Showing posts with label Bullies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bullies. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Haters Don't Lie, They Multiply (Return of the Little Hater)

On being creative, and the little voices that get inside your head and stop you from shining.

From Jay Smooth's Ill Doctrine where there is a huge collection of videos on the toughest of our culture's subjects most toxic lessons handled with great heart and insight. Little hater is Jay's term for self doubt.




Dedicated to all who are trying to creatively relate to the problems in the world we all share. Sometimes it is really hard. (Unlike the Pope or Palin, let's not quit.)


Monday, December 31, 2012

Out with the Old, In with the New

Forgive the utter banality of using the old man time, new baby with a top hat iconography to end this year.  The thing is I couldn't get over how dead-on this silly, overused graphic fits the end of 2012.

This was the year we witness the old white men in power spending billions to spread lies, hate and fear for months on end to ensure that the status quo would not be threatened.  It was a catastrophic failure and proof that something new is afoot in the US of A.

These old white guys failed miserably and the staggering missteps and blunders continue. Millions of us want to see them go away, be silent, be shamed and most of all be held accountable for the misery they engender.


The promise of new ways to be within a dying empire will be the way we will be devoting ourselves when that old regime rages no more.  




Sunday, December 16, 2012

Killers


Ten Arguments Gun Advocates Make, and Why They're Wrong

by PAUL WALDMAN 12/15/12 in The American Prospect Post (in total)
A guide to the debate we'll be having, or at least we ought to have.

There has been yet another mass shooting, something that now seems to occur on a monthly basis. Every time another tragedy like this occurs, gun advocates make the same arguments about why we can't possibly do anything to restrict the weaponization of our culture. Here's a guide to what they'll be saying in the coming days:

1. Now isn't the time to talk about guns.
We're going to hear this over and over, and not just from gun advocates; Jay Carney said it to White House reporters today. But if we're not going to talk about it now, when are we going to talk about it? After Sandy hit the East Coast, no one said, "Now isn't the time to talk about disaster preparedness; best leave that until it doesn't seem so urgent." When there's a terrorist attack, no one says, "Now isn't the time to talk about terrorism." Now is exactly the time.

2. Guns don't kill people, people kill people.
Maybe, but people with guns kill many, many more people than they would if they didn't have guns, and guns designed to kill as many people as possible. We don't know if the murderer in Newtown was suffering from a suicidal depression, but many mass shooters in the past were. And guess what? People suffer from suicidal depression everywhere in the world. People get angry and upset everywhere in the world. But there aren't mass shootings every few weeks in England or Costa Rica or Japan, and the reason is that people in those places who have these impulses don't have an easy way to access lethal weapons and unlimited ammunition. But if you want to kill large numbers of people and you happen to be an American, you'll find it easy to do.

3. If only everybody around was armed, an ordinary civilian could take out a mass killer before he got too far.
If that were true, then how come it never happens? The truth is that in a chaotic situation, even highly trained police officers often kill bystanders. The idea that some accountant who spent a few hours at the range would suddenly turn into Jason Bourne and take out the killer without doing more harm than good has no basis in reality.

4. We don't need more laws, we just need to enforce the laws we have.
The people who say this are the same ones who fight to make sure that existing laws are as weak and ineffectual as possible. Our current gun laws are riddled with loopholes and allow people to amass enormous arsenals of military-style weapons with virtually no restrictions.

5. Criminals will always find a way to get guns no matter what measures we take, so what's the point?
The question isn't whether we could snap our fingers and make every gun disappear. It's whether we can make it harder for criminals to get guns, and harder for an unbalanced person with murderous intent to kill so many people. The goal is to reduce violence as much as possible. There's no other problem for which we'd say if we can't solve it completely and forever we shouldn't even try.

6. The Constitution says I have a right to own guns.
Yes it does, but for some reason gun advocates think that the right to bear arms is the only constitutional right that is virtually without limit. You have the right to practice your religion, but not if your religion involves human sacrifice. You have the right to free speech, but you can still be prosecuted for incitement or conspiracy, and you can be sued for libel. Every right is subject to limitation when it begins to threaten others, and the Supreme Court has affirmed that even though there is an individual right to gun ownership, the government can put reasonable restrictions on that right.

