plush assignment with the Texas National
Guard? I leave it to you to decide.
Movie Review: "Rendition." Starring Omar Metwally, Jake Gyllenhaal, Reese Witherspoon, and Meryl Streep. Directed by Gavin Hood. Rated R for violence 2 hrs 2 mins
Movies are all fake, as we know. I don't think Omar Metwally is an Egyptian, let alone a green-carded Egyptian scientist living in the states. Didn't he play a Palestinian in "Munich?" Reese Witherspoon, who plays his wife, may have an amazingly pointed chin, but I don't think she's really pregnant. It's just movie magic. Jake Gyllenhaal isn't really a soft-hearted CIA employee, and Meryl Streep isn't actually all that mean and hard-hearted. We've seen them fooling us with other roles and personalities. It's all movie magic. I don't think they were even in North Africa, but they might have been.
Nevertheless, "Rendition" is a really good movie. You just have to suspend your credibility, as they say. When they put wonderful directing, excellent music, stirring cinematography, and actors of this quality together, they really can't miss. The screenplay was outstanding, too, and you can really enjoy it after you suspend your credibility. It tells two amazing stories supposedly about how U.S. policies are affecting people in a faraway Muslim world. One is a really touching romance about young people trying to deal with everything young people in love deal with, and U.S. foreign policy at the same time. The other story supposes that an innocent man is "disappeared" on American soil and taken to a faraway torture cell, all at the hands of incredibly arrogant and inhuman U.S. government employees. There, he endures unspeakable atrocities while his agonizing wife, back in the states, unwraps the mystery and exposes the policy of "extraordinary rendition" and many of the culprits, but not all of them.
Think it's kind of far-fetched? Go see it. You'll see that, when it's done right, a movie can actually be, much as we may sob and wish it weren't, very believable.
--Jim Lane
So far, Texas' pleas for mercy have met stony silence from the other 49 states. Discredited Bushites, driven from their power perches in Washington, shamed before the nation and barely ahead of indictment, are flocking into the Lone Star State. Not one single other state has offered to take them! When former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and his retinue announced that they, too, would join the stream of grimy red-faced asylum seekers streaming into Texas, our mighty groans swelled to a crescendo sufficient to drown out the sighs of relief and cries of jubilation from the rest of the world.
"Why do they have to come here?" we gasp. Texans feel that we have always done our part. Texas took in some of the victims of hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Historically, Texas has always opened its heart to refugees, including worn-out politicians, all the way back to Tennesseans Sam Houston and Davy Crockett. Now, when our capacity for compassion is stretched to the limit, why has no other state in the union stepped up to offer to take some of the Bushies?
When Gonzales finally caved before the endless streams of revelations of his dishonesty and depravity, when Americans realized that this reviver of torture and defiler of the constitution was also a fibber, they drove him from office. "But drive him where?" we asked collectively in Texas. Why do WE have to take him?
On the news that Gonzales and his dirty-handed crew would be coming here, Texas newspapers listed a rogue's gallery of former Bushites already nesting in Texas' bosom. Where do Americans think the underhanded Karl Rove will lurk? What about propagandist Karen Hughes? Harriet Miers, who had her moment of fame when she tried out for the Supremes and was found wanting, yes, she's in Texas! The list drags on. The former Bush campaign manager and FEMA director, Joe Allbaugh, directs Iraqi construction work from his home in, yes, Texas! Former Budget Director Albert Hawkins has inserted himself into the Texas Department of Health. Bush frontman Scott McClellan is here, along with Rod Paige and Dan Bartlett. Worst of all is oily man Don Evans, a longtime Bush associate and former Commerce Secretary who is right here in my home town of Dallas planning the worst disaster of all - the Bush transformation of Southern Methodist University from an unassuming ivy-league school into an eternal spewer of Bushism that will include a secretive library, a misleading museum, and a non-think tank!
We collectively cavil at the future, when it is virtually inevitable that the Big Enchilada and Laura themselves will take up residence in posh Highland Park, right next to SMU, and hold court for reactionaries in Texas for the rest of our unnatural lives. By then, we'll be up to our necks in disgraced politicians. It isn't our fault. At least part of the egregious blame belongs on the other 49 states who are selfishly guarding their own borders and basically telling suffering Texas to go suck an egg!
