Archive for June, 2009

So unfair! – But Not Surprising

Published: 14 June 2009 6:57 PM UTCPosted in: Global
So unfair! – But Not Surprising

Watching the events unfold in Iran via CNN and in cyberspace, I can’t help but feel a bit more hopeful than in the past, whenever this type of situation has arisen in other countries.

The story has been basically the same. Some extreme right-wing or left-wing leader rises to power in the middle of an election looking for a change of direction, and suddenly, part of that change also means breaking away from friendly countries, taking away the rights of the people, and aligning themselves with rogue regimes around the world.

Let’s start off with Venezuela. It used to be a thriving country in Latin America. Venezuela is where South Americans in neighboring countries went if their visa to enter the United States was turned down. There was a large middle class and many in the rich ranks. But there was also poverty and discontent in the larger population. Chavez, being a military leader, rose to power after a failed coup and eventually having run for president. As a leftist, promising to take care of the large poor class, Chavez got enough votes to win. That was in 1999. He’s been in power since then, and even has managed to re-write the constitution, extending his terms and the reach of his mandate. Despite many attempts from people, the electorate, his opponents, to depose him, to question his “elections”, he remains in power. Chavez has it down to a science. I have no doubt that being under the tutelage of Castro he will remain in power for a long time, and will hamper world peace, even though this is not the will of the Venezuelan people. Due to the unfortunate presence of Bush and his cowboy policies in the world stage, Chavez has managed to endear himself to many, among them peers in Latin America, who have become his supporters.

With Chavez leading Venezuela to the left and pulling away from a formerly good relationship with the US, outside of his region, he has reached out to Cuba, China, Russia, Iran, and made alliances with these country leaders to foment strong relationships that will benefit them in commerce, warfare and space exploration.

He has taken under his wing the less experienced presidents of his neighboring countries: Correa in Ecuador, Morales in Bolivia, and Ortega in Nicaragua. They often visit each other’s countries and have open trade amongst each other. Chavez, having excellent relationships with China, Russia and Iran, has also opened the door for his allies. Last Fall, I visited Ecuador and saw an unusually high number of Chinese tourists peppered throughout the streets of Quito, side by side with the usual northern Europeans, Germans and American backpackers. It surprised me to see so many. A young architect who lives there, informed me that Correa has an open visa travel agreement with the Chinese, where all they need to do is present their passport to be admitted to Ecuador. The Venezuelans have started investing in Ecuadorian infrastructure, brought in the Chinese and Russians as investors, and the same is happening with the other Chavez-friendly countries. Recently China launched a first satellite on behalf of Venezuela. All this is happening while Bush/Cheney were distracted “fighting terrorism” in other parts of the world.

In comes Ahmadinejad, all the way from Iran, bringing “goodwill”, money, and God-only-knows what else. Guess which countries did Ahmadinejad visit during his trip to Central and Latin America? You probably guessed it right. As per the headlines in this anti-American paper, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is scheduled to begin a four day tour of Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Bolivia and other Central and South American countries on Saturday, there is no doubt that Ahmadinejad is aligned with anti-American nations right here in our own backyard.

Click here for photo and article at Hispanic American Center for Economic Research

Chavez with Ahmadinejad

According to the Hispanic American Center for Economic Research (HACER), ‘Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad must love the tropics’, commented ironically The Miami Herald. He has spent more time in Latin America than President Bush. Since his inauguration in 2005, Iran’s foreign policy focus has shifted from Africa to Latin America in order to, as Ahmadinejad puts it, ‘counter lasso’ the US.

Even though Colombia and its president, Alvaro Uribe, remain aligned with the United States, especially in their fight against the drug cartels, it is no secret that the FARC –based in the jungles of Colombia– are aligned with Chavez. And evidence has been found that they even have had dealings with Correa in Ecuador, something which he denies heatedly. But evidence is evidence and you can’t dispute it. What’s more, after the visit of Ahmadinejad, it was also rumored that the FARC received money from Iran, as well as help with weapons, warfare technology and “training”.

As per an article written by an Uruguayan journalist, The Iranian leader views the presidents of Venezuela, Ecuador and Nicaragua as political partners, because they are anti-American. But the fact that he named the South American trio, Chávez, Ortega and Correa, as those with whom he has a privileged relationship in confronting the United States, is highly disturbing to the Iranian opposition.