And we all know that if this shooter turns out to have a Muslim name, plenty of Americans, including plenty of gun owners, will be more than happy to give up all kinds of rights in the name of fighting terrorism. Have the government read my email? Have my cell phone company turn over my call records? Check which books I'm taking out of the library? Make me take my shoes off before getting on a plane, just because some idiot tried to blow up his sneakers? Sure, do what you've got to do. But don't make it harder to buy thousands of rounds of ammunition, because if we couldn't do that we'd no longer be free.

7. Widespread gun ownership is a guarantee against tyranny.
If that had anything to do with contemporary life, then mature democracies would be constantly overthrown by despots. But they aren't. We shouldn't write laws based on the fantasies of conspiracy theorists.

8. Guns are a part of American culture.
Indeed they are, but so are a lot of things, and that tells us nothing about whether they're good or bad and how we want to treat them going forward. Slavery was a part of American culture for a couple of hundred years, but eventually we decided it had to go.

9. The American people don't want more gun control.
The truth is that when public opinion polls have asked Americans about specific measures, the public is in favor of a much more restrictive gun regime than we have now. Significant majorities would like to see the assault weapons ban reinstated, mandatory licensing and training for all gun owners, significant waiting periods for purchases, and host of other restrictions (there are more details here). In many cases, gun owners themselves support more restrictions than we currently have.

10. Having movie theaters and schools full of kids periodically shot up is just a price we should be willing to pay if it means I get to play with guns and pretend I'm Wyatt Earp.
OK, that's actually an argument gun advocates don't make. But it's the truth that lies beneath all their other arguments. All that we suffer because of the proliferation of guns—these horrifying tragedies, the 30,000 Americans who are killed every year with guns—for gun advocates, it's unfortunate, but it's a price they're willing to [have others] pay. If only they'd have the guts to say it.

Postscript: The other vital conversation we should be having in this country that goes beyond guns.  This is a heartbreaking story, 'I Am Adam Lanza's Mother' - Let's talk mental illness.

Update: 12:30 pm, Sunday - Add your name to ask the Obama Administration to immediately address the issue of gun control through introduction of legislation in congress.

Friday, October 5, 2012

Taking Treats from Toddlers = False Toughness


Presidential debate Wed. from Romney,

"I'm sorry, Jim, I'm going to stop the subsidy to PBS. I'm going to stop other things. I like PBS, I love Big Bird. Actually like you, too. But I'm not going to -- I'm not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for. That's number one."

PBS released a statement in response to Romney and the GOP's ridiculous desire.
"We are very disappointed that PBS became a political target in the Presidential debate last night. Governor Romney does not understand the value the American people place on public broadcasting and the outstanding return on investment the system delivers to our nation. We think it is important to set the record straight and let the facts speak for themselves.

The federal investment in public broadcasting equals about one one-hundredth of one percent of the federal budget. Elimination of funding would have virtually no impact on the nation’s debt. Yet the loss to the American public would be devastating.

A national survey by the bipartisan research firms of Hart Research and American Viewpoint in 2011 found that over two-thirds of American voters (69%) oppose proposals to eliminate government funding of public broadcasting, with Americans across the political spectrum against such a cut.

As a stated supporter of education, Governor Romney should be a champion of public broadcasting, yet he is willing to wipe out services that reach the vast majority of Americans, including underserved audiences, such as children who cannot attend preschool and citizens living in rural areas..." [read the rest here]
Getting rid of PBS may not seem like a big deal to many in the grand scheme of things, but the GOP's desire to cut its funding points to a tactic they frequently use: cut financially trivial programs to give the false impression that they are making the tough choices to reduce the debt and boost the economy at the same time they are protecting the largest drags on the economy -- tax breaks for the rich, wars, big oil etc.
Via Dependale Renegade
Cupcakes included because they are irresistible.

Saturday, August 25, 2012

Putting on the Big Show

In the hot mess that was this last meeting on Aug. 22, 2012, Councilwoman Kristin Gaspar and Councilman James Bond treated their position on the City Council with all the decorum (ahem) of 19th century carnival barkers. They treated the justice system, specifically the Grand Jury, like a freak show. And, if Gaspar was speaking truth and she doesn't know how the Grand Jury works, it could be even more creepy.

Mayor Stocks laughed out loudly when earlier Bond rumbled his snappy put down aimed squarely at the late Councilwoman Maggie Houlihan's husband. Jerkism hardy har har! He's a jerk for having threatened to sue the city. This is a council majority that closes all doors and forces citizens to sue to be heard and then calls them a name.


