xian's blog

From today's Tribune:

The 2007 statewide data show that compared with whites, police agencies searched blacks three times more often and Hispanics more than twice as often. But police discovered illicit goods roughly twice as often when whites agreed to searches.

"Officers are more trusting of whites than they are of blacks, and they are particularly suspicious of Hispanics," Grossman said of state police. "It's clear from the data that officers require less certainty when they ask Latinos to be searched than they do whites, there are more stringent standards for whites."

Key points to take away from the study and its background:

1. The study is based on police data.
2. The study clearly shows a disparity in who is asked to be searched and in the opposite direction who is caught carrying contraband.
3. The study shows insignificant difference in rate of agreement to being searched.
4. Even if you are uninterested in racial issues, it demonstrates a clear inefficiency in policing--it wastes resources when we unnecessarily search people who do not have contraband in their cars.
5. If the police had not been compelled by law to compile this data, we probably wouldn't have know about this problem.
6. It does not demonstrate intentional bias on the part of law enforcement officers.
7. The study was made possible by the sponsorship of legislation by a particular state senator.

 "There was just an AP article posted that found how Senator Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again..."

Discuss.

I've bitter about the way our country selects its leaders. Reading posts around here, I can't help but think that many feel the same way I do. Most of the problem lies in what issues we consider when choosing whom to support and how we go about doing so. We complain about candidates and the media using "negative campaign tactics", yet we replicate the same dynamic in our own communities and with our own voices.

This comes back to the factionalized mentality that we have in relation to politics. To many, it's nothing but a sporting event and we don't care how our team wins as long as it wins. As the Onion puts it, "The main issue for this year's campaign will be the same as any other year--'bullsh*t'"

But ultimately, though we may have forgotten, we are on the same team. The only people we have to blame for the state of the country are ourselves for putting our party affiliations ahead of our country's well being.

I don't think is a problem of ill-intentions. I think we as a nation have simply forgotten what it means to be positive in the first place. So let's lay out a few ground rules.

We need to draw a distinction between personal attacks and policy criticism. I am not pro-gun, but I have always respected that position. I simply like to ask questions. For example, when the bulk of urban folks would like to see extreme enforcement of guns laws and more restrictive laws, how can we moderate that with the logical rural attachment to firearms? Where was the NRA when the government was setting up concentration camps, or when the NRA was being all KKK friendly?

These are many of the questions I asked myself before I arrived at my thoughtful anti-gun stance. But that doesn't mean anyone who disagrees with me is a moron. The only judgment I make is on those who refuse to even consider the evidence at hand. Obviously, some will thoughtfully consider and arrive at a different conclusion and that's one of the things that make the society great.

Unfortunately, this approach is not currently supported. Look at this site--everyone can see that the Clinton campaign is the anti-thesis of thoughtful American discourse, however, people are eager to support her campaigns slander and framing simply because "the enemy of our enemy is our friend".

Obama has run a respectful campaign. His "attacks" have merely being to say, "Please don't make **** up!"

Let's let him and McCain run their campaigns and focus on their policy proposals and abilities and be sure that there is a fair election.

Perhaps you think I am merely using rhetoric. I want to remind you that I did not support our current governor or president. I would have certainly supported Clinton on policy--her positions are more conservative than mine, but I would certainly have taken her as president.

I would not under any circumstances support her at this juncture. I would not support any of her style of attacks on McCain. I can no longer reward this type of politicing. And if you feel the same way, maybe it'll actually mean something.

Seriously, a few more people saying, "I don't like Obama. I think McCain is the better candidate, but let's stop talking about this bullsh*t and start the real election discussion so we can have the best candidate for our country!" would make a big difference.

It has become clear that there is one particular sociopath who uses the anonymous function on this site to attack people. Often he (she) uses facts about the other person's life to attack them.

I have seen many constructive discussions derailed by this single poster who lives to destroy and hurt others.

As a result, I've decided to no longer respond to anonymous posters. I realize that I will miss some good points made by other anonymous posters, but the efficiency of time spent on anonymous posts is just not a very good return. I learn some, but not nearly as much as I would by reading the regular posters more specifically.

www.macon.com/198/story/230163.html

The linked story demonstrates why we need deep immigration reform for the LEGAL immigration process. Without a reasonable legal process, it's just tossing money down a well to combat illegal immigration. In this case, you have a couple who followed the legal process, and then did not correct a marital status change. In effect, they were penalized for getting married, since, you know, we don't like stable families in this country.

