Category: Current Affairs
Support for Obama Among Jewish (and Other) Religious Voters is High
Wow. One of my twitter feeds just posted this link: Jews Unwavering in Support for Obama. It's a Jerusalem Post story but citing a Gallup poll, reputable and usually more conservative than other top-level pollsters.
Here are the numbers:
Approval through Obama's first 100 days in office
79% of Jews voted for Obama
79% of Jews
85% of Muslims
73% of nonreligious
96% of liberal Jews
77% of “moderate” Jews
45% of conservative Jews w/exactly 45% disapproving
CHRISTIANS:
67% of Catholics favored Obama
58% of Protestants
45% of Mormons
And here's Gallup's graphic of the entire breakdown:
Definitely interesting.
RERUN – A GREAT REPUBLICAN: Farewell to Jack Kemp, a Fine Gentleman
This good looking guy, football star of the early 60’s, is Jack Kemp – congressman, vice-presidential and presidential candidate and a fine man. He died of cancer Saturday at 73, universally respected and, by many, loved. If you read this blog you know that I’m anything but a conservative, so this isn’t a political meditation; it’s an appreciation of a good guy.
When I think of Kemp, whom I met several times during his various campaigns, I see the same picture. It’s Inauguration Weekend for the first George Bush, and there’s a huge youth rally at the National Armory in Washington. I’m there for the Today Show, filming the teenagers practically hanging from the rafters, excited and waiting for the speakers to show up.
There are lots of them, holding forth in various ways about the new administration and all it would do. Finally, Kemp, the soon-to-be Secretary of HUD, Housing and Urban Development, arrived, and gave a sweet, unpretentious talk. Then, football hero that he was, he knew how to handle this young and happy crowd. Producing a football, he drew his arm back, ball in hand, and threw the ball far into the crowd, to enormous applause. It was wonderful.
After his years in the Bush Administration, he continued to act on his values: the need for extra opportunity for those held behind, and for justice. In the years of fierce immigration battles in the 90’s, he opposed California’s cruel anti-immigration Proposition 187, jeopardizing his own political future, and took strong positions on the concept of opportunity for those whose futures seemed bleak. Kemp was an economic conservative and all that that entailed, and also a caring, committed American. He proved it’s possible to be both. I’ve always admired him, and I wanted to say so, and wish him Godspeed. The is a portion of a (long) letter to his (17) grandchildren shortly after the 2008 election:
My first thought last week upon learning that a 47-year-old African-American Democrat had won the presidency was, “Is this a great country or not?”
You may have expected your grandfather to be disappointed that his friend John McCain lost (and I was), but there’s a difference between disappointment over a lost election and the historical perspective of a monumental event in the life of our nation.
Let me explain. First of all, the election was free, fair and transformational, in terms of our democracy and given the history of race relations in our nation.
What do I mean?
Just think, a little over 40 years ago, blacks in America had trouble even voting in our country, much less thinking about running for the highest office in the land.
A little over 40 years ago, in some parts of America, blacks couldn’t eat, sleep or even get a drink of water using facilities available to everyone else in the public sphere.
We are celebrating, this year, the 40th anniversary of our Fair Housing Laws, which helped put an end to the blatant racism and prejudice against blacks in rental housing and homeownership opportunities.
As an old professional football quarterback, in my days there were no black coaches, no black quarterbacks, and certainly no blacks in the front offices of football and other professional sports. For the record, there were great black quarterbacks and coaches — they just weren’t given the opportunity to showcase their talent. And pro-football (and America) was the worse off for it.
I remember quarterbacking the old San Diego Chargers and playing for the AFL championship in Houston. My father sat on the 50-yard line, while my co-captain’s father, who happened to be black, had to sit in a small, roped-off section of the end zone. Today, we can’t imagine the NFL without the amazing contributions of blacks at every level of this great enterprise.
I could go on and on, but just imagine that in the face of all these indignities and deprivations, Dr. Martin Luther King could say 44 years ago, “I have an abiding faith in America and an audacious faith in mankind.” He described his vision for America, even as he and his people were being denied their God-given human rights guaranteed under our Constitution.
You see, real leadership is not just seeing the realities of what we are temporarily faced with, but seeing the possibilities and potential that can be realized by lifting up peoples’ vision of what they can be.