Gratefully Teresa Barth is not amused.  She's well known for the using the Thomas Jefferson quote in her communications, "We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate."  For her this means knowing the facts before opening your mouth and not treating the dais as a carnival sideshow or self-promoting infomercial selling party lines or revising history.

And here is a friendly reminder, please remember to specifically exclude Teresa Barth in accusations that belong in the laps of the council super majority.  It is difficult enough for our councilwoman to try a separate herself from this majority carnival gang, make her points, get on the record, remain civil, go above and beyond with outreach, homework and civic participation.  Remember, it is mostly just about being deliberate in your phrasing (council MAJORITY, not just council). To be lumped with the others must be extremely disheartening if not irritating.


In the final portion when future agenda items were requested, Mark Muir asked about the Economic Development Corporation being placed on the agenda, specifically the North County Economic group. Teresa Barth asks if this is related to the Supervisor Bill Horn project. Stocksplaining, the mayor assures her and all of us poor rubes, no.


Barth may well be correct in her assumption. The non-profit San Diego North Economic Development Council "has used the taxpayer grants to coordinate Prosperity on Purpose."  This Bill Horn pet project is right up Jerome's alley, no transparency and funneling tax money to developers. NCT article on this is titled, "Questions raised about supervisor-backed Properity on Purpose".


Editor Note because respect is respect: Frank Zaitshik, who runs Wade Shows, a carnival business with over 100 amusement rides and attractions that entertains over 15 million people each year speaks about Carnival Barker terminology. Zaitshik, a second generation carnival worker -- a term he prefers to the word "carny," which is some used as a pejorative. He says he has spent much of his life battling negative stereotypes about his industry. 

The reference to 'carnival barkers' and 'sideshows' is really a thing of the past. "It's not like the olden days. The carnival industry has modernized and is more high-tech. In fact, there are very few barkers or sideshows these days."

Wednesday, August 8, 2012

Quote of the Day


I think every year:

-every driver should have to spend two weeks as a cyclist, and
-every customer should have to spend two weeks as a restaurant server.

Tongue-in-cheek comment at post on an innovative idea for including bike riding proficiency as part of a drivers license test. It's all about empathy and perspective.

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Quote of the Day

"Eight years was awesome and I was famous and I was powerful," Bush told the Hoover Institute's Peter Robinson. "But I have no desire for fame and power anymore. … I crawled out of the swamp and I'm not crawling back in." George W. Bush

Jeebus, the US electorate are the stupidest people on the planet.  How could we?

It's good at this stage to remember we didn't.  The Supreme Court crowd put this clown in charge. But still . . .


We have very little reason to believe that stupidity will reign in this upcoming election that big money is attempting to buy people who lack essential core beliefs.  It can't work with those who are aware of what they believe, why they believe in what they are voting for in 2012.  But, if the past decade holds true (with few exceptions), this is what basic human rights and future prosperity is up against this worldview these days.

Americans’ Core Beliefs:
Don’t make me feel bad about the way I live, and
It will all work out, we’re Americans.


Wednesday, July 4, 2012

July 4, 2012




Bill Moyers on legalized bribery. 


Supreme Court Upholds Citizens United; Tightens Corporate Stranglehold on Campaign Finance

In 5-4 decision, court strikes down Montana ban on corporate donation law, strengthening Citizens United.




Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Revolution in Quebec

Press CC for English subtitles . . .

A great inspiration for budding film makers besides being relevant to our California student protests against tuition hikes and a great deal more in the US of A.  And corruption, misuse of police force, lack of humanity and greed are present here and millions of others towns and cities around the world. 


Remember this from last week?  

Citizen Tip = "All movements are born out of grievance." 
"This week the connection between our local reality, local grievance is linked to the worldwide, nationwide changes in full view of the world through live stream.  The corporate press in this country is still mostly absent in this global  story unfolding.  But, the vastness of millions protesting around the world is happening even if the US public is largely unaware of what is going on in this country and abroad." 
 And, sometimes its difficult to keep expectations excruciatingly low.

Via Common Dreams

Thursday, May 10, 2012

Leading to Mean, Not Meaning

You may have read reviews of the newly released movie, Bully, focused on bullies in our children's lives . Don't these reviews seem to be overlooking a very obvious connection - the leaders in the political area of today's US of A?