This is actually relatively common--if a couple applies under a fiancee visa and then choose to get married in the long-ass interim, they may be charged with immigration fraud and face deportation, even if it is discovered long after the fact.

The economics of the immigration dynamic make it even more ridiculous--people will continue to come and employers will continue to hire them as long as there is economic opportunity and demand. It makes no sense to stop that dynamic--which has bolstered our economy for centuries--with a muddled, maddeningly, life ruining, family separating legal immigration process.

The process should be quick and simple:

1. Register and demonstrate interest in coming to the U.S.

2. Demonstrate a plan to survive and work within the country.

3. Check-in several times over the next half-decade to confirm that your family unit is working and productive.

4. Receive citizenship.

With a streamlined, easy legal process, it will HELP sort the tiny minority of those who have ill-intention for our country from the massive majority who will provide the hard-working, adventureous spirit that all waves of immigration--no matter their ethnicity or national origin--have provided us.

But if not, let's be real. It would take me about 5 seconds to decide to illegal enter this country if it was necessary to keep my family together and fed.

And I speak from familial experience.

For the life of me, I cannot understand America's position or even close to understanding the world's do nothing position on the U.S.'s killing of cows. This is absolutely inexcusable. If America needs food, then find other sources. Mother Nature makes only one natural enemy for Cows and that is Killer Cows.

Man is not a natural enemy and cow do not reproduce at a rate of offset destruction by man.

Google cow and there are a couple of sites showing the bravery of cow and the bravery of people. The male cow charge the attackers with their sharp horns to keep them from killing the females and baby cows and the cowards just shoot them, then drag them in a slaugtherhouse where they are tortured alive.

Perhaps we drop a couple of nuclear bombs in the midst of the ranching communities of the U.S. After all, the world still owes them a couple, and it's a perfectly thoughtful thing for me to threaten mass murder over cultural differences.

My final disgust was I was watching football over the holiday and Ford, ran an advertisement stating how environmentally concerned they were. It was right after the "This is MY country ad".

Bullshit!!!!!

I would not by anything from America, even if it meant my walking.

Foods like cows, pigs, chickens, etc. are designer foods and not truly a food source that supports a large population. Because every like me, lives by an ocean where there are huge supplies of fish and shellfish. The Americans even promote more obesity and murder of livestock by not incorporating seaweed or octopus--staples of a good diet--into their diets.

To that end, I am, and shall always remain;
Bizarro South Asian Indian Rex Bradfield

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/node/26717

Naturally, I think there's a pretty good case for racial profiling, or at least desperant treatment here, but I'm more interested in the response of the officer here. Under no circumstances should an officer EVER refuse to give a badge number. In fact, any officer on the scene who supported the officer who refused to get her badge number should lose their badge too.

We always talk about accountability for public servants. Nowhere is this more important than in law enforcement. There is no reason that a non-undercover officer should ever have to conceal their identity from a citizen who simply is asking to indentify the officer.

From the one-man news and entertainment service, Angry Asian Man

hindu prayer makes history... and controversy

A Hindu clergyman, Rajan Zed, made history on Thursday by offering the Senate's morning prayer—the very first Hindu to offer the prayer that opens each day's Senate session. First, however, he had to endure the shouts of protestors in the visitors' gallery, who were removed by police: Senate Prayer Led by Hindu Elicits Protest. Two women and a man, who were shouting idiotic stuff like "this is an abomination," were arrested and charged with disrupting Congress, a misdemeanor. For several days, the Mississippi-based American Family Association has apparently been urging its members to object to the prayer because Zed, who was born India, would be "seeking the invocation of a non-monotheistic god." Suckas. You can see video of Zed's prayer (and hear the protestor's shouts) here.

Rickey Henderson makes his triumphant return to MLB as a coach for the New York Mets.

In a time where many complain about the lack of dedication to sports from athletes, I'm happy to see someone who is clearly as passionate as a human being can be as his profession return to the game.

For those who don't know him or those who do and want to expand their knowledge while laughing, here is a compilation of some of his most famous "Rickyisms".

My favorite:

In the last week of his lone season with the Red Sox, Chairman Tom Werner asked Henderson what he would like for his ‘going-away’ gift. Henderson said he wasn’t going anywhere, but he would like owner John Henry’s Mercedes. Werner said it would be tough to get the same make and model in less than a week and Henderson said, “No, I want his car.” Turns out the Sox got Henderson a Red Thunderbird and when he saw it on the field before the last game of the season, Rickey said, “Whose ugly car is on the field?”

