The Fallout From The Unnecessary Iraq War Still Going...
Yes, there are two Americas’ Virginia, they exist as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist. One tolerant and broadminded, the other intolerant and narrow-minded! Sincerely, thinkingblue, from the TOLERANT AND BROADMINDED USA PS: Joe (You Lie) Wilson, et al reside in the other America!
EXCERPT from: Poor in the Land of PlentySasha Abramsky’s ‘American Way of Poverty’
“The American Way of Poverty.” Abramsky, a freelance journalist who has written for The Nation, The Atlantic and other publications, regards inequality “as a social control mechanism” supported by financial interests’ belief in “the desirability of oligarchy.” He endorses the notion, popular on the left, that poverty is not just a glitch but a feature of the American system, “a corrosive brew,” he writes, “capable of eating away at the underpinnings of democratic life itself.”
The absence of a strong movement for change is striking, especially given the diversity Abramsky finds as he maps the landscape of poverty. “There are people with no high school education who are poor,” he writes, “but there are also university graduates on food bank lines. There are people who are poor because they have made bad choices, gotten addicted to drugs, burned bridges with friends and family — and then there are people who have never taken a drug in their lives, who have huge social networks, and who still can’t make ends meet.”
The destitute include those “who have never held down a job, and others who hold down multiple, but always low-paying, jobs, frequently for some of the most powerful corporations on earth.” There are the chronically poor — “children whose only hot meals are what they are given at school” — and the newly poor who have lost the middle-class comfort of “huge suburban houses and expensive cars.”
More Here: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/22/books/review/
sasha-abramskys-american-way-of-poverty.html?sasha-abramskys-american-way-of-poverty.html?
Playing into the hands of Hamas
Israel and Hamas are not equals on the battlefield - not at all, clearly - and when the power to harm or control others is this uneven, it is meaningless to speak about moral symmetry. But as the current onslaught in Gaza unfolds, it is sadly evident that both sides are continuing to respond to real provocations in ways that are not morally right, or even politically smart.
If Hamas thought that lobbing missiles into Israeli civilian neighborhoods was a decent or proportionate response to the grim realities of the occupation, they were wrong. On the other hand, if Israel thinks it can bludgeon the Palestinians into political surrender, or get Hamas - or the Palestinian community at large, for that matter - to acquiesce to military occupation then it, too, is wrong.
There is no military solution to this conflict. Until both sides fully grasp this, the world can expect only continuing violence and vendetta, with civilians on both sides paying the price for leaders who - because of pressure, ambition or hubris - feel that they must do the most damage, fire the last shot or make the most credible threat. Indeed, it is sad, and repellent, to hear military correspondents speak of "teaching a lesson," "increasing pressure," "making a statement," achieving "deterrence," when those they are reporting on are really trying to control the news cycle, or win arguable (and in any case temporary) psychological advantage, by killing, or accepting the deaths of, people at random on the other side.More Here: http://www.haaretz.com/playing into the hands of hamas