--Jim Lane
Religion figures heavily in today's politics. Every day, fundamentalist Jews murder Palestinians, fundamentalist Muslims murder other Muslims, and fundamentalist Christians help provide a cover for the most ruthless empire in history. How can it be that each of them, perpetrator and victim, has "God on their side?" Internationally respected theologian Dr Joerg Rieger of Southern Methodist University in Dallas has written a thorough review of the great historical interpreters of Christianity in order to probe the relationship between America's religion and justification of empire.
It is undoubtedly true that the empire-builders of Christendom, from Constantine
to George W Bush, have found biblical ways to justify their depredations.
The great American labor leader Eugene Victor Debs explained it this way in
1922: "But of course war made by the ruling class, proclaimed by its
politicians, must be blessed by its priests.
'Every preacher in Christendom howled for the world war and shrieked for blood
with now and then a rare exception who was driven from his pulpit in disgrace
if not sent to the penitentiary to expiate his crime.
'How many of these rampant warriors of the cloth, these pious followers of
the lowly and gentle Jesus who turned their pulpits into filthy sties of the
profiteering pirates and screamed for war and blood - how many of these Christian
clergymen who betrayed the Prince of peace they profess to worship, had their
own legs torn off, their own eyes gouged out, their own bowels ripped from
their bodies?"
Rieger, author and editor of several important theological works, finds room for additional interpretations of the great historical works justifying empire. None of them quite fits the facts, meaning, and importance of the life of Jesus. All of them may have been misinterpreted, either erroneously or deliberately.
It may be true that St Paul wrote that slaves must obey their masters, but Rieger goes deeper into his writings and concludes: "God in Christ is a different kind of lord who is not in solidarity with the powerful but in solidarity with the lowly." In discussions of other theological writings, Rieger reveals that concepts such as "faith based initiatives" and "church asylum" are not new but very old. In the latter parts of his book, Rieger takes on "modernist" or "liberal" theologies which continue to silently justify imperialism by pretending it isn't there.
In his home area, Dr Joerg Rieger and his family are known for much more than his books, classes, and public presentations on theology. They are often on picket lines and marches for peace and justice issues. Despite the careful scholarship of his book, Rieger is no "ivory tower" thinker, but one who preaches and practices with equal fervor.
American activists would do well to pay more attention to Christianity. By abandoning the field to fanatics and political opportunists like the Bushites, they leave the enemies of human emancipation powerfully armed. In response to the pious murderers, we should do much more than ask, "Who would Jesus bomb?"
--Jim Lane
By Paul Hill
The post-Katrina catastrophe in New Orleans has ripped the mask off the ruling class like no Mardi Gras ball has ever done before. The greed, racism, arrogance and brutality of the Bush administration and the class whose interests it represents are out in the open for all to see. Barbara Bush, former first lady and mother of President Bush, was one of the first to make things clear when she said that the poor people sleeping on cots in the Astrodome in Houston were "better off." In other words, it was better for them to be ripped out of their homes and displaced to a strange city, dependent on the mercy of others than to live in their own community and homes.
Even today, there is no apparent solution on the horizon for the plight of these people after two years of political malarkey and incredible boondoggling of federal money. This money should have been spent on real recovery programs to include rebuilding projects, jobs programs, education and health care but instead has been squandered on feathering the nests of wealthy contractors that are Bush cronies and are not connected in any way to the New Orleans community. The purpose of this paper is to suggest solutions to this crisis.
An article in the New York Times by Leslie Eaton on 7/24/07 reviews the disastrous state of health care in New Orleans. It correctly points out that the abysmal health care situation is blocking economic recovery. There has been an exodus of doctors from the city because of the reprehensible conditions. The Times article notes, "Only one of the city's seven general hospitals is operating at its pre-hurricane level; two more are partially open, and four remain closed." New Orleans' residents must travel to adjacent parishes to seek health care in the emergency rooms of private hospitals in the suburbs.
Both Charity Hospital and the VA Medical Center remain closed and they were the main providers of indigent health care prior to the storm. Charity Hospital and New York's Bellevue were both opened in 1736 and they are the oldest public medical institutions in the nation. President Franklin D. Roosevelt rejuvenated Charity with $3.6 million which resulted in a new 20-story hospital which was completed in 1939. Michael E. DeBakey, famed Houston heart surgeon was trained at Charity. There are plans now to replace Charity and the VA with a $1.2 billion medical complex which would serve the indigent, veterans as well as the insured. The complex would provide a much needed boost to the local economy and could create jobs for the unemployed residents of New Orleans.
