Found at Daily Kos

A Brown Woman's Open Letter to Geraldine Ferraro & the Clinton Campaign

Dear Geraldine Ferraro and Clinton Campaign,

Geraldine Ferraro, I would like you to know that I am someone who always gives people the benefit of the doubt, but it was through your arrogant responses to the backlash you have received that I am convinced that you meant exactly what you said. I don’t know much about you, I was only 1 year old when you were the Vice President nominee, but as a fellow Democrat, the last 48 hours have deeply troubled me.

I would like you to know that the combination of your statement(s) and the Clinton campaign’s response; I cried last night. Yes, I cried. Let’s start with this:

You said: "He happens to be very lucky to be who he is"

It reminded me of when I was 17 years old sitting in my AP Calculus class, and a "friend" in "congratulating" me for being accepted into a prestigious undergraduate institution told me how "you’re so lucky that you’re last name is ______." Because of course, to him, my higher test scores and higher GPA were nothing in balance to my Spanish surname. That was supposed to be one of the happiest days of my life, yet I went home and cried to my father. I woke up the next morning with an e-mail from my dad saying, "Yes, you are lucky to be Mexican. Because Mexicans are some of the hardest working people in the world."

I received multiple comments like that as a teen, and admittedly they affected me. It took me a couple of years as an undergraduate to feel as though I was more than a charity case, that my spot was earned, even though I knew my qualifications and hard work better than anyone that made such comments.

There's More

Damn, there are many times where I feel exactly the same.

So, there has been a ridiculous amount of bullshit articles circulating lately. Ive commented on a couple of them this week, and here are two that I read, but was just too tired to rip apart.

Want to have a baby? Now's the Time

For Hillary's Campaign, Its Been A Class Struggle

There is more (if you can even believe it) but yeah, linking gets old

Anyways, Katha Pollitt gave an ass kicking to Charlotte Allen today. It isnt our stupidity that pisses Allen off but:

that these women reject, with every fiber of their latte-loving beings, the abstinence-only, father-knows-best, slut-shaming crabbed misogyny of the Republican right.

Gotta love it

There is something about Radiohead that just makes everything OK. Today while listening to this song, I entered a state I am rarely in, absolute peace.

House of Cards- Radiohead



What wouldn't I do to make out (or more) with Thom Yorke : )

Can I get an Amen?

Old habits die hard. I admit I still flinch if someone calls me a bitch. But I must remember to be proud that I am no longer invisible, and therefore pleasing to everyone and anyone. And I think of my favorite real-life bitch, my dog and companion. Now there's a role model.

She's faithful, loving, valuable, warm, nurturing, intelligent, affectionate and capable of ripping someone who attacks me or my loved ones to ribbons. She's a bitch and, except for the way she drools and sheds, I want to be just like her.

Is 'Bitch' the New Black?

I really, really, really, hate this company.

So, right now Monsanto is fighting to have labels taken off milk that say "rbgh free". Hmm, maybe because people realize that they don't want milk from cows pumped full of unnatural growth hormones. Monsanto claims there's no difference in the milk and that bgh is natural (that is before it's been modified into rbgh which makes cows produce much more milk, to the point that they go to slaughter much earlier than non rbgh cows). Fuckers.

So I guess a Glamour editor got herself into trouble because she said that "political" hairstyles such as a fro or dreadlocks are not appropriate for the office. I don't know about you, but my fro is in no way political, I was born with it. To compensate for this ridiculousness, Glamour decided to create a panel of women to discuss why "biased beauty standards are still around". They talked a lot about hair, and what it meant to them to have it straight or to leave it natural.

Floyd: Even now, often hair is the way we are differentiated in this culture. To me the decision to straighten your hair is deeply political. When I have my Afro and walk down the street, there’s no doubt that I’m black. With this [straightened] hair, if I talk about being black on air, viewers write and say, “You’re black?!” I feel [straightening your hair] is giving up a sense of your identity. Let’s be honest: It’s an effort to look Anglo-Saxon.

For the past 2 years, I have been regularly straightening my hair. For a bit, it was a nice change. I got tons of compliments, I could brush my hair whenever I wanted, and I didn't have to wash my hair everyday (which my hair loved, the dead have feelings too). But the novelty soon wore off, and although I really wanted to wear my hair curly again, I continued to straighten it. Why? Because I felt that with my hair straight, I looked more professional and grown up, something I have been trying to achieve, unsuccessfully, since I graduated college.

