Revering Reagan.

Today's print version of the Telegram & Gazette featured a rather ballsy 'opinion' piece by Michael Reagan.  (I can't find the link for the piece on the website- apparently you only get the misfortune of reading Michael Reagan if you pay for home delivery.  Reagan isn't listed in their Syndicated Columnist list on the Opinion Page.)

Michael Reagan has made a career out of revering his adopted father, and I'm pretty sure if he was the adopted son of Gerald Ford, he wouldn't have much of a career in political 'journalism.'  He had a few whoppers in his piece, including the title, Ronald Reagan; Our First Black President?  He believes that Ronald Reagan was our first 'black' president, but he states:

"Two decades before the election of Barack Obama, novelist Toni Morrison dubbed Bill Clinton "our first black President." She even said that Clinton was "blacker than any actual black person who could ever be elected in our children’s lifetime."  Well, I could make an even stronger case for my father, Ronald Reagan, as "our first black President."—but I won't make that claim. I don't want to diminish the justifiable pride African-Americans take in having a President who is genetically and culturally black. Our first black President is Barack Obama."

-----

Hyperbole like this is meaningless and omnipresent in Michael Reagan's articles, and is the reason I usually don't read his work.  It was Michael Reagan's manipulation of the unemployment statistics and whitewashing of Ronald Reagan's actual record on race relations that caught my attention.

"Ronald Reagan was a far better friend to black Americans than Barack Obama has been. Just compare the Reagan and Obama records. Under Obama, black unemployment rose from 12.6 percent in January 2009 to 16.0 percent today. This means that black unemployment has increased by more than one-fourth since Obama took office.   And the Reagan record? African-American columnist Joseph Perkins has studied the effects of Reaganomics on black America. He found that, after the Reagan tax cuts gained traction, African-American unemployment fell from 19.5 percent in 1983 to 11.4 percent in 1989. Black-owned businesses saw income rise from $12.4 billion in 1982 to $18.1 billion in 1987—an annual average growth rate of 7.9 percent. The black middle class expanded by one-third during the Reagan years, from 3.6 million to 4.8 million."

Michael Reagan uses the last six years of economic data during the Reagan Administration to make his case, and contrasts Reagan's final six years with the first two years of the Obama Administration, which is a terrible comparison, as Mediamatters.org points out.

 (This chart and a longer view of unemployment rates by race can be found here.)

-----

Michael Reagan proudly points out that:

"In a White House Rose Garden ceremony in 1983, President Ronald Reagan signed a bill honoring Dr. King with a federal holiday on the third Monday of January every year."

He neglects to mention his stepfather's initial opposition to the holiday that vanished in the face of overwhelming support for a national holiday.  Michael Reagan is also strangely silent on his stepfather's belief in State's Rights, which was widely used as a code word for supporting Jim Crow and segregation.

-----

If it isn't Glenn Beck co-opting Dr. King's legacy, it's Michael Reagan misrepresenting his stepfather's legacy for political gain, and it only works if we don't know our history.  Perhaps this article was a nod to the Telegram & Gazette's past associations with the John Birch Society.  Maybe it was just filler for a paper that has consistently cut back on local content and actual employees in their building producing a local paper.  Either way, shame on the Telegram & Gazette for printing such revisionist garbage.

At least they didn't say crumbling mill town....

Commonwealth Magazine has an in depth piece on the WinnCompanies' involvement in campaign donations and the company's success at securing tax credits and low interest public loans.  We've had quite a debate in this city regarding affordable housing projects, and while I love the idea of affordable housing, this sort of cozy relationship makes me very uncomfortable.  Is there a better way to create affordable housing without questionable campaign contributions and public money?

Here's the money quote about Worcester's Canal Lofts:

"In downtown Worcester, sitting in the shadow of Interstate 290, there’s an old mill building that has seen better days. A century ago, when Worcester was an industrial hub, the four-story brick complex was an envelope factory. That business faded in the 1970s, and eventually a furniture manufacturer moved in. When the property hit the market a few years ago, two-thirds of the Water Street mill’s square footage sat idle, and several windows had been boarded up. The mill had its location working for it, though. It was a quick walk from Worcester’s train station, and it stood in a neighborhood city officials were trying to fill with new restaurants and residences. The WinnCompanies saw potential, put the mill under agreement, and got the site permitted for the construction of 64 apartments. In June, Winn paid $2 million for the building and a parking lot across the street. The Canal Lofts, as Winn dubbed the project, illustrates the dramatic impact various pools of public subsidies have on Winn’s development projects. Half of the project’s apartments will be set aside as affordable housing units. Because affordable housing restrictions necessarily limit developers’ potential profits, federal and state policy­makers have put a number of subsidies in play to encourage affordable development. The Canal Lofts development is a $25.3 million project. Winn is borrowing $16.3 million from a pair of banks, and another $3.3 million in long-term, low-to-no-interest affordable housing loans from various public agencies. That would leave the developer on the hook for the remaining $5.7 million in development costs. But at Canal Lofts, Winn is tapping $2.2 million in state historic tax credits, $2.5 million in state low-income housing tax credits, and another $711,000 in federal low-income housing tax credits. Taken together, the credits lower the amount of cash Winn has to put into the development from $5.7 million to $314,000."