Correa with Ahmadinejad - Click here for article & photo source

Correa with Ahmadinejad

Correa was up for “re-election” in Ecuador, on April of this year. Despite the fact that people who voted for him the first time did not vote for him again, he “won” anyway. Last Fall he held a referendum to change the constitution, a constitution rumored to have been crafted in Venezuela, and again, according to his administration, there were enough votes to pass the new constitution, which gave him an extended mandate and extended time should he be re-elected. So, it was no surprise that even though his support among the electorate had dwindled, he remains in power. And while in power, despite the opposition of the people, he managed to kick out the United States Air Force base that had been set up in Manta, a thriving city in the Pacific coast, which has greatly benefitted from and welcomed the American presence.

Morales and Ahmadinejad - Click here for article and photo source at CNN.com

Morales and Ahmadinejad

In Bolivia, another member of Chavez’ club, the story is similar. Supposedly a referendum passed the new leftist constitution –also rumored to have originated in Venezuela– that also expanded Morales’ mandate and his time in power if re-elected. And, of course, Morales was re-elected even though the cries of irregularities were loud. He continues to remain in power today, and a special member of Chavez’ club. This country has received special attention from Ahmadinejad.

As per Monsters & Critics, Ahmadinejad opens wallet for Bolivia on visit to South America. I’m sure that does not go over too well with the Iranians at home, whose economy is struggling. As per M&C, “Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad pledged 1 billion dollars for the development of Bolivia’s economy and pledged to work more closely and fight imperialism with its leader and the president of Venezuela during visits to La Paz and Caracas.”

Ortega and Ahmadinejad - click here for Time article and photo source

Ortega and Ahmadinejad

In Nicaragua, another stop along Ahmadinejad’s tour, it was time for re-election last November. And guess what? Same situation. Among ugly maneuverings, and claims of voter fraud, he claimed to have won re-election. See The Economist Article titled, Nicaragua – How to steal an election.

Do you see the pattern here?

So, despite my outrage upon hearing the unfair results of an effort to oust Ahmadinejad, he’s aligned with cheaters who likely share a playbook on how to stay in power, regardless of opposition. I have no doubt that Ahmadinejad, a billion dollar member of the cheaters club, is well supported and will do all necessary to remain in his seat. If Chavez, Castro, Correa, Morales and Ortega have done so successfully, despite the opposition of the electorate, why wouldn’t he?

It is an unfortunate similarity to Bush and Putin’s “re-elections” in the past decade.

So, we can’t be surprised, when after all the noise and all the demonstrations and legal challenges, Ahmadinejad is likely to remain in power, because of his special membership in the cheaters club. They support each other, and will do all necessary to cause as much damage before they leave.

The saddest thing is that even the United States no longer has moral ground to interfere. George Bush and his horrendous legacy has made sure of it.

Even though I am not as acquainted with the politics of Iran, I only hope that the people of Iran have a greater will and endurance than the people of the Americas, and given their success 30 years ago, perhaps they’ll have a better chance to break this ominous pattern. Otherwise, the Obama administration is certain of having its cup of international challenges, runneth over. I’m just glad the Clintons are in his team.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

The Light of Hope for Leadership via Global Consensus Flickers

Published: 13 June 2009 10:12 PM UTCPosted in: Global
The Light of Hope for Leadership via Global Consensus Flickers

Cyberspace has done the wonderful thing of making the world a local cyber-neighborhood, where conversations of all origins and topics occur and many of us have learned to care more often about what goes on beyond our borders.

On December of 2007 I wrote my first political post here at MariaNYC.com, moved by an unfortunate trifecta of bad news for women in politics around the world. Since I lost that article due to computer malfunctions, here and in cyberspace, I will summarize it by saying that in that sad December 27th of 2007 three things had occurred, which made me lose hope in humanity and the future of women in leading roles.