This is a cute article too...

"Everybody was asking me for the ball. I said, 'You're not getting this ball. I always wanted to get a foul ball. This one's going on a shelf at home."

-- Rickey Henderson
 
 

This is bare bones, but I wanted to continue one of the tangential, substantive discussions that came out of that trainwreck of a thread:

www.cbc.ca/news/background/arar/renditions.html

www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-horses25may25,1,7080546.story

Yesterday Blagojevich signed into law a bill that bans horse slaughtering in the State of Illinois. In a way, it doesn't affect me--I haven't had a good piece of horsemeat since I returned from Japan five years ago.

But it's strange to see that the meat I gave up vegetarianism is banned in my state. It's weirder when I hear the lame justifications and the anti-foreign sentiment that has driven much of the campaign. "They're pets; not food!" Yeah, sure, right up to the point that one sinks their teeth into one. "The plant is foreign owned!" Yeah, but what about the workers who work there?

I have a great deal of respect for those who have so much love to give and have ample left over to give it to animals. I mean that genuinely. I just think it's a shame that human welfare is often neglected while so many of our resources go toward other creatures great and small.

It reminds me of a flyer I received from Alley Cat Allies, which decried that a huge percentage of feral cats receive no health care and that must be addressed. I thought, "Maybe I should become a feral cat..." (I worked part-time and went to school part-time and had no insurance even as I took care of others' children.)

At any rate, they are two different issues--it's one thing when Americans use our ill-gotten gains or well-gotten gains to promote our own issues. That's democratic capitalism in action--even when it's stupid. It's another thing when the government steps in to ban a food product and business opportunitiy that is not health threatening (unless you happen to be a horse) and non-addictive (unless like me, you absolutely love biting into raw horsemeat). To those who are utterly against any slaughter of animals whatsoever, I respect your position, but there are plenty of people who voted through this bill with a juicy hamburger in their other paw.

To conclude:

Horses are dumb animals compared to some of those we do eat.

Horses taste good.

That's all that should matter.

From today's Tribune:

www.chicagotribune.com/news/specials/chi-safety-magnets1-story,1,4110861.story

For non-subscribers, basically it relates the story of a boy who died from ingesting high-powered magnets which fell from a children's toy to the intention gutting of the department which regulates children's toys. He died of gunshot wound like injuries throughout his digestive system.

Inflammatory headline aside, obviously this is a department that Clinton could have returned to prominence during his time in office. What it does point to is the danger when many of our governmental positions are filled by those who are connected to and advocating for the very groups they are supposed to be regulating.

Daley and Bush seem to be the masters of hiring the fox to guard the hen house. It would seem to amount to a sort of treason.

Lest anyone feel like taking the common tack of blaming the victims, check out this excerpt from the article which made me think, "If we'll never be as thorough as these parents, will our kids be at risk?" (Probably not, since we aren't planning on buying very many toys, but the point stands--it could have been anyone...)

 When Penny gave the Magnetix toys to Ben on his birthday that November, she recognized the plastic pieces posed a choking hazard to young children. So Kenny—at 20 months old, the baby of the family—was not allowed near the Magnetix sets and, whenever possible, was moved to another room when his older siblings played with them.

In addition, the Sweets set family rules about Magnetix: You could play with them only in the family room. The pieces always had to go back in the plastic container with the lid shut tightly.

In the 10 days their children played with the Magnetix toys in November 2005, Ken and Penny Sweet didn't find any stray, brightly colored plastic pieces.

Not knowing the history of problems with Magnetix, the Sweets were looking for the wrong thing.

A very well written piece from a professor who was the victim of both racial profiling and then a stupid administration:

I love the way that he gets blamed for recycling the old poetry as if that was an unwise act!

Pat Buchanan hits with the most racist, illogical tirade imaginable which attempts to hijack the VT massacre for his own hateful agenda.

It's funny because my recollection was that the media fixated on the fact that this homegrown crazy was "from Korea", despite that being true only in the most literal sense.

ATRA attempts to defend a small business from a crazy judge gone wild.

Because Pearson no longer wanted to use his neighborhood dry cleaner, part of his lawsuit calls for $15,000 — the price to rent a car every weekend for 10 years to go to another business.

"He's somehow purporting that he has a constitutional right to a dry cleaner within four blocks of his apartment," Manning said.

So much for immigrants being the problem. Remember, every economic study indicates that immigrants of any ethnic have a stronger entrepeneural spirit than native born Americans.