(D) None of the Above.

Today's T&G Poll (01/14/11) is a little biased, don't you think?

 Where's the fourth option?  Something along the lines of 'I'm not pleased with his performance' would be nice for those of us who don't fall into any of the T&G's pre-fabricated categories.

-----

After my post on 01/05/11 regarding Grace-Marie Turner's As I See It, I sent an email to Bruce Gaultney (Publisher), Leah Lamson (News Editor) and Chris Sinacola (Editorial Editor) registering my displeasure with their inability to properly identify Ms. Turner's connections to the for-profit health care industry.

None of them have bothered to respond.  Thanks for ignoring me!

New politics and old policies.

The Washington Post has an interesting piece on the intersection of Tea Party politics and school policy.  Desegregation plans, whether by race or by economics, require educators and elected officials to create plans that keep students from spending too much time on buses or concentrate the most challenging students in low performing schools.

"Over the years, both Republican and Democratic school boards supported the system. A study of 2007 graduation rates by EdWeek magazine ranked Wake County 17th among the nation's 50 largest districts, with a rate of 64 percent, just below Virginia's Prince William County. While most students posted gains in state reading and math tests last year - more than three-quarters passed - the stubborn achievement gap that separates minority students from their white peers has persisted, though it has narrowed by some measures. And many parents see benefits beyond test scores."

Using a 'new' political ideology to recreate a system that was showing progress seems counter intuitive.  Radical changes, whether they are influenced by the 'left' or the 'right', need to be thought out, studied, and implemented with the best interests of the students in mind, not the political interests Americans for Prosperity (Sourcewatch.org's profile here).

"Things have not gone smoothly as the new school board has attempted to define its vision for raising student achievement. A preliminary map of new school assignments did not please some of the new majority's own constituents. And critics expressed alarm that the plan would create a handful of high-poverty, racially isolated schools, a scenario that the new majority has begun embracing.  Pope, who is a former state legislator, said he would back extra funding for such schools.  "If we end up with a concentration of students underperforming academically, it may be easier to reach out to them," he said. "Hypothetically, we should consider that as well."

The lesson learned is that you get what you voted for.  Next time, make sure you know who's paying for your candidate's campaigns, because they are the ones who will be influencing your policy.

Breaking in a few Christmas presents.

I went for a hike up and around Newton Hill today on my new snowshoes, and used my new camera to document the results.  I was the only person in the park until the very end of my hike, where I found a few kids snowboarding by the tennis courts.

There were a few cross country ski tracks and snowshoe tracks already made on some trails, which made my afternoon easy, because there is some heavy, deep powder covering a firm base.

The summit was amazing and almost unblemished by human tracks, and the view perfect in all directions.

Nobody was out disc golfing.

I even had a flyover by a Chinook (I think?) that was heading towards Worcester Airport.  I tried to zoom in for a second picture, but I fumbled.

I'll be back tomorrow for more in preparation for my trip to the White Mountains at the end of the month.  I imagine I might need a few aspirin to loosen up tomorrow! 

Good idea, bad idea.

When scary things happen in this country, people rush to react as quickly as possible to threats, real and imagined.  The Arizona shootings have prompted the following ideas:

Bad idea: Peter King (R-NY).  How will banning guns in the presence of a government official prevent any future shootings?  All it will do is add a few more years on the sentence of any would be assassin.

Good idea: Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY).  Making extended magazines illegal would make it more difficult for would be assassins to target spray bullets throughout crowds. 

Bad idea: Robert Brady (D-PA).  A vague ban on threatening speech towards lawmakers?  Laws are already on the books to protect people from verbal assault and threats.

Well said, Jon Stewart:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Arizona Shootings Reaction
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog</a> The Daily Show on Facebook

Perhaps we need to step back, take a deep breath, and stop blaming each other for Jared Lee Loughner's actions.

Fear.

In light of the shootings in Arizona, perhaps we should re-read this T&G article on Police Chief Gemme's interpretation of the 2nd Amendment and the lawsuit he faces from Hector Pineiro.  Mr. Pineiro's family has been the victim of a home invasion, and Mr. Pineiro fears for his safety outside of his Main South office.  His solution is a concealed weapon, which is an invitation to more violence.

"Many things have convinced him of the need for a license to carry a concealed weapon. When leaving his office at night, he said he encounters people involved in criminal activities and is asked for money by others."

Some people would say he hasn't been attacked at his office, and doesn't need a gun.  Others would say he hasn't been attacked....yet.  Either way, making decisions based on perceived threats and fear isn't the best way to live: remember, Mr. Pineiro can't point out a single instance where he was been threatened with violence at his workplace.  Sometimes the bogey man isn't what we imagine him to be.  Either way, everyone needs to remember the whole text of the 2nd Ammendment:

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

It would be unconstitutional for Mr. Pineiro to bear arms without any government limits, and unconstitutional for the government to deny him his right to bear arms.  That sound exactly like Police Chief Gemme's solution to Mr. Pineiro's request.

-----

A few more thoughts about fear:

-Here's a great chart about things that our news media wants us to be scared of.  Be sure to toggle between total deaths vs. fear (bottom right corner).

-Glenn Greenwald has an interesting piece on governmental policies, WikiLeaks, personal freedom, and fear.