Predictably, the Bush administration is opposed to this plan and would prefer to build a small hospital and spend the money on private insurance. This would throw the door open to continued cronyism which has been the trademark of the Bush administration. Louisiana health officials maintain that such a plan would help less than half of the uninsured.
The question remains as always, "What is to be done?"
The first step is for the people of New Orleans and their supporters across the country and around the world to organize and unite to fight back against the brutal assault by the Bush administration. Trade unions, NAACP, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and other progressive organizations should lead this struggle and one of the first goals should be to fully fund the rebuilding of the Charity Hospital and surrounding medical complex. Perhaps it is time for a general strike until the decision has been made to rebuild and reopen Charity Hospital.
The exodus of doctors from the city has to also be remedied. Passage of HB676 which would provide universal health care coverage for all people in this country would be a step in the right direction of providing doctors with the incentives they need to carry on their work. Doctors are no different from all working people - they want to be paid for what they do.
Following the storm in 2004, the Cuban government made a concrete offer of providing 1100 doctors specially trained in providing post-hurricane medical care. Of course, the Bush administration declined this generous offer of assistance to the people of the Gulf Coast. It is high time for the people of Louisiana and Mississippi and the rest of the country to demand that the Bush administration either provide necessary medical personnel to ease the misery of their people or accept Fidel Castro's offer of immediate medical assistance from Cuban doctors. The people of New Orleans and surrounding areas need medical help now and if doctors from Cuba are able to help, how can we refuse their humane offer?
The New York Times article was instructive as to the plight of the people
of New Orleans. However, what is needed now is clear thinking about real solutions
to the ongoing crisis. Only the people united can stop the hemorrhage of money
going to wealthy leeches and direct the funds back to the benefit of the people
devastated by Katrina.
Movie Review: Sicko
By Jim Lane
Pollsters with their questionnaires were all over the moviegoers waiting in line for the sneak preview of "Sicko" on June 23 in Dallas. They seemed particularly interested in finding out why people were motivated to turn out.
Certainly, the moviegoers were motivated. Tickets sold out long before the scheduled opening, and later, in the theater, part of the audience was standing through the entire movie.
"Was it the newspaper ad?" they asked. "Was it TV or radio announcements? Was it the publicity over government threats against Moore for having gone to Cuba?"
None of the suggested reasons was right for me. I wrote in mine: "News."
Every news report is full of health care heartbreak. The same newspaper that announced the sneak preview carried this headline, "Two Fort Worth hospitals on list for heart patient deaths." Fort Worth had made the "Top 5" hospitals nationwide for number of questionable deaths under medical supervision.
The paper also had a cartoon lamenting the fact that Texas is 49th in health care among the 50 states.
I didn't know beforehand that the movie would talk about health problems associated with childbearing and early child rearing, but the headline on the day after the movie was, "Foster children's injuries investigated."
There are long and completely disgusting statewide scandals behind each of those headlines.
The most telling headline had appeared a week earlier. It was about the only people in Texas who are actually trying to do something about the health care crisis, the National Nurses Organizing Committee. The headline read, "Fired nurses protest at Mesquite Hospital."
The recent session of the Texas Legislature had coldly ignored the nurses' attempt to pass a bill limiting patient/nurse ratios and providing protection for whistleblowers. As soon as the session closed, one of the hospitals right outside Dallas insisted that nurses take unreasonable and unsafe patient loads. When one of them refused, they fired her; then another; then another. The three fired nurses and their supporters have redoubled their efforts for patient protection since then.
Health care activists are leafleting and circulating petitions outside the theaters where "Sicko" is showing. One of the three martyred nurses was waiting for the crowd as we left. She told me that every detail of Michael Moore's condemnation of America's for-profit health care system was true and accurate. "Our system isn't even a health care system," she told us, "It's sickness care."
Part of the motivation question was answered just by looking at the theater
audience. Although it was an evening showing, gray and silver were the dominant
hair colors. Wheelchairs and crutches were prominent.