  1. The media’s constant beating and negative portrayal of Hillary Clinton, as she was running her primary against all the other democratic contenders at the time. And even in my beloved CNN, the portrayal was mainly negative. It bothered me because here was the first woman getting this far in a key presidential contest, and was fighting –what I sensed at a womanly level to be–common subconscious sexism.
  2. Added to that was the recent publication at the time, of photos showing one of my favorite all-time former presidential contenders at the international level, who during her brave campaign in Colombia, had been ruthlessly captured by the FARC, still in captivity 6 years later, looking sad and emaciated. It broke my heart to see Ingrid Betancourt, such a dynamic, progressive woman, reduced by nameless, worthless excuses for human beings, to just bones, skin and no spirit.
  3. The drop that spilled the cup in my despondence was the news that the phenomenal Benazir Bhutto had shamelessly been assassinated in Pakistan.

I remember the title of that first post being, “What the Hell is Going On?”. I questioned at the time the humanity subconscious in trying to suppress these up and coming female leaders in a contentious world stage. Of course I ended my article also pointing at the flickering light of hope that existed in knowing that Angela Merkel in Germany,
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf in Liberia, Michelle Bachelet in Chile and Cristina Fernández de Kirchner in Argentina were proof that it was worth holding on to hope that there will be a better balance of women and men in power in global politics. Yet, I have to face the fact that the balance is by far still yet to be achieved.

I was a bit slow coming around to supporting then candidate Obama, at the time fresh out of a bloody primary. As a Hillary supporter I ended up weighing my options and concluding that –despite the feminine presence at the bottom of the Republican ticket–there was no other way than to support the Democrat ticket on the final round of the election. And it was a worthwhile choice. Even though my initial choice for candidate did not win the primaries, watching Mr. Obama, as President, work hard at keeping his promises and not losing his common touch with those who put him in office, I’ve become a huge admirer of his. Listening to his speeches and watching the reaction of people, my own among those, has helped me overcome my initial despondence about the events of December 2007 and have hope for a more balanced mindset in world leadership. God knows how much we need it.

Dr. Deepak Chopra talked about this need for balance of power in the world stage with Larry King, a couple of weekends ago. He said that men have been in power too long –as a result we have seen wars and the avarice and aggressive gambling that went on to cause the economy to falter. He said that it is time that women take leading roles too, because women tend to look for consensus, as compared to the aggressivity of many male leaders who tend to gamble what they have, have an aggressive and competitive stance and tend to push their agenda on others, shunning the spirit of cooperation on behalf of world peace for their own advancement and reputation. And I agree with him! But I don’t think it is necessarily about our physical gender differences as much as it is about our mental attitudes, which unfortunately tend to be associated with male or female mindsets. Of course, in general it tends to be that way, but there are many exceptions to that rule. Sarah Palin is a perfect example of that exception. If she ever made it to the world stage as a leader, God help us! So, being a woman is not necessarily a guarantee that you’ll be a consensus maker. But in general, it tends to be the case, just like it tends to be true of many older and wiser men.

Although Hillary didn’t make it to the White House, Mr. Obama has proven to be the kind of leader Dr. Chopra said the world needs right now.

Obama may not be a female leader, but in all the “man” he is, he’s not on testosterone overload. He’s not a warmonger, nor the cowboy “my-way-or-the-highway” type. He is more sophisticated than that and he’s serious about world peace. I love his mindset, and his gender doesn’t seem to define his attitudes, for the most part. We needed someone like that to change the tone of the prior testosterone-overloaded macho administration that has caused so much damage in the cause of world peace. Obama is a great representation of this new type of leader. So having someone like him in power put me at ease that we wouldn’t be entering the world stage again with our fists up, ready for another fight. I truly saw the shift in the feedback from the leaders of countries that have normally been anti-US. After Mr. Obama’s election win, comments from the likes of Chavez, Cuba’s Fidel Castro and his brother, and even Iran’s president, began to signal a new tone.

Right around the same time there was a slight glimmer of hope for another leader who believes in consensus. In Israel the Kadima party held a leadership vote, won by Tzipi Livni, one of the nation’s leading voices for the two-state solution. In Israel she has earned a reputation as honest, clean, and sticking to her principles, but her chances were shut down. How it went down, it’s summarized in the excerpt below:

While election results gave Kadima the most seats in the Knesset, parties to the right in Israel’s political spectrum gained enough seats that a coalition government under Kadima leadership was unlikely. As a result, Israeli president Shimon Peres asked Netanyahu and [his party] Likud (which received one less seat than Kadima in the elections) to form a government; this is the first time in Israel’s history that the party with the most seats was not asked to govern.