Virginia Tech Aftermath:

Student arrested for fulfilling homework assignment

Violent Computer Game and decorative swords-->disciplined

Racist Threats at Circuit City

Ballplayer taunted by racist idiots

I'd be interested in your responses to any of these stories...

Update: Title changed to be less vague, more accurate

Just a story I saw in which a law enforcement officer attacked a decorated veteran for parking a van in his driveway. He tossed in some ignorant AND false racial epithets for good measure (not that "true" racial epithets would be any better :P)

From Angry Asian Man:

Heard about this from SALDEF... They're calling for the Joliet Police Department in Illinois to investigate an violent incident involving an officer patrolling a local neighborhood last month. The cop allegedly assaulted a Sikh American man while yelling racial epithets, right in front of his wife and six-year-old child:

On Friday March 30, 2007 at around 3:00pm , Mr. Kuldip Singh Nag, a Sikh American who was awarded the Bronze Star for his service in the U.S. Navy during the first Gulf War, was at his home in Joliet , IL when a local police officer noticed that a van parked on Mr. Nag’s private property had expired registration tags. Upon being confronted with this, Mr. Nag’s wife, Vera Kaur Nag, informed the officer that the van is parked on their driveway and was inoperable.

Mr. Nag then came outside to answer the officer’s questions regarding the van. The Joliet police officer then demanded that Mr. Nag park the van inside his garage and not on the driveway, to which Mr. Nag responded to the officer that it was not possible and that regardless, the van is parked on his private property and he has a right to park it on his driveway.

At this moment, the officer pulled out his pepper spray and attacked Mr. Nag. As Mr. Nag screamed in agony, the officer removed his baton and violently struck Mr. Nag numerous times until he fell to the ground. While the assault ensued, the officer was reported by both Mr. and Mrs. Nag as saying, "You f****** Arab! You f***** immigrant, go back to you f****** country before I kill you!"

The assault landed Mr. Nag in the hospital for five days, with complaints of intense pain and head trauma. And the whole thing happened right in front of his wife and kid. All this, because Mr. Nag parked a van with expired tags in his own driveway. Police brutality alone is unacceptable, but this clearly crosses the line as a hate crime. This incident needs to be investigated, and this officer needs to be taken down. That's racist!

This NPR story details the movement of the U.S. into the Diyala province in Iraq, one that is well-known for being an insurgent stronghold. 

It is a compelling story of heroic American soldiers risking their lives to help free Iraqi villagers from oppression. And "risking" is too light of a word--four American soldiers were killed by an IED in this area today.

An Army Lt. describes some of the atrocities committed by insurgents:

Stallings says insurgent groups terrorized the local people, and that they beheaded a retired police officer. "They pulled everybody out of their houses to watch it," he says.

However, it is also a story that captures well the desperate tightrope walked by our military in its role as an occupying force:

They've taken over homes along the main road, and offered compensation to the owners. One of their main outposts is the biggest and nicest house in the street, but the owner has yet to be compensated.

The house was recently built by its owner and they had barely moved in when American forces commandeered.

Stallings tells a member of the owner's family that the forces aren't prepared to make payments yet.

"We've been here less than a week," Stallings says. "There are a lot of claims that we have to handle and we don't come into town with a trunk of money to hand people cash for the things that have happened."

Those family members are not the only ones with questions about U.S. occupation in the area:

Stallings is assailed by questions from the locals. He's not helped by a short Iraqi soldier at his elbow asking how much longer they have to stay in Shakarat. The soldier complains he's working 12-hour shifts, hasn't had time off, and hasn't been paid.

Stallings becomes frustrated.

"Yes, we're going to be here as long as we need to be to secure the people of Iraq," he tells the Iraqi soldier. "You need to talk to your chain of command, your commander, your platoon leader... to ask them these questions, not me. I only run the American part of things; your commander runs the Iraqi part of things."

This is the problem. I completely believe that Stallings is not responsible and is understandably frustrated, but who is responsible? We cannot win the hearts and mind of those we preport to be defending if nothing we put in place is dependable.

Think about it: you spend your own time and money building your dreamhouse and then those protecting you take the house and refuse to compensate you? You are risking your life in one of the most dangerous occupations on Earth as a member of the new Iraqi military and you are not even being paid for it?

We have heard before about the billions of dollars that our lack of corruption control in Iraq is costing us, but the greatest cost is that the money is not making it to those who have given their own sweat and blood to earn it. Why should they continue to have faith in us?