When President-elect Obama quoted Abraham Lincoln on the night of his election, he was acknowledging the transcendent qualities of vision and leadership that are always present, but often overlooked and neglected by pettiness, partisanship and petulance. . . .
My advice for you all is to understand that unity for our nation doesn’t require uniformity or unanimity; it does require putting the good of our people ahead of what’s good for mere political or personal advantage.
Kemp was a fierce economic conservative. AND a true believer in the promise of our country. There is no Republican candidate who offers that kind of moral, ethical and political leadership today. We could really use him.
The End of the Berlin Wall: Twenty Years Ago
This is the Brandenburg Gate in the center of Berlin. The first time I saw it, in 1974, there was a wall built right through it.
Here's a photo of it then, from the Hotel Adlon website. The hotel stood, from 1907 to 1945, when it was decimated by a fire, just to the left of the Gate. It was the stopping place for world leaders and socialites and was rebuilt shortly after the Wall fell.
Because Berlin has such a dramatic history, it was always exciting to be there — maybe more so while the wall remained.
I remember especially coming through Checkpoint Charlie (that's it on the left) on a dark fall day (Americans were allowed to visit for the day after going through this scary border station and having cars and packages searched) and, as we approached the Gate, seeing an old man standing, looking over into the West. In his hands, clasped behind his back, was a rosary. Not so popular in communist East Berlin. I recall thinking immediately "Oh. His daughter is getting married in the West today and he can't go, and he's standing there, thinking about her, praying for her." Berlin in those times lent itself to imagining such things. The drama was palpable.
The first time we went to Berlin after the wall fell, I remember, it was pouring. Oblivious to the weather, we walked back and forth beneath the lovely arches in the now-open gate, kind of giddy at what it meant to the people of Berlin and all those who care about freedom and, I guess, redemption. For despite what happened in Berlin during the war (and we've studied it extensively and spoken both with survivors and those involved in the rebuilding of the Jewish community) the Wall caused immeasurable suffering and was a diabolical slash through the heart of the city and every one of its people.
I've written about Berlin before: from its playgrounds to its grim Communist years. We go there often. It seems to pull us back, its intellectual energy and re-emerging Jewish community irresistible. Once, when we'd taken our kids there while the Wall remained, one son, around 5, bought a stuffed wool pig and told everyone he "got it out of jail."
Here's one last photo – of two buildings: one redone and the other still old and rickety, in the very cool neighborhood of Prenzlauer Berg, which is in the old "East Berlin" and now, last I heard, had the highest childbirth rate in Germany and was home to artists, writers, musicians and fashionably cool people who don't have to work. What you see stands for it all: the struggle to renew, still only partly complete.
The First Hundred Days and the Opposition Has Been Busy (Boy Are We Glad to See Senator Spector Over Here!)
Happy 100th day to the president. It's probably the toughest presidency on record, given the scope of challenges he faces: depression, disintegrating infrastructure, inadequate schools and devastated health care system and now, a plague (well sort of.) But you know all that. What you may not have noticed is that all those Republicans despite their "What? Who? Me?" have been very busy making things harder. I have to thank the great Nerdette, always ahead of the pack, for pointing out the evidence, below.
Politics Online Conference: The Political Speakers – A Summary
For the past two days I've been at this Politics Online Conference here in DC.
It's been around for a few years now, but this one was huge and rich. Among those who spoke: Politicians: Senator Claire McCaskill (MO), Reps. Steve Israel (NY), Cathy Morris Rogers (WA)and Tim Ryan (OH), Secretaries of State Jennifer Brunner (OH) and Debra Bowen (CA). Their panels were about the uses of mostly social media to maintain consistent and two-way contact with their constituents. It's fascinating to realize that when a congressman shows up at an event, constituents "know what books I've been reading from me Facebook page" and stop by to discuss them. Ryan had an interesting take on it: "FDR had the radio, JFK had the television, and Obama has — you." The confluence between the politician and the tool and the times seems to be of utmost importance.
According to all the speakers, these kinds of interaction have radically altered their relationships with voters, and, according to McCaskill, with staff. The communications staff has no control or prior knowledge of her tweets. As she put it, holding up her blackberry "I'm on my own with this thing." Sometimes, apparently, they aren't thrilled with the result.