(Quote from Wikipedia, which used as sources The International Herald Tribune and The Associated Press, 02/20/09.)

Netanyahu is a hard liner who does not believe in the two-state solution and as per The Washington Post’s article, believes the “U.S. backed peace talks a waste of time”. Many will point to inane excuses for this strange turn of affairs where this woman leader, who believes in consensus, despite being voted in the majority, was unable to obtain her deserved position, which instead was given to a hard-liner, an old guy with last century’s political mindset, who is certainly not likely to help the Middle East peace process with the Palestinians.

Netanyahu’s right-wing hard-line coalition reminds me of the right-wing hardliners here in the US, which were in charge during the past 8 years and had a huge hand on the spiraling down of world peace into the dangerous levels it is today. The damage caused by the misguided conduct of the Bush/Cheney administration, many agree have caused formerly friendly countries to stop supporting the US –many in Latin America– and we all agree it cannot be overturned overnight.

Those who rose to power in the midst of the discontent with the US foreign policy are doing all possible to hang on to it today, legitimally or not. Chavez got “re-elected”, to complete his 10th year in office, despite protests and contests of the “election results”. Correa in Ecuador –Chavez’ little “pup”–not only got “re-elected” this year, but through a misleading referendum for a new constitution–rumored to have been authored in Venezuela– under the promise of more jobs, land for the poor, better healthcare and social security, buried a clause that secured his “presidency” for terms longer than the two-allotted terms, with Nicaragua and Bolivia going down the same path.

Watching Obama in the world stage in Cairo and seeing the results of the Lebanese elections soon after, lean their newly elected leadership pro-west and defeat the dangerous hardliners, made me hopeful, that perhaps there would be a turn around towards overall world peace. The events that unfolded on the days leading to the Iranian election yesterday, made many of us feel even more hopeful, that despite the growing threat of North Korea, Al Qaeda and the extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Iran could come around and become an important ally in the troubled Middle East. I even had hoped that the lives of thousands of women in Iran would be improved under the modern progressive thinker Mousavi seems to be.

I was patiently watching the events of the election, ready to unfold an article –after a likely Mohadinejad defeat– about a new more hopeful era, where the beacon of cooperation and mutual respect among nations had begun to lead us into world peace. The election of Mousavi in Iran would have meant a total rejection of another right-wing hardliner, a war monger like Bush and Cheney, aligned with the religious right, who only cares to secure his own agenda without truly caring for the citizens nor the rest of the world.

To my dismay, the news today has been a setback to the hope of many. I remember well how sad, surprised and hopeless I felt for the people –and the women– of Pakistan when Benazir Bhutto was assassinated. My feeling is similar today in regards to the results of the Iranian elections. As many of you know I am not from the Middle East, yet as a New Yorker with Latin American roots, I consider myself a citizen of the world and so I carefully follow world affairs, because it’s no surprise that sooner or later world events affect us all, no matter what corner of the world.

What’s more, as a woman I follow the plight of other women around the world. I cheer for those who are bold enough to take on political leadership roles, despite the odds, and hope for their success. Like the wise Dr. Chopra, I agree that there is a need for a more balanced mentality in world leadership, and the feminine mentality can bring that balance. I also feel for the sad situation of so many women around the world, who are still powerless, in the lowly status of second-class citizens, who in many occasions are even treated as property. There is still a long way to go for this other half of the world.

I was hoping to write a more cheerful post today, pointing at what could have been an election that clearly showed the will of the people and one more positive step to help women in that corner of the world. Today’s fraudulent “re-election” of the right-wing sponsored, hardliner Ahmadinejad in Iran is a blow and a mockery of the concept of democracy.

Unfortunately this is not new, yet it never ceases to surprise me. And as much as I wanted to write about the presidency of Mr. Obama, having lit a bright beacon of hope, leading the world up the higher road of peace and cooperation, I can only say that at best, right now the light of hope, for world peace, international good will, and the cause of women around the world, is flickering, yet it remains alive, for I believe he’s not the only one working hard out there looking to make a positive difference.

