Sunday, February 17, 2008
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
George Tells It Like It Isn't
George Will went all WASPy revisionist on us in his latest opinion article regarding giving native Hawaiians the same status as Native Americans when it comes to managing their own affairs.
To begin with, he managed, in true right wing glory, to use the spector of Nazism to start the article with this as his opening quote:
"I decide who is a Jew around here."
-- Hermann Goering in 1934 when told that a favorite Munich art dealer was Jewish.
The article goes on, but I want to draw attention to some of his worst fact twisting. Let's start with this one:
Those designated Native Hawaiians would be members of a new "tribe" conjured into existence by Congress. But it cannot legitimately do that.
George, Hawaiians are a distinct "tribe". They lived in the islands for centuries before Europeans and Americans showed up. The Senate isn't conjuring up a new group. It's actually, for once, acknowledging that the group actually exists, and has for a long time.
But his reasoning behind why Congress can't make this acknowledgement is really a head turner:
In 1959, 94 percent of Hawaiians, including a large majority of Native Hawaiians, voted for statehood.
You see, once a state votes for statehood, apparently the rights of natives no longer exist. Indeed, according to his logic, the groups themselves no longer exist. Following that faulty line of reasoning, the Penobscot Indians of Maine stopped existing in 1820, when Maine became a state.
But the most galling part of his article came with his revision of the history of the fall of Hawaii's monarchy.
The seeds of this weed were sown in 1993, when Congress passed a tendentious apology for supposed U.S. complicity -- which was neither clear nor essential -- in the peaceful 1893 overthrow of Queen Liliuokalani's monarchy by Hawaiian residents.
The overthrow of Queen Liliuokalani was certainly not peaceful and the US was indeed complicit with destroying the monarchy. The real history is below.
According to historian Ralph S. Kuykendall, "The proximate cause of the Revolution of January 17, 1893, was the attempt by Queen Liliuokalani on the previous Saturday afternoon, January 14, to promulgate a new constitution which she had prepared."[8] Once organized and declared, the policies outlined by the Provisional Government were 1) absolute abolition of the monarchy, 2) establishment of a Provisional Government until annexation to the United States, 3) the declaration of an "Executive Council" of four members, 4) retaining all government officials in their posts except for the Queen, her cabinet and her Marshal, and 5) "laws not inconsistent with the new order of things were to cointinue".[9]. About 1,500 armed local people under the leadership of the Committee of Safety, a 13 member council, organized the Honolulu Rifles to depose Queen Liliʻuokalani. They quickly took over government buildings, disarmed the Royal Guard, and declared a Provisional Government.
In fact, it was so outrageous that President Cleveland tried to restore the Queen to her throne but was unable to do so because she refused to pardon those that were involved in the action.
I can't imagine what brought George Will to write this article in the first place, but to write something so dishonest and deceitful tells me that I just can't trust him in his future writing.
Side note - If you would like to read one of the best books written on this subject, I would suggest "Hawaii" by James Michener. Yes, its histroical fiction, but its based on the history of the islands and the people.
To begin with, he managed, in true right wing glory, to use the spector of Nazism to start the article with this as his opening quote:
"I decide who is a Jew around here."
-- Hermann Goering in 1934 when told that a favorite Munich art dealer was Jewish.
The article goes on, but I want to draw attention to some of his worst fact twisting. Let's start with this one:
Those designated Native Hawaiians would be members of a new "tribe" conjured into existence by Congress. But it cannot legitimately do that.
George, Hawaiians are a distinct "tribe". They lived in the islands for centuries before Europeans and Americans showed up. The Senate isn't conjuring up a new group. It's actually, for once, acknowledging that the group actually exists, and has for a long time.
But his reasoning behind why Congress can't make this acknowledgement is really a head turner:
In 1959, 94 percent of Hawaiians, including a large majority of Native Hawaiians, voted for statehood.
You see, once a state votes for statehood, apparently the rights of natives no longer exist. Indeed, according to his logic, the groups themselves no longer exist. Following that faulty line of reasoning, the Penobscot Indians of Maine stopped existing in 1820, when Maine became a state.
But the most galling part of his article came with his revision of the history of the fall of Hawaii's monarchy.
The seeds of this weed were sown in 1993, when Congress passed a tendentious apology for supposed U.S. complicity -- which was neither clear nor essential -- in the peaceful 1893 overthrow of Queen Liliuokalani's monarchy by Hawaiian residents.
The overthrow of Queen Liliuokalani was certainly not peaceful and the US was indeed complicit with destroying the monarchy. The real history is below.
According to historian Ralph S. Kuykendall, "The proximate cause of the Revolution of January 17, 1893, was the attempt by Queen Liliuokalani on the previous Saturday afternoon, January 14, to promulgate a new constitution which she had prepared."[8] Once organized and declared, the policies outlined by the Provisional Government were 1) absolute abolition of the monarchy, 2) establishment of a Provisional Government until annexation to the United States, 3) the declaration of an "Executive Council" of four members, 4) retaining all government officials in their posts except for the Queen, her cabinet and her Marshal, and 5) "laws not inconsistent with the new order of things were to cointinue".[9]. About 1,500 armed local people under the leadership of the Committee of Safety, a 13 member council, organized the Honolulu Rifles to depose Queen Liliʻuokalani. They quickly took over government buildings, disarmed the Royal Guard, and declared a Provisional Government.
In fact, it was so outrageous that President Cleveland tried to restore the Queen to her throne but was unable to do so because she refused to pardon those that were involved in the action.
I can't imagine what brought George Will to write this article in the first place, but to write something so dishonest and deceitful tells me that I just can't trust him in his future writing.