I couldn't really verbalize why I felt this way, but whenever I wore my hair curly, its wildness seemed.... unprofessional and childish, maybe even a bit rebellious. But I love my hair curly, and feel much more like me when I wear it that way (not that I feel my personality is unprofessional or childish). Why the hell was I worrying over my hair? Why did I feel like I was making a statement when I wore my hair curly? Why did I equate curly hair with being unprofessional and straight hair as professional? After reading the Racialicious blog I think I finally found my answer.

But this does not change the reality that “white” is considered the golden standard and that everything else is deemed unacceptable. Straightened hair, fairer skin, keener features are all considered beautiful while anything else is automatically considered unattractive. If you are a woman of color, you suddenly find yourself under enormous pressure to compensate for that you “lack.”

And from the Glamour panel:

REESE: I’d like us to consider how we see things. When it comes to race, we’re looking from the past. When people see me with my natural hair, they don’t see Dr. Venus Opal Reese who has four degrees, they see an historical idea of what natural hair means. And that’s what it meant in the 1970s and 1960s; it equaled black nationalism and was linked to the Black Panther Party. It was considered militant. That doesn’t mean it’s true now, but that’s how it’s linked.

Holy Shit! So, I refuse to any longer feel guilty for liking to wear my hair natural. I refuse to let myself be fooled into thinking curly hair makes me appear any less professional. Its humbling to know that even when I thought I was above buying into beauty norms, I was unknowingly perpetuating one.

Hahaha!

Mumbai's Traffic Generates It's Own Ad Campaign

Why Must Teachers Close The Budget Deficit?

Of course, there is also the long-term damage to the state through these crippling education cuts. Larger class sizes and fewer classrooms mean fewer students will learn. Fewer students will attend college, fewer will get good jobs or create new businesses and technologies. The state will be set back even further - California will become Mississippi.

Unfortunately, our country doesn't really think about the future consequences of our actions. To name a few current examples: Iraq, global warming, our dependence on oil, factory farming, environmental destruction, suburbia, genetically modified food and abstinence only education. And I think to myself, what a wonderful world.

I had posted a NY Times article on MySpace about a new book coming out on how Americans are hostile to knowledge, and another article came out recently about teenagers being rather ignorant of history and literature facts ( granted some of the questions I could not answer). I would love to do a science survey. Just when our students seem to be learning less, falling behind other countries, California, home to some of the most prestigious universities in the country, is ready to slash funding so crucially that we are going to layoff teachers in the thousands?! And that's just in Orange County.

No Child Left Behind has done plenty by itself to make education into an assembly line, why must we make our students suffer any more?

On another note, as an aspiring teacher, where does that leave me? When will the budget include hiring new teachers? Do I give up and go back to school in something else? Since we're in a recession, its not like I can get a random job till things get better, so I'm not sure I can just wait it out. I have the worst timing.

----------------
Now playing: Stateless - Bloodstream
via FoxyTunes

P.S. I LOVE this song....thank you Peter

From the Democratic Caucus's Senate Journal:

War in Iraq has cost the lives and livelihoods of thousands of brave men and women in uniform:

3,972 U.S. Troops Have Been Killed in Iraq. According to iCasualties.org, 3,972 American troops have been killed in Iraq as of February 25, 2008. [iCasualties.org, 2/27/08]

29,080 American Soldiers Wounded Through January 2008. According to iCasualties.org, 29,080 U.S. troops have been wounded in support in Iraq through January 2008. [iCasualties.org, 2/27/08]

Iraq war has had tremendous fiscal and economic costs:

Current Cost of War in Iraq Is Almost $11 Billion Per Month. “In FY2007, DOD’s monthly obligations for contracts and pay averaged about $12.3 billion including about $10.3 billion for Iraq and $2.0 billion for Afghanistan.” [CRS Report, 2/22/08]

That Amounts to…

• $332,258,064 Per Day
• $13,844,086 Per Hour
• $230,734 Per Minute
• $3,845 Per Second

U.S. Has Already Spent $526 Billion on War in Iraq. “This $700 billion total covers all war-related appropriations from FY2001 in supplementals, regular appropriations, and continuing resolutions including not quite half of the FY2008 request. Of that total, CRS estimates that Iraq will receive about $526 billion (75%), OEF about $140 billion (20%), and enhanced base security about $28 billion (4%), with about $5 billion that CRS cannot allocate (1%).” [CRS Report, 2/22/08]