The other great political panel was, to paraphrase Spencer Tracy in Pat and Mike, "small but choice." Obama Director of Online Media Joe Rospars (on the right) nd McCain eCampaign Director Michael Palmer (on the left) discussed, and disagreed, with a focus on their work online. There was lots of great information, both anecdotal and strategic, but sadly, the overriding element turned out to be the bitterness Palmer still feels about their defeat. It's tough to let go after working that hard, but, as many observed, this seemed beyond that. Even so, it was revealing to hear Rospars, as he often does, attribute their online success as much to "respect for people and treating them like adults" as to any technological parlor tricks. It's actually consistent with the Obama folks when they're on panels or appearing in public events; they never talks about "I" did this or that. They are all very careful to attribute their success to their team. When complimented for that, the response is usually "but it's true!"
To come: A riveting youth vote panel and one on mobile campaigning, and a look at some of the cool but more esoteric events.
OH and if you're wondering why this post is so late, it's because there was no usable wireless at the Reagan Center and the damn Mac Air has no Ethernet plug! How frustrating do you think that was?
Farewell to Judith Krug – and Thanks from All of Us (Readers, Libarians, Kids, Computer Users and Gamers — Yes, Gamers)
You’re looking at a heroine here, a tireless advocate of “freedom to read” and the First Amendment. Her name is Judith Krug, known to many as “Judy” and a brave and wonderful woman. As Director of the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom since it was founded in 1967, she also founded “Banned Books Week” in 1982. That’s how I met her.
I’d done stories before about First Amendment issues and someone gave her my number. She called to tell me that the last week of September, 1982, would be the first ALA Banned Books Week and wouldn’t the Today Show like to cover it? Of course we would. Look at some of the most banned books over the years – here in the US! Surprising at best, eh? They include Harry Potter, Huck Finn, Of Mice and Men, The Catcher in the Rye and Kaffir Boy. Appalled by the list, I remember starting the piece with film of the Nazi book burnings in Berlin. Judy loved it!
In the years since 1982 we repeated the story almost every year — and every year new books joined the list. Not always from the right, either. Some liberal parents challenged Huckleberry Finn as racist, and the other ban efforts came from all over the place! Harry Potter as Satanism, Native Son because it put the death penalty in dispute and the Bible preaches “an eye for an eye,” Wrinkle in Time, Understood Alice and others by Phyllis Reynolds Naylor, Are You There, God? It’s Me, Margaret, The House of Spirits, Slaughterhouse-Five and Lord of the Flies.
But banned books were far from her only concern. As the Chicago Tribute wrote:
Mrs. Krug worked directly with librarians across the country who were engaged in censorship battles. She enlisted allies from fields that are
affected by 1st Amendment attacks such as publishers and journalists,
said Robert Doyle, executive director of the Illinois Library
Association.
“She was concerned about the gamut of expression,
so that people could go to the library and encounter the full
marketplace of ideas,” Doyle said.
Beyond books was her opposition to filters on library computers and her less-noticed championing of free expression in video games. A Game Politics piece includes this:
Judith was instrumental in the fight against video game censorship. She was a forceful advocate for Media Coalition amicus
briefs in the Indianapolis, St. Louis, Illinois, Minnesota, and
California video game cases. It would have been easy for the librarians
to say, “That’s not our battle,” but thankfully that wasn’t Judith’s
temperament.Judith was a fierce believer in the importance of
freedom of expression to our culture and our society and was zealous
defender of the First Amendment. We all have truly benefited from her
passion.
Judy died on April 11th. She leaves a family who will miss her, I’m sure. But she leaves a legacy for the rest of us too, one for which we should be grateful. Anyone who loves to read, who wants to be able to ask a librarian for a special book for a quirky kid, who wants to use the library computer to do research or read off-the-wall news stories, or who just loves to wander in the stacks or online looking for something that never occurred to them, or a special idea or book or website — we’ll miss her too.
Can You Believe We’re at Blogging Boomers 112 Already? Time Flies, Eh?
Thanks to the great Barbara Weibel, you'll find this weeks Blogging Boomers Carnival at Hole in the Donut. She's listed everything from those puzzling moments when you and your long-time companion come up with the same thoughts at the same time, to midlife relationships to stashing unused pharmaceuticals, and a lot more. There's not a week when the carnival isn't interesting, but this one is a really wonderful combination of ideas.