Americans, especially disabled and older Americans, are worried to distraction
about for-profit medical corporations.
None of us was disappointed in the film. One of my friends cried through most of it, and other viewers could be heard gasping for breath. We all broke out in cheers and applause twice, and there was a standing ovation at the end. With enviable filmmaking dexterity, Moore covers almost every aspect of the dirty national scandal, except for the notorious failure of veterans' care, which would require a full movie by itself.
Although Moore fans seeking his usual humorous approach were not disappointed, they were also impressed with this greatly increased emphasis on compassion for the victims. This film does more than expose atrocities. Much more than in Moore's other films, "Sicko" revealed real solutions that are actually working in other capitalist countries and, even moreso, in revolutionary Cuba.
"Sicko" will be remembered as the first shot in an American war
over patient treatment that will last at least into November 2008. Go see
the movie and join the war.
Jim Lane (flittle7@yahoo.com) is a labor activist in North Texas.
Suggested caption for attached photo: Nurses of the National Nurses' Organizing Committee. The three women in front were fired a few days later
Movie Review: "Sicko," a Michael Moore documentary
Why Watch This Movie?
By Jim Lane
Pollsters were all over the moviegoers waiting in line for the sneak preview of "Sicko" on June 23 in Dallas. The questionnaires followed the usual lines, but they seemed particularly interested in why people were motivated to come. Certainly, they were motivated. Tickets sold out long before the scheduled opening, and part of the audience was standing. "Was it the newspaper ad?" they wanted to know "Was it TV or radio announcements?" "Was it the publicity over government threats against Moore for having gone to Cuba?"
None of the suggested reasons was right for me. I wrote in mine: "News."
Every news report is full of health care heartbreak. The same newspaper that announced the sneak preview carried this headline, "2 FW Hospitals on list for heart patient deaths." Fort Worth had made the "top 5" among hospitals in the nation for number of questionable deaths under medical supervision. The paper also had a cartoon lamenting the fact that Texas is "49th in health care" among the 50 states. I didn't know beforehand that the movie would talk about health problems associated with child bearing and early child rearing, but the headline on the day after the movie was, "Foster children's injuries investigated!" There are long and completely disgusting statewide scandals behind each of those headlines.
The most telling headline had appeared a week earlier. It was about the only people in Texas who are actually trying to do something about the health care crisis, the National Nurses Organizing Committee. The headline read, "Fired nurses protest at Mesquite hospital." The recent session of the Texas legislature had coldly ignored their attempt to pass a bill limiting patient/nurse ratios and providing whistleblower protection. As soon as the session closed, one of the hospitals right outside Dallas insisted that nurses take unreasonable and unsafe patient loads. When one of them refused, they fired her; then another; then another. The three fired nurse and their supporters have redoubled their efforts for patient protection since then. Americans are likely to find devoted health care workers outside every movie theater where "Sicko" plays!
One of the three martyred nurses was waiting for the crowd as we left the sneak preview. She told me that every detail of Michael Moore's condemnation of America's for-profit health care system was true and accurate. "Our system isn't even a health care system," she told us, "It's sickness care."
Part of the motivation question was answered just by looking at the theater audience. Although it was an evening showing, gray and silver were the dominant hair colors. Wheelchairs and crutches were prominent. Americans, especially disabled and older Americans, are worried to distraction about for-profit medical corporations.
None of us was disappointed in the film. One of my friends cried through most of it, and other viewers could be heard gasping for breath. We all broke out in cheers and applause twice, and there was a standing ovation at the end. With enviable filmmaking dexterity, Michael Moore covered almost every aspect of the dirty national scandal, except for the notorious failure of veterans' care, which would have made the length of another whole movie.
Although Moore fans seeking his usual humorous approach were not disappointed, they were also impressed with this greatly increased emphasis on compassion for the victims. "Sicko" does more than expose atrocities. Much more than in Moore's other films, "Sicko" revealed real solutions that are actually working in other capitalist countries and, even more so, in revolutionary Cuba.
"Sicko" will be remembered as the first shot in an American war over patient treatment that will last at least into November, 2008. Go see the movie and join the war.
30
PS: Michael Moore noted that England got national health care in 1948. As
I understand it, the American CIO gave up on a potentially successful effort
for national health care in 1949. There's a great story there. Who would know
about it? How would one research it?