Tomorrow is a new day, and as much as I didn’t think I’d get through after the John Kerry defeat in 2006, life will go on for most of us, and we can only hope for a better day, for the emergence of enlightened leaders and better balance in the mindset of the world stage, where women can gain the overdue and well-deserved respectful place. Having Mr. Obama at the White House remains a hopeful beginning. I can only hope others like him will follow sooner rather than later, for there seems to be too many bad guys with selfish and backward agendas out there.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Republicans Shun the Will of the Voters Once Again

Published: 09 June 2009 6:27 PM UTCPosted in: Local - NYC
Republicans Shun the Will of the Voters Once Again

I wonder if New Yorkers care at all over what happened yesterday in the NY State Senate.

Look, I know and understand well that we are all too busy to pay attention to what goes on in Albany. In truth, I will confess I had not been paying attention myself. As a New Yorker living in this wonderful city, I have the silly mindset that NYC is the center of the universe. Of course I know it isn’t. But my point being, many of us live our lives not caring much about what goes on outside of the 5 boroughs.

Watching the local news last night, however, I was appalled to learn that the local Republicans in the NYS Senate are up to their dirty Republican tricks. According to the NY Times, Republicans had been the majority in the NYS Senate, until this past November when the Democrats were voted back in power, understandably so. But of course, the Republicans being, well, Republicans, couldn’t accept the WILL OF THE PEOPLE, who had clearly put the Democrats in charge. Of course no, the will of the people means nothing to these power-hungry, self-serving politicians.

They went around the voters and staged a coup in the Senate yesterday, gaining a new “majority” by luring two wayward Democrats with shady records. The first is the famous Mr. Monserrate from Queens, recently indicted of stabbing his partner, and –as per the Daily News– caught on video dragging her from his apartment– and the other, the famous Mr. Espada, who, according to the NY Times, is under investigation for tax issues. I wonder what made the Republicans select these two for their newly gained “bipartisan majority”. Let me guess. The Republicans must have thought, “Hey! These guys are crooked enough. They qualify to join us and will have no problem being lured in!”

I am furious. As a New Yorker I believe these two should be voted out of office in the next election, for they betrayed the will of their electorate, who wanted a Democratic majority. They have betrayed their constituents by switching allegiances. The Democrats had an agenda –which included giving tenants more rights, strengthening abortion rights and the legalization of same sex marriage, very important and controversial issues– which had a better chance in Democrat hands.

Of course, voting Espada and Monserrate out of office in the next election would be too late. By then, no doubt, the results of their actions would have had their repercussions, and without a doubt, will be irreparable and irreversible.

As New Yorkers, we need to unite and protest the betrayal of Monserrate and Espada. We should demand their resignation or removal. There are things at stake that will have no chance of passing under Republican control. In other words, the same BS we have been dealing with, all this time from the NYS senate, which for the past decades has been under Republican control, will continue, as we have fallen sleep at the wheel and remain oblivious to what is happening in Albany. I know we’ll start caring when it is too late and legislation that affect us negatively, enacted by a self-interest ruling party such as the Republicans, is passed, and then it’ll be too late to do anything.

If you are a New Yorker and care about issues that Democrats care about, call or contact the offices of Monserrate and Espada and tell them how you feel about their betrayal. (Click on the links.) If I were you I’d demand their resignation. If you’re more politically active than me, is there a way we can start a campaign to get them out?

According to the NY Times, Espada, which is now “president” of the senate, is next in line to become governor should something happen to Patterson. And this is the guy that is under investigation for tax evasion?

Is there something we can do?

I understand both of these guys are considered “powerful” in their counties, so if anything happens to me, you know who’s behind it. LOL!!!

Seriously, if there is anything that can be done, it needs to be done now. I know very little about NYS politics, I will admit it, but what I find appalling is the Republicans getting away with such shenanigans, and all of us remaining oblivious to it. They are counting on it. They can’t get away with it. It was not the will of the voters.

I just googled the situation and found that the NY Daily News covered this and had a poll on the situation. The majority –as of this evening– think Espada and Monserrate are, to quote the Daily News: “Traitors and backstabbers who should lose their seats.”