Political Leaders  
Local politics via Our Mayor blog, as in today's post. Big Cheese Stands Alone is meant to expose bully behavior. And this is just one of more than a dozen posts with clips all listed here. These are a fraction of the stories citizens could share throughout the dozen years Jerome Stocks has served on city council . As editor, I'll state that a clear mission is to show clips of the council warts and all and especially the voices not covered by the news or the kinds of things a compliant press doesn't write about or expose.  For this reason we can't get candidates LIsa Shaffer or Tony Kranz to participate directly in the blogs, but we will continue to show clips of them, copy from their public websites, facebook entries and other public sources because we consider them the alternative to crony behavior from the mayor and the council majority and their friends and funding sources.

The movie, Bully, is a place we all might learn about a pathology that allows this mean behavior to thrive.

 

When vicious behavior is rewarded in every facet of our culturally elite's personal, social, recreational, business and political lives without accountability and scrutiny; it is no surprise we raise up a new crop of bullies each and every year. But, leaders who are mean in their very characters are not going to be providing us meaning of any value if the message is, I've got mine - the hell with you. 

Remember This Revelation?
The scene is Harvard Business School, 1975. Bush is captain of his class' basketball team, which is playing the Class of '76 team.

The game was tight. The other team's captain, Gary Engle went up for a shot. Bush slugged him — an elbow to the mouth, knocking him to the parquet. "What the hell are you doing?" Engle remembers saying. "What, you want to get into a fistfight and both of us end up in the fucking emergency room?" Bush just smiled.

Moments later, at the other end of the court, Engle went up high for a rebound and felt someone chop his legs out from under him. Bush again. Engle jumped up and threw the ball in Bush's face. The two went at it until two teams of future business leaders leapt on their captains, pulling them apart. Engle, angry and vexed by what had happened, began wondering why the hell Bush would have done what he did. He lost his composure, and his team lost its leader.

A few years later, Engle...bumped into Jeb Bush....Engle, a Republican contributor, had thought from time to time about his game against George. Nothing like that had happened to him before or since. This was his chance to get a little insight about it. He told the story. Jeb kind of laughed, Engle recalled. "In Texas, they call guys like George 'a hard case.' It wasn't easy being his brother, either. He truly enjoys getting people to knuckle under."

He truly enjoys getting people to knuckle under. source
Bully 2.0
In a TV interview this month, Mitt Romney's wife Ann insisted, "There's a wild and crazy man inside of [Mitt Romney] just waiting to come out." How wild and crazy is he? Well, when he was a teenager at boarding school in 1965, he was so crazed by a fellow student's slightly long hair that he organized a wild mob that held the boy down while Romney cut off the offensive locks, as his victim wept. [. . .]

“He can’t look like that. That’s wrong. Just look at him!” an incensed Romney told Matthew Friedemann, his close friend in the Stevens Hall dorm, according to Friedemann’s recollection. Mitt, the teenaged son of Michigan Gov. George Romney, kept complaining about Lauber’s
look, Friedemann recalled.

A few days later, Friedemann entered Stevens Hall off the school’s collegiate quad to find Romney marching out of his own room ahead of a prep school posse shouting about their plan to cut Lauber’s hair. Friedemann followed them to a nearby room where they came upon Lauber, tackled him and pinned him to the ground. As Lauber, his eyes filling with tears, screamed for help, Romney repeatedly clipped his hair with a pair of scissors.

"It happened very quickly, and to this day it troubles me,” said [Thomas] Buford, the school’s wrestling champion, who said he joined Romney in restraining Lauber. Buford subsequently apologized to Lauber, who was “terrified,” he said. “What a senseless, stupid, idiotic thing to do.” ... "It was a hack job,” recalled Phillip Maxwell, a childhood friend of Romney who was in the dorm room when the incident occurred. “It was vicious." source
A bully is essentially a coward.  Only when he can outnumber, outweigh or otherwise overwhelm or secretly attack does he strike.  We never need to accept this behavior.  And it is vital we don't back down and sanction behavior by saying we don't want to be negative, we don't want to be rude or otherwise equivocate with unacceptable demonstrations.  Although tolerance is an ideal worth striving for in so many areas, it doesn't belong in this arena of human rights and indulging predators or sociopaths.

Bullying at home when mom and the kids are smacked around or treated with contempt?  That is a whole other story for blog writers attuned to this with resources to share. We invite contributors.