Movie Review: Chalk
If you are a teacher, if anyone close to you is a teacher, if you plan to
become a teacher, or if you simply appreciate great humor, see this film.
Produced by Morgan Spurlock of Super-Size Me fame, and made "in the
comedic style of The Office and Christopher Guest's films", Chalk is
a mockumentary about the lives of a handful of teachers at Harrison High School.
The film begins by stating the simple fact that "over 50 percent of teachers
quit within the first three years." First-year history teacher Mr. Lowrey
struggles with discipline and a class he hasn't figured out how to manage.
The third-year geography teacher obsesses over his goal to receive "teacher
of the year" within his first five years of teaching, and is not above
some serious Machiavellian scheming to accomplish this. The high-energy and
outspoken Coach Webb stresses over whether all the teachers are equally "on
board" with the strict new tardy policy, and also worries about whether
she's too "pushy" with the other staff. And Mrs. Reddell has just
been promoted to Assistant Principal, only to discover that her work is quickly
overtaking her personal life.
Despite the seemingly stereotyped caricatures these characters present, director/cowriter
Mike Akel of Austin, Texas, add a humanistic touch and sensitivity to this
movie, avoiding a film which takes its laughs at the expense of the teachers.
The film, shot on location in Austin, Texas, instead takes its laughs from
the circumstances in which the characters find themselves, and treats the
teaching profession with due respect. It shows that teaching is much more
than it's cracked up to be, and includes scenes of frustration and challenges
which will be familiar to anyone who has worked in a classroom. More than
just hilarious comedy, it is a sympathetic look at high school life from the
perspectives of some of its employees. In a funny twist, time in the film
is marked not by dates or months but by how many days until the next vacation;
any teacher knows about "counting down the days," and it was amusing
to see the film acknowledge this.
When I saw this film at the new Magnolia theater in Dallas, Texas, it couldn't have been better-timed, hitting the theater the first week of summer vacation. I was lucky enough to see it on the night in which the director/co-writer, actor/co-writer, and a second actor were in the audience to introduce the film, and to take questions afterward. Both Mike Akel and co-writer/actor Chris Mass have worked as teachers, so they have an idea what they're talking about. They asked how many teachers were in the office, and easily twenty to twenty-five percent of the hands in the crowded room were raised. The audience received the film very well, laughing out loud and heartily applauding at the closing credits.
The filmmakers acknowledged the difficulty of getting an independent, low-budget film such as this seen in a competitive environment so dominated by multi-billion dollar Hollywood products; sales, however, have been good at theaters where it has been shown. If you're fortunate enough to live somewhere near an indie theater where this is playing, I recommend you don't miss it. If you're not, at least catch it when it comes out on DVD.
--Brad Janzen
Trusting and undefended people of America, tremble before this cinematic warning of the Iranian threat to your very safety and way of life! Even though the actors speak Farsi, the subtitles and your keen eye for details reveal the bloodthirsty Iranians, heedless of human life, fanatically committed to American death and humiliation, long curved knives, nuclear weapons, and so on and so forth! Be forewarned, innocent Americans, you must see this film!
Actually, this casual, open-hearted, and good natured movie comes at a great time for Americans who are being subjected to the daily demonization of Iran by U.S. officials. These Iranian boy and girl actors, they might actually be amateurs, are brandishing their innocence instead of weapons, and the only fanaticism they display is for soccer.
The scene is the 2006 playoffs for the World Cup. Iran is playing against Bahrain to see who goes into the finals. Only male Iranians are permitted to watch Iranian males play, as, incidentally, only Iranian females are allowed to watch Iranian females play.
Iranian girl soccer nuts dress like Iranian boy soccer nuts, brightly painted faces and all, and try to sneak into the stadium for the big game. Some of them have tried it, with some success, many times before, and they come up with ruses so original that only teen-agers could have imagined them.
A handful get caught. They, and the clueless, unarmed, soldiers who guard them as the game continues just out of sight, make up the main part of the story. Will the girls get to see the game? Will they be punished? Will Iran beat Bahrain? The teens wheedle the soldiers, as teens will do. The soldiers try to be tough, but keep reminding themselves that one of these girls could be their sister, and we in the audience keep reminding ourselves that they could be one of ours.