I’m glad to see I’m not the only one feeling this way. The question is, what can we do about this betrayal NOW. Anyone with any good ideas, please feel free to reply.

UPDATE: Jade, one of our readers just suggested we contact the Queens and Bronx Democratic County Committees. Thanks Jade!

1. Queens County Democratic Committee: I couldn’t find an url, so, here is the phone number: (718) 268-5100 and address: 7250 Austin St, Forest Hills, NY 11375-5355. They link to a generic Democratic site: http://www.democrats.org/contact.html

2. Bronx County Democratic Committee: OK. These guys seem better organized. Here is their webpage which has all the relevant info: http://www.bronxdemocrat.org/

For daily tidbits of this “opinionated” New Yorker, you can follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/MariaNYC

Photo credit: NY Times

For the NY Times source article that originated this commentary, click here. Or copy and paste the link below.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/09/nyregion/09switch.html

For tomorrow’s article follow-up on this topic, click here or copy and paste the link below.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/nyregion/10switchsub.html

Yes, I am an avid follower of the NY Times and CNN.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

The Bullies and the Pulpit Against Judge Sotomayor

Published: 07 June 2009 8:39 PM UTCPosted in: National
The Bullies and the Pulpit Against Judge Sotomayor

And so it has begun.

Just as I stated in my last post celebrating President Obama’s nomination of Judge Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, the witch hunt would begin as soon as the news were out.

The usual cast of characters has shown up to lead the hunt: Gingrich & Limbaugh, your extreme right wing purists, who believe the party is one that does not include those who are different or who disagree with them. And have you noticed they are both white men?

Yet, there is one other culprit which does surprise me, and perhaps it shouldn’t, since I saw the same type of “coverage” when Hillary Clinton ran for president, and that is the media. I am not speaking about one specific channel, since it is everywhere you turn. Too often I hear them quote the famous “Wise Latina” lines out of context, ignoring the rest of that speech.

What kind of journalism is that?

No doubt, one that attracts more viewers and readers.

And it makes me wonder. Why is it so much easier to pick on the faults of female public figures, as compared to their male counterparts? And why does the media go into a frenzy, playing right into it?

I will have to give credit to CNN though, for making the effort to put the infamous quote within the context of the entire speech. I have seen Soledad O’Brien and Don Lemon actually go in the air and read the entire paragraph surrounding it. Once you hear where it comes from, you can judge for yourself.

I happen to agree that it is our experiences that shape us. It is a fact that white men who are the majority in power, heads of companies, politicians, have been running the world for centuries. So of course she chose white men as an example that even though they are in power, it did not make them necessarily better qualified. She said what she said. But can we look at her record? What do her multiple rulings say about how she handles herself as a judge? Because in truth, it doesn’t matter what you believe in if you apply the rule of law. However, it is comforting to know that she would also have a better understanding of the plight non-white males face. But if you look at her record, I doubt they will find she allowed her ability to empathize hamper her decisions as a judge. It is so easy to paint in black and white what should be treated as a complex multifaceted issue.

As of the past few days, I’m not sure who has discovered that she has not only used the “wise latina” speech once but a couple of times. And now the hunt has been revived. Gingrich, who called her a racist on Twitter last week and then retracted his statement, went on the air today to “reshape” his attacks by calling her mediocre as a judge and that because of her statements, that one single point, she should be disqualified.

There is a saying that states people in glass houses should not be throwing stones. And this guy is obviously unaware of that. Not only does he live in a glass house, but he has quite a few skeletons in his closet. Check it out by clicking here. But my words today are not about him. However, there is a point to be made about Gingrich because he is looking to run for president and therefore has appointed himself to lead the “moral” charge against judge Sotomayor. And the public needs to be reminded that this guy has no business in this issue, nor any credibility to stand and point his self righteous finger. Gingrich is a mean school yard type of bully. He is irrelevant to this nomination, yet I don’t understand why is he getting any coverage. He’s not even an elected official who’s actually going to vote for the nominee!

I am really concerned that the media is giving him a platform to spread his lies and misguided “opinions”.

The man has such little credibility? Isn’t there anyone else out there who can speak on the subject with some authority?