G-L-O-R-I-A! Happy Birthday Gloria Steinem
I have known Gloria Steinem for a very long time. March 25th was her birthday and she is an amazing seventy-five years old! I've admired her since my teens. There used to be a magazine called SHOW, kind of a cross between Vanity Fair and New York Magazine. In 1963, when I was a senior in high school, Gloria published a piece there called "I Was a Playboy Bunny." Describing her three weeks as an "undercover" Bunny, the piece launched her career. I remember saying something half derogatory about it — remember I was 17 — and my mother saying to me "You're just jealous." She was right. What a great job, what an elegant woman, offers from magazines, everything I was determined to have for myself – she'd done it. If she could get out of Toledo, I could get out of Pittsburgh. (I did.)
I've had my eye on her ever since and as she helped to lead all of us out of the wilderness I felt a special ownership since we both attended Smith College. In those years, as I became more involved in what would be called the Second Wave of Feminism, Gloria was a spearhead for most of it. In fact, I once told a colleague of hers, a well-respected writer herself, how much I admired her. Her response "The way you feel about me? That's how I feel about Gloria."
On the tenth anniversary of Ms. Magazine, which Gloria had helped to found, I produced a series for The Today Show . For one segment, a camera crew and I followed her on a day-long trip to Philadelphia to make a speech. That was when I realized that her role was larger, and more personal, than I had understood.
Here's what happened: We got on the Metroliner in Penn Station and a woman came up to us to tell Gloria how she had changed her life. We arrived in Philadelphia and, right in the station, another women did the same. So it was all through the day. At the evening event, she could barely make her way through the room as an endless stream of women approached to thank her, express admiration, just talk to her. Through all of it, woman after woman after woman, she was unfailingly courteous and engaged. Each was the only one she was talking to. None was made to feel out of place or inappropriate. I don't know about you, but that's tough for a public person to do; Gloria has done it for years. In other words, she wasn't leading Feminism, she was being Feminism.
It's been like that ever since. In the public eye or out, hugely famous or less famous, she's always been there to keep the focus where it belongs and carry us further toward equality, and it's always been about all of us, not her. It's been an honor to know her, even a little bit, and to see personally that she's not just a fine leader, she's a fine person. Happy Birthday Gloria (a little bit late). We're lucky to have you.
UPS Pulls Its Ads from O’Reilly: He Deserves It But. . .
I'm torn. Really. Nobody hates Bill O'Reilly and all he stands for more than I do. And when he went after my former colleague Amanda Terkel by sending a producer to prey on her on her vacation, a camera alongside, I was troubled. It's not the news gathering I was trained to do.
On one hand, it was totally unethical to follow a writer around and harass her for comments made about an anchorman. It's bizarre and a ridiculous waste of editorial resources, especially when the world of journalism is in such economic chaos. Chasing her down the street, peppering her with questions, when no one ever asked her for an interview she probably would have granted – it's all disgusting.
On the other hand, when we push advertisers to withdraw their ads from a show, we are doing something we ourselves opposed during the time of great TV from Norman Lear to Stephen Bochco to Diane English, among others. All in the Family, Hill Street Blues, Murphy Brown – they were among many fine, pioneering programs with a progressive bent that faced threats from major evangelical and other religious and political organizations like the Family Research Council. Their weapon every time was a threat to advertisers to remove their ads from these and other programs, or face boycotts. Of course there were no blogs in those days so it was tougher to organize but these people were scary and sometimes effective. We always defended free speech. Those shows deserved protection because they aired on licensed public airways. O'Reilly airs on cable – people pay to watch it so maybe that makes it a bit different.
On the other hand, (I know, this is the third hand) the Amanda gambit was totally unethical behavior, designed, I suspect, as chilling effect on its own. It raises the price for honest advocacy, exploiting the protection of the First Amendment to do so.
I guess what I'm saying is that what O'Reilly and his goons do is reprehensible; in my mind it's somewhat worse when the "victim" is a tiny woman, anything but threatening, who is on vacation. But using the weapons that I saw as so dangerous when they were aimed at "us" — I'm not so sure. What do you think?