Should we stay or should we go? I'm not convinced of either, but what I do know is that we better be damn competent at whichever option we choose...

My original post was lost in the refresh of the site, but I figured I'd re-post it.

The Reverend Soong-Chan Rah has been a great force for addressing stereotypical and racist materials within the evangelical community. I found his latest engagement particularly uplifting. Links to his blog follow:

The Reverend discovers stereotypical skit:

www.xanga.com/scrah/570928015/rickshaw-rally-redux.html

Skit Guys' response:

www.xanga.com/scrah/572384870/the-skitguys.html

Phone call from one of the Skit Guys:

www.xanga.com/scrah/572553919/update.html

Plea for civility in letters to makers/publisher of skit:

www.xanga.com/scrah/572974642/christian-social-action.html

Publisher's committment:

www.xanga.com/scrah/573197506/significant-commitment-from-youth-specialities.html

Public Apology:

www.xanga.com/scrah/574160161/a-public-apology-from-youth-specialties.html

I really enjoyed reading the Reverend's account of the intervention. There is deep integrity in the way he handled and interacted with both the makers of the racist material and also with people "on his side" who were not upholding the principles he believes in.

I believe that exhibiting empathy and appreciation for others' perspectives is far more effective outreach than any other. So many times, in their own embarassment or narrow-minded view, people will become defensive and act for themselves rather than do what is best for their faith and beliefs.

Anyway, I applaud all involved, and would love to hear other's impressions of the intervention, including other Christians, but also atheists and folks from other faiths.

Thanks!

Oh, BTW--props to the prolific, one-man news service, Angry Asian Man for circulating this story widely.

Since there seem to be many different perspectives on this site, I thought it might help to remind everyone that we all pretty much love the country equally.

The big gap, however, is in what we consider that country to be and who belongs to it.

So what is an American? How should it be determined?

This is from your heart and mind not somethng implanted in you by the government, media or school system, so please don't use legalistic definitions like "Whomever has citizenship". Law can and have changed endlessly throughout the history of the union, so that would be a really circular, meaningless definition.

So please describe what someone has to do to be a good American....

I don't want to start off with people just nitpicking my positions--create something of your own--so I'll wait until later to share. (Although I'm sure you could find my definitions online if you happened to be a little industrious.

Today's Daily Illini features an article about last night's forum.
media.www.dailyillini.com/media/storage/paper736/news/2007/02/02/News/Stop-Forum.Lets.Students.Voice.Concerns-2693709.shtml

Before we dig in and draw our battle lines, let's just get a few things out of the way:

1. The forum was widely attended--far beyond expectations. In addition to Follinger, the huge turnout caused them to set up additional viewing stations in the Illini Rooms at the Union and Gregory Hall.

2. The issue was not just about the Chief, but the general atmosphere of racial relations on the campus.

3. The issue was not to target white students. There were plenty of Caucasian Americans within the crowd. But what was disturbing was:

4. The lack of Pro-Chief and Pro-Stereotyping people in the crowd. Because:

5. The common "Who does this really hurt?" question was clearly and concretely addressed and answered by the presenters.

I'm curious what will come of this. Certainly I am proud of the students for organizing the event and also, while I'm not sure about the adminstrative response to the issues, the response to the event itself was very efficient in terms of quickly getting additional venues set up.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on these issues, but I hope the sheer numbers and thoughtful presentation of this event will help people see that the treatment of students and Native Americans are issues that people care about and make it harder to just write off people who hold that viewpoint on the issue. I mean it would be pretty disgusting at this point to just say, "Oh that upset kid, and those several thousand folks of color need to quit being so whiny and PC!"

The regular report on Iraq describes widespread corruption in Iraq which causes funding and goods to not reach their intended purpose in the reconstruction effort.
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IRIN/848cffd0d4d0d66de754cc536dcd83c6.htm

An Army Captain details the problems with corruption.
www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php


I have an honest question:
Why is it that we cut dozens of necessary government programs due to inefficiencies in the spending that cost us thousands or in some cases millions of dollars, and yet we are willing to continue to throw away BILLIONS in war efforts?

I'm not saying there is no defensible reason to rebuild Iraq. Quite the opposite. But if you aren't actually going to make any effort to ensure that the money actually serves its purpose, why not just cut a check to me? I can't remember the last time I spent a dollar on myself. I'll make sure something good comes out of it.

Our health care and educational systems could use the money dearly. Why do we continue to pass millions and billions on to crooks and smugglers?