Besides having been Speaker of the House and being outsted in the midst of his adulterous scandal, here are some spots of this leopard:

1. Adulterous

2. Draft dodger

3. Dead beat dad

4. He doesn’t live up to his own talk of “Family values” (According to realchange.org, he pressed his first wife to sign divorce papers while she was still in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery because to quote him: “She isn’t young enough or pretty enough to be the President’s wife.”) Such model of vanity and insensitivity!

5. An elected official who bounced 22 checks during his time in congress.

Check out the sources here: http://www.realchange.org/gingrich.htm

If Sonia Sotomayor would have done one of those things, they would have had her head.

Despite her impeccable record, they had to blow something out of proportion, and have the media play along. I don’t get it why the media allows these characters with so many skeletons in their closet lead the charge against someone with such a great record. It seems that such few journalists seek to find the facts and truth. Instead, they give Gingrich so much respect, and a spot on the Sunday talk shows. Are they that desperate for ratings?

Sure! There is a first amendment guaranteeing his right to blow hot air, but seriously people, what kind of media channel would have enough credibility to have this guy on? He’s the equivalent of the tabloids. Quoting him with any credibility would be the equivalent of quoting the National Enquirer.

Let’s follow the lead of the more level-headed leaders, Democrats and Republicans alike, who are looking to review Sonia Sotomayor’s record, her decisions, her accomplishments, who anyone would agree, speak more than her own words.

So, I’d like to ask the world today, don’t listen to the hype. It’s all a distraction from Sonia Sotomayor’s actual accomplishments.

The bullies are out in full force looking to intimidate and frighten people into thinking judge Sotomayor is a “scary Latina” who is only going to rule in favor of her own. These are the same people who used to run around claiming Obama is the same as Osama. And unfortunately, there is a small segment of the population who is glib enough to believe it.

There will be a minority who will dislike her for the reasons above, or simply because they are afraid of anyone who looks or sounds different. But I hope the press is smart enough not to continue giving them a national platform, from which to continue their attacks.

After all, think about it, if that is the worst thing they can come up with, about Sonia Sotomayor, then she should be confirmed. After all, who doesn’t remember the Republican nominee Clarence Thomas, tainted by a sex scandal. They still rammed him through.

I only could hope there are more reporters like Soledad O’Brien or Don Lemon, who want to make sure all the facts are out there for people to judge for themselves, and not just the sensationalist line designed to influence and taint opinion even though it’s out of context.

But since that is not happening, I encourage you to check out the White House website, which has published all the necessary information on Judge Sotomayor and president Obama’s reasoning behind his nomination. Get the facts from the source and judge for yourself by clicking here or copy and paste into your browser the link below:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/Sotomayor/

And on that topic, here is the definition of Yellow Journalism, as found in Wikipedia. You tell me who does it remind you of.

Yellow journalism is a type of journalism that downplays legitimate news in favor of eye-catching headlines that sell more newspapers. It may feature exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering, sensationalism, or unprofessional practices by news media organizations or journalists…. the practice of over-dramatizing events.

For more on this quote, click on this link, or copy and paste into your browser, the link below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism

Photo Credit: NY Times – Click here for related article or copy and paste into your browser the link below:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/03/us/politics/03judge.html?_r=1

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Obama’s Cairo speech gives us all hope

Published: 07 June 2009 3:28 PM UTCPosted in: Global
Obama’s Cairo speech gives us all hope

This is a re-write of an article written shortly after Obama’s speech. Given that I wrote it still in awe, I forgot to back it up. When I lost the data of my site this past Friday, I am seeing myself forced to re-write about certain events that are worthy of comment. Obama’s speech in Cairo is one of those, one that is still being discussed, specially today on the Sunday talks.

No doubt, Mr. Obama is the ultimate statesman, a gifted speaker, and he is indeed an American treasure, which we should all be proud of. His speech, peppered with so many touching moments, addressing sore points and wounds, long open and unhealed, no doubt marked a new beginning between the USA and the Islamic world. This jaded New Yorker couldn’t help but feel hopeful that his tone, his words will inspire a new wave of cooperation and goodwill among the majority of people, here in the US and in the Muslim world.