It's just an enjoyable, short, creative, lovely story about
absolutely charming teenagers. There are no denunciations of women's oppression.
There is no blood. There are no weapons of mass destruction!
--Jim Lane
In the 21st century, one can pick a new crisis to worry about almost daily. Capitalists and their political representatives like to propose "solutions," but they have none. A good example is the ongoing occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. When the Soviet Union imploded, Americans thought peace was at hand. But the capitalists could not provide peace, because capitalism by its very nature must create aggressive wars, just as it has since its beginning. All peace is temporary under capitalism. As this is written, the Democratic Party representatives of the ruling capitalist class is trying to come up with a single, united strategy to deliver on their campaign promises to bring the troops home. They can't even think of one, much less implement it!
The slow and painful killing of the Planet Earth is another good example. Capitalism has one great power: to increase production and lower prices. Even if they could temporarily stop polluting, they would have to constantly police the situation because it is in the fundamental nature of capitalists to pollute. Capitalism is not a long-term, rational, people-friendly system. It is an economic system that, beyond raising production and lowering prices, can do nothing except rail in fury against the claims of its subordinated peoples.
The solution to our series of crises is not within capitalism.
Texas progressives mourn the death of columnist and author Molly Ivins, who succumbed to cancer on January 31. Even the people she antagonized most - corporate bigwigs and greedy politicians - are making public lamentations about the loss of our true Texas satirist. Governor Rick Perry, who will be always remembered by Ivins' own name for him, "Governor Good Hair," made a statement. "Shrub," the offspring of former President George Bush The First, did too.
Ivins' memory will forever remain in the warm spot she created in the hearts of the state's progressives in the 1970s, when forward-thinking political figures weren't even numerous enough to be called a minority in the Democratic Party. The tiny Austin weekly, Texas Observer, hired her during the time when there were only 30 state legislators who would take a stand for minorities and the state's poor. They were called, of course, the "Dirty Thirty." It was a time when so many bad things happened in the Texas Legislature that laughing was the only possible relief, and Ivins led that laughter.
Mercilessly, she pointed out the large and small picadilloes of state government. "The only legislature we have," as Molly Ivins called it, ordinarily meets for only a few months every two years. For concerned Texans, those months belonged to Molly Ivins and the Texas Observer. She would sound the alarm when they were preparing to meet, and she would announce the "all clear" when they finally adjourned.
Ivins' talent made her one of America's most read syndicated columnists and the author of a number of hilarious books.
Even though Texas Democrats do not control a single state office nor either house of the "Lege" today, Molly Ivins lived to see the Democratic Party's more liberal wing take control, as more and more Black and Latino candidates took office and the racist Dixiecrats died off or switched parties.
Fittingly, Molly Ivins' last published column was a rant against the war in the Mideast and "Shrub's" demands for escalation. She wrote, "Every single day, every single one of us needs to step outside and take some action to help stop this war. Raise hell. Think of something to make the ridiculous look ridiculous."
Unbelievably crazy things continue to happen in Texas. Senator Cornyn voted to abolish the minimum wage, then proposed that wealthy people should be able to deduct the cost of their health spas. Eccentric millionaire James Leininger of San Antonio announced a new publicity campaign to undermine the public schools. Progressive Democrats have infuriated the powers-that-be in the Lege by voting to uphold the constitution. TXU, the giant utility, says that Texans should believe them, just one more time, when they say their 11 new coal-fired plants won't increase pollution. Some of the Methodists are calling the other Methodists names because they don't want Shrub's presidential library (and reactionary think tank) ensconced on the campus at Southern Methodist University. The Baptists fired their Hebrew teacher because they found an obscure biblical warning against having women teach men. Hungry Texans are terrified that the Baptists will also find the injunction (Leviticus 11:10) against eating catfish.
How will we bear Texas news without Molly Ivins?
--Jim Lane
By Paul Hill
Many people are asking why President Bush persists in prosecuting the war in Iraq in spite of overwhelming opposition. Many people are trying to answer this question. As a Texan, I'd like to make a stab at it.
In spite of all the distracting theories propounded by various pundits, I think the reason Bush is conducting and even escalating the war goes back to Karl Marx's theory of the class struggle. Bush has distinguished himself as the best President big money can buy and the corporations believe it is in their interest for the war to continue and this is what they are telling their President to do.