The Bush Administration Requested $72.8 Billion for War Costs in 2009 So Far. “For FY2009, the Administration has requested about $72.8 billion for war costs including a “placeholder” DOD war request of $70 billion, $1.5 billion for State Department/USAID foreign and diplomatic operations, and $1.3 billion for VA medical care for OIF and OEF veterans. Details for DOD’s request are expected after General David Petraeus makes his recommendations about future troop levels in April. With the pending FY2008 and FY2009 requests, the total for enacted or requested war funding is about $878 billion.” [CRS Report, 2/22/08]

Funding for Iraq War Increased 160% Between 2004 and 2008. “Annual war appropriations more than doubled from about $34 billion in FY2001/FY2002 to about $80 billion with the preparation for and invasion of Iraq in FY2003 (see Table 3). Based on passage of the FY2007 Supplemental, annual DOD funding are growing by an additional 75% between FY2004 and FY2007. If DOD’s total FY2008 request is enacted, the level in FY2008 would be 160% higher or more than one-and-one-half times larger than FY2004.” [CRS Report, 2/22/08]

Joint Economic Committee Estimated Total Cost of the at $1.3 Trillion Through 2008 - $16,500 for a Family of Four. The Joint Economic Committee has estimated that the total budgetary and economic costs of the Iraq War from FY 2002-2008 to be $1.3 trillion. This cost amounts to $16,500 in war costs for a family of four. These economic costs include the ongoing drain on U.S. economic growth created by Iraq-related borrowing, the disruptive effects of the conflict on world oil markets, the future care of our injured veterans, repair costs for the military, and other undisclosed costs. [Joint Economic Committee, 11/07]

Joint Economic Committee Estimated Total Cost of $2.8 Trillion Through 2017, Assuming Gradual Drawdown to 55,000 Troops. The Joint Economic Committee also estimated that assuming troops are gradually drawn down to 55,000 troops by 2013 and that level remained constant through 2017, the total economic cost of the war would be $2.8 trillion, or $36,900 for a family of four. [Joint Economic Committee, 11/07]

While pouring money into Iraq, we have failed to invest in domestic priorites here at home:

No Child Left Behind Has Been Underfunded By $71 Billion Since 2002. Since 2002 when it was enacted, the No Child Left Behind Act has been underfunded by $71 billion. This cumulative funding gap is comprised of the difference between funding authorized by the bill and the actual annual appropriations from FY 2002 through FY 2008. [NEA, 2/25/08]

American Society of Civil Engineers Estimated U.S. Must Invest $1.6 Trillion Over 5 Years to Bring the Nation's Infrastructure to Good Condition. In 2005, the Americans Society of Civil Engineers estimated that $1.6 trillion is needed over a five-year period to bring the nation's infrastructure to good condition. [American Society of Civil Engineers, Action Plan for the 110th Congress]

The Cost of 4 months in Iraq Could Modernize and Ensure Interoperable Communications for America’s 2.5 Million First Responders. The Department of Homeland Security has estimated that it would cost $40 billion to modernize communications for the 2.5 million first responders in the United States. [Department of Homeland Security, 3/17/04]

The Cost of 3 Months in Iraq Could Secure All Weapons-Usable Materials in Russia, to Prevent This Material From Falling Into the Hands of Terrorists. In the countries of the former Soviet Union there is currently enough unsecured radioactive material to build 40,000 nuclear weapons. In 2001, the bipartisan Baker-Cutler Commission stated that the “most urgent unmet national security threat to the United States today, is the danger that weapons of mass-destruction or weapons-usable material in Russia could be stolen and sold to terrorists or hostile nation states and used against American troops abroad or citizens at home. The Commission reported that it would cost $30 billion over eight to ten years to secure all weapons-usable material in Russia. [Campaign for America’s Future, A Report Card on the Department of Energy’s Nonproliferation Programs with Russia, 1/10/01]

The Cost of 22 Days in Iraq Could Safeguard Our Nation’s Ports from Attack. The Coast Guard has estimated that $7.5 billion over ten years would be necessary to implement the requirements of the 2002 Maritime Transportation Safety Act, which would protect U.S. ports and waterways from terrorist threats. [Center for American Progress, 7/1/04]

The Cost of 18 Hours in Iraq Could Secure U.S. Chemical Plants. According to the CBO, it would cost $255 million over five years to fully fund the Chemical Facilities Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006. [CBO, 6/26/06]

There's a lot more

----------------
Now playing: Tool - Eulogy
via FoxyTunes