Of course there will always be the plethora of detractors, here and over there, who relish and benefit from war, and profit by incentivizing disdain for our multinational differences. Unfortunately many of these detractors are in leadership positions and will be leading in thought. But president Obama, with his new tone and attitude is taking away one reason these leaders could successfully persuade their followers to go down the path of hate.

Many are saying that Obama shouldn’t be apologizing. But let me address that here, because I believe many of us living in the USA would agree with me. Obama is not going out there, hat in hand, apologizing. What he is doing is changing the tone, from the negative bullyish tone of the former administration, which we all know has caused so much damage to our standing around the world, to one more conciliatory. And he is doing it from a position of strength. Isn’t that what the best statesmen do?

Of course the bullies are going to say that anything that does not mirror their behavior equals apologizing. They see diplomacy as a weakness. They believe in settling things with fists, threats and brawn. They are the very people who are prone to use their power for selfish, short-sighted ends, instead of putting it to the service of the people who elected them. I’m not only talking about those here, but also the bullies over there.

Obama comes across as someone who doesn’t forget the people who elected him. His tone and diplomacy are daring and inspiring. So, when we hear speeches of hate, thinly disguised in the words of the extremist leaders (again, here and over there), we can think of Obama’s words and know we have a committed world leader who has the best of intentions in his decisions. He sounded sincere, worldly, aware of our differences and our commonalities, and ready to lead us into a more desirable direction, regardless of our difference in views and beliefs.

Though normally I’m very skeptical of speeches, even of Obama’s past speeches, I was inspired by this one, and happy to feel that I was part of history, having watched it live. No doubt his words in Cairo will likely mark the beginning of new hope for not just the USA, but others out there whose voices and sentiment were lost in the sounds of war and greed.

Thank you Mr. Obama. You represent us well, at least the majority of us here, regardless of cultural backgrounds. You are a true leader of the new century, a peacemaker.

Links:

To view a video of the speech, alongside the text, visit the NY Times page by clicking here, or copy and paste into your browser the link below:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/06/02/us/politics/200900604_OBAMA_CAIRO.html

Photo credit: NY Times

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Ahh! Technology, technology!

Published: 05 June 2009 7:10 PM UTCPosted in: Technology
Ahh! Technology, technology!

Dear readers, I am sorry to say that due to some technical issues I have lost most of my previous articles. Thankfully there weren’t that many, perhaps 10 or so since the Spring began. I’d like to think they were juicy enough to keep you coming back. My goal was to share ideas, opinions and entertain you in the process, no doubt.

So, after dealing with the loss of that content, I’m starting anew, again. And tonight I am selecting, instead of my typical political issue, technology as my topic.

It’s Friday night, 8:38PM and here I am still at my desk. Had my site not crashed, I think it’d be doing something else perhaps more social. But given that I’m committed to this, I am still here.

Technology, is supposed to bring us together, and it has done a great job doing so. For many of us who are miles away from each other, the wonders of technology can actually help us stay close without feeling so apart. Texting, Twitting, Skyping, social networks such as Facebook, LinkedIn, MySpace are a sure way of keeping us connected.

As much as I love that about technology, there are moments like these when I just want to throw my keyboard out the window. But I like my keyboard, my beautiful keyboard, too much to do it.

There is also the issue of being spammed by strangers. Often it happens, here in this blog, Craigslist, Twitter. Anonymity enables those ill-intentioned or money-motivated to shamelesly trick the less experienced into downloading malicious code causing problems. My brother said it this morning, the Internet it’s a wild west. There is really no one out there to police what goes on.

I have been spammed in CL, spammed here, spammed in Twitter. Yet, despite those –that I consider minor– headaches, I keep coming back for more, because I love connecting with those of you out there, who like me, are well-intentioned, who enjoy sharing your thoughts, ideas, news, opinions.

So, as much as technology at times can cause us headaches, no doubt can help us connect better. So despite the “wild west” it is in cyber space, despite my site crashing and having to start from scratch tonight, a Friday night, I am here, committed to reach out and connect with those of you who make it all worth it.

I have some old articles that I did save, which I will re-publish in this new version, but everything else will be new. So,

I thank you for hanging in there, and for coming back.

Feel free to continue leaving your comments. You know how much I enjoy hearing from you.

To a fresh start tonight.

Cheers!

MariaNYC

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post