Wars and the industries that profit from them have throughout history been some of the most effective weapons that the wealthy have used against the working people. The Iraq war is no different.
We know that billions of taxpayer dollars are being pumped into Halliburton and other corporate cronies of the Bush/Cheney administration. This is an investment exclusively for the wealthy because working people are not benefiting in any way from this gross expenditure of the wealth produced by working people.
We also know that the industries that produce the weapons used in wars profit from wars. The Bush family is heavily involved with the Carlyle group which finances the defense industry. Marxist scholars, including Michael Parenti, have shown that the defense industries produce some of the smallest returns for working people and some of the biggest profits for their wealthy owners. Defense production is also a very effective weapon that the wealthy have used against working people.
When the mainstream media pundits discuss the reasons Bush is escalating
the war, these reasons are rarely mentioned. Could it be that it is because
the mainstream media is entirely owned by the same wealthy people that put
Bush in office? As we prepare to march on Washington, we need to remember
to put the class struggle back in the struggle against the war.
"The Good German," Directed by Steven Soderbergh and starring George Clooney, Cate Blanchett, and Tobey Maguire
Dallas newspaper readers are asking, "What kind of people are they?" while we find out about Dyn-Gen, a government contractor headquartered in nearby Irving, Texas, that hires mercenaries to blow up or be blown up in Iraq. As it's our tax money paying for all this blowing up, we're compelled to ask, "What kind of people are we?"
The new film by Steven Soderbergh uses World War II film archives and film techniques to ask the old question that we all grew up with, "What kind of people were the Germans?" and the same piercing, demanding, doubt about ourselves.
Not everybody will like the movie. It makes a virtue out of every WWII film cliché about bombed buildings and war-weary cynics. The presentation is black and white, with lots of shadowy cinematography highlighting different parts of war-weary cynical faces. Almost all the backgrounds are from Soviet archives. Almost every setup is one you've seen before. The actors trim away all nuance and deliberately imprison themselves in stereotypes.
My movie buddy and I loved "The Good German" for its direct and bullet-hard inquisition into the motivations and tolerances of German and American governments and people in World War II and now.
--Jim Lane
I was scared to go to see "The Queen" since Helen Mirren is one of my favorite actresses. I was terrified that she would portray the Queen in a positive light and I would never be able to forgive her. The movie was outstanding and I do forgive her.
Mirren did an excellent job of portraying the arrogance of the ruling class, i.e. people of wealth, power and privilege. Her arrogance and that of her minions in dealing with the tragedy of the death of Princess Diana really hits you in the face.
The movie centers on the time of the election of Tony Blair to Prime Minister and the death of Princess Diana. Many people point out that Tony Blair is the poodle dog of President Bush and this movie makes it apparent that he is also the lap dog of the crown. Queen Elizabeth reacted to Diana's death with coldness and detachment. When the working people expressed their regard for the dead woman, who was the mother of the Queen's grandson's, Blair beseeched the Queen to appear in public and pay her respects. She did eventually bend to the will of the people, thereby saving the royalty temporarily from the wrath of working people. However, the splits which are widening and deepening in the ranks of the wealthy elite are more than apparent in this well done movie.
She rewarded Blair's efforts to save her royal arse by giving him the cold shoulder afterwards according to the movie. In the movie, Blair's wife says to him, "At the end of the day, labour Prime Ministers always go GaGa over the Queen."
The only real compassion the Queen displayed was for a stag she observed while she was stranded in the countryside.
The other aspect of the movie that was enlightening was the dramatization
of the effects of idealism, i.e. religious conviction, on policy decisions
in capitalist society. The Queen and her followers believe that her power
is endowed on her by God as depicted in the movie. She used this ideology
to justify her behavior which was clearly based in her anger at the rebellious
Diana. Political leaders, including our own President, often use idealism
to justify policy which bolsters the wealthy elite. Bush has reportedly said
that God told him to invade Iraq. In most situations this kind of statement
would result in an immediate commitment to a mental institution, but Bush
has avoided this so far. The Queen's arrogant disrespect for her dead daughter
in law and the working people of Britain should have resulted in a loss of
power, but she has avoided this so far.
By Paul Hill