Side note - If you would like to read one of the best books written on this subject, I would suggest "Hawaii" by James Michener. Yes, its histroical fiction, but its based on the history of the islands and the people.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
He Asked, They Couldn't Tell
The question they couldn't answer at the GOP You Tube debate last night. Probably because there was not good answer to give and still keep their position
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Ever Green On Clinton
First, it was Oprah on tour with Barack Obama. Now, Babs has upped the ante.
"Madame President of the United States ... it's an extraordinary thought," Streisand, 65, said in a statement released by Clinton's campaign. "Hillary Clinton has already proven to a generation of women that there are no limits for success."
Clinton campaign spokesman Ken Sunshine said that while Streisand, an Oscar winner for her film debut in the 1968 musical "Funny Girl," has contributed to virtually every Democratic presidential contender dating back to the 1960s, she has rarely singled out a primary candidate to support.
Well, now the race for the White House is getting interesting. I, however, can't make a final decision until Christina Aguilera tells me whom she supports.
It is for the President of the United States. How can I seriously make a decision about my support until I know what the biggest thinkers of my time are doing?
"Madame President of the United States ... it's an extraordinary thought," Streisand, 65, said in a statement released by Clinton's campaign. "Hillary Clinton has already proven to a generation of women that there are no limits for success."
Clinton campaign spokesman Ken Sunshine said that while Streisand, an Oscar winner for her film debut in the 1968 musical "Funny Girl," has contributed to virtually every Democratic presidential contender dating back to the 1960s, she has rarely singled out a primary candidate to support.
Well, now the race for the White House is getting interesting. I, however, can't make a final decision until Christina Aguilera tells me whom she supports.
It is for the President of the United States. How can I seriously make a decision about my support until I know what the biggest thinkers of my time are doing?
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
A Little Bit Country
Okay, I'll admit it. It's time to come out of the closet about it.
Every Monday night, I sit in front of the tv and am glued to Dancing With The Stars.
One of the reasons has been to see an idol from my youth - Marie Osmond - perform each week. I remember rushing into the house once a week to watch the Donny & Marie Show. I was secretly a little bit country then, too.
Now, of course, she's in the finals of DWTS, and there is some consternation about her beating out better dancers because her huge 'baby boomer' base votes for her each week.
But some critics say Osmond's personality has trumped her dancing ability, and voting could start to look like another similar reality show, "American Idol."
Earlier this year, seemingly tone-deaf contestant Sanjaya Malakar triggered a campaign to rig the vote in his favor when radio host Howard Stern urged voters to support Sanjaya for laughs. Sanjaya was eventually voted off "American Idol."
There is a difference, though. Sanjaya was being voted for as a joke and as a way to embarass American Idol.
Marie's votes are coming from a fan base that has followed her life with its ups and downs for decades.
Its true, she isn't as talented as some of the dancers that have been voted off in previous weeks. But they're not a 48 year old mother of eight, either.
And, lets be serious. If this were a real competition to determine the absolute best dancer, the judges scores would be the determining factor, not a half hour of phone calls by fans.
And lets remember - its called "Dancing With The Stars" not "America's Best Dancer".
So good luck tonight, Marie. I'll be rooting for you. And, yes, you got my vote last night.
Monday, November 26, 2007
MySpace Turns Deadly
I have to say that this is one of the most disturbing stories about adults behaving like children toward children that I think I've heard.
He called himself Josh Evans, and he and 13-year-old Megan struck up an online friendship that lasted several weeks. Then the boy abruptly turned on Megan and ended it. That night, Megan, who previously had battled depression, committed suicide.
The secret was revealed six weeks later: Neighbor mother Lori Drew had pretended to be 16-year-old "Josh" to gain the trust of Megan, who had been fighting with Drew's daughter, according to police records and Megan's parents.
In order to "get back" at a neighborhood 13 year old girl who had previously been friends with her daughter before the two grew apart, an adult woman posed as a young boy on MySpace and for six weeks kept up a charade before unceremoniously "dumping" the girl; telling her among other things that "he" had heard she was a bad friend and the world would be better off without her.
The distraught 13 year old girl, who had been battling depression, committed suicide that night.
I realize that we do stupid things when we're angry, not seeing what the outcome might be until after it happens, so I'm not going to do what some in the town have done and consider the parent a murderer.
However, the lack of parenting skills that are shown here makes me flinch. Who hasn't had a childhood friend that they grew apart from? Isn't there a lesson to teach your child about life in there?
Instead, the woman went to revenge - against a 13 year old girl - with tragic results.
I hope parents out there think about this the next time that protecting their children from hurt feelings might lead to lashing out against other kids.
He called himself Josh Evans, and he and 13-year-old Megan struck up an online friendship that lasted several weeks. Then the boy abruptly turned on Megan and ended it. That night, Megan, who previously had battled depression, committed suicide.
The secret was revealed six weeks later: Neighbor mother Lori Drew had pretended to be 16-year-old "Josh" to gain the trust of Megan, who had been fighting with Drew's daughter, according to police records and Megan's parents.
In order to "get back" at a neighborhood 13 year old girl who had previously been friends with her daughter before the two grew apart, an adult woman posed as a young boy on MySpace and for six weeks kept up a charade before unceremoniously "dumping" the girl; telling her among other things that "he" had heard she was a bad friend and the world would be better off without her.
The distraught 13 year old girl, who had been battling depression, committed suicide that night.
I realize that we do stupid things when we're angry, not seeing what the outcome might be until after it happens, so I'm not going to do what some in the town have done and consider the parent a murderer.
However, the lack of parenting skills that are shown here makes me flinch. Who hasn't had a childhood friend that they grew apart from? Isn't there a lesson to teach your child about life in there?
Instead, the woman went to revenge - against a 13 year old girl - with tragic results.
I hope parents out there think about this the next time that protecting their children from hurt feelings might lead to lashing out against other kids.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
