Tuesday, December 2, 2014


News Clips For The Day


POLICE


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/11/30/1348377/--It-s-about-white-rage?detail=email

"It's about white rage."
By teacherken
SUN NOV 30, 2014

Those are the final words of a powerful Washington Post op ed by Carol Anderson, Associate Professor of African American studies and history at Emory University, among other things.

The full title of the piece, which I strongly urge you to read, is Ferguson isn’t about black rage against cops. It’s white rage against progress.

She places Ferguson in as deep a historical context as I have yet seen, perhaps appropriate for the her subject matter as a college professor, going back to White rejection of the intent of the 13thj, 14th and 15th Amendments.   She reminds us of the institution of Black Codes after the withdrawal of the Union Army from the South as a result of the deal that made Hayes President of the US even though Tilden had clearly won the popular vote and may have by an honest count won the electoral vote as well (shades of 2000).

She also tells us about United States v. Cruikshank, a case with which I admit despite teaching government and history I was not familiar, which limited the application of the Bill of Rights against the states and argued that the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the 14th Amendment applied only to actions by state governments, and thus private citizens could not be prosecuted for violating the rights of freedman - this in the aftermath of a riot against Republican Freedman by white Democrats during an election, in an attempt to keep them from voting.

As a side note, Justice Scalia and others who made the atrocious Heller ruling, this opinion ruled "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendments means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress,and has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National Government. "  Here I might note that this meant the Freed Slaves did not necessarily have a right to bear arms if a state wanted to restrict it.  And for context I remind people that the institution of gun control in California was in response to Black Panthers showing up at the state legislature carrying.  Blacks can be killed by white police with impunity if the cop has even a hint of feeling threatened even if no weapon is evident (no doubt if a weapon is) but White militia types can aim at Federal law enforcement at the Bundy ranch and not be charged, and now we have the Oathkeepers (white) "patrolling" around Ferguson - will they shoot Blacks with the same kind of impunity we have seen over the years?

But there is so much more to this op ed.
Please keep reading.

Anderson is clear  -  "crystal" if I may quote from a movie - on how seeming advances for the rights of Blacks to become more fully and equally a part of American society are opposed.  She reminds us of the Southern White push back after Brown v Board -

Nearly 80 years later, Brown v. Board of Education seemed like another moment of triumph — with the ruling on the unconstitutionality of separate public schools for black and white students affirming African Americans’ rights as citizens. But black children, hungry for quality education, ran headlong into more white rage. Bricks and mobs at school doors were only the most obvious signs. In March 1956, 101 members of Congress issued the Southern Manifesto, declaring war on the Brown decision. Governors in Virginia, Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia and elsewhere then launched “massive resistance.” They created a legal doctrine, interposition, that supposedly nullified any federal law or court decision with which a state disagreed. They passed legislation to withhold public funding from any school that abided by Brown. They shut down public school systems and used tax dollars to ensure that whites could continue their education at racially exclusive private academies. Black children were left to rot with no viable option.
Here I need to provide some context missing from this otherwise superb op ed.   Brown was issued in 1954, as most know.  But it, and the parallel decision for the District of Columbia,Bolling v Sharpe (which was necessary because until that parallel decision the Equal Protection Clause which was the basis of Brown had never been applied against the Federal government), had no specific enforcement provisions.  The Court accepted additional arguments and in 1955 issued what is known as Brown v Board II, which declared that segregated schools needed to be integrated "with all deliberate speed."   In the South the focus was on the word "deliberate."  That, combined with the massive resistance, came close to totally undercutting the intent of Brown, and led to the results Anderson describes.

She notes a similar backlash to the hope many of us had after November 2008 when Obama was strongly elected -  365 electoral votes, a 7.2 percent popular margin, the largest percentage of the popular vote by a Democrat since Lyndon Johnson, a Black man carrying 3 states of the Confederaccy (NC, VA, FL).   And yet
A rash of voter-suppression legislation, a series of unfathomable Supreme Court decisions, the rise of stand-your-ground laws and continuing police brutality make clear that Obama’s election and reelection have unleashed yet another wave of fear and anger.

She rightly notes the intent of Voter ID laws is primarily to suppress Black votes:  
A joint report by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the NAACP emphasized that the ID requirements would adversely affect more than 6 million African American voters. (Twenty-five percent of black Americans lack a government-issued photo ID, the report noted, compared with only 8 percent of white Americans.) The Supreme Court sanctioned this discrimination in Shelby County v. Holder , which gutted the Voting Rights Act and opened the door to 21st-century versions of 19th-century literacy tests and poll taxes.

Anderson also reminds us that the Tea Party attack on government is at least in part an attack on the Black community, because Public-sector employment, where there is less discrimination in hiring and pay, has traditionally been an important venue for creating a black middle class.

She covers a lot of history, older and more recent.
She reminds us of Trayvon and Zimmerman as well as Brown and Wilson.

We see otherwise incomprehensible Supreme Court decisions, such as
Connick v. Thompson, a partisan 5-4 Supreme Court decision in 2011 that ruled it was legal for a city prosecutor’s staff to hide evidence that exonerated a black man who was rotting on death row for 14years.

She reminds us of fear, of stop-and-frisk laws targeting people of color, of 3 strikes laws that disproportionally affect the Black community.  We learn yet again the impact of the Great Recession has also disproportionally affect people of color, especially blacks.
She insists we remember all these things.

Then she ends with two sentences, that should be an essential part of our understanding:
Only then does Ferguson make sense. It’s about white rage.

I am going to end by quoting from a comment on the thread, one not demonstrating precisely the kind of White Rage about which Anderson writes.  Someone named Asa Gordon posted this:

Douglass, in his "Address to the people of the United States" (September 24, 1883), declared:  

"Though the colored man is no longer subject to be bought and sold, he is still surrounded by an adverse sentiment which fetters all his movements. In his downward course he meets with no resistance, but his course upward is resented and resisted at every step of his progress ... The color line meets him everywhere ... In spite of all your religion and laws he is a rejected man. ... and yet he is asked to forget his color, and forget that which everybody else remembers. ... He is sternly met on the color line, and his claim to consideration in some way is disputed on the ground of color."

"It is our lot to live among a people whose laws, traditions, and prejudices have been against us for centuries, and from these they are not yet free. To assume that they are free from these evils simply because they have changed their laws is to assume what is utterly unreasonable and contrary to facts. Large bodies move slowly. Individuals may be converted on the instant and change their whole course of life. Nations never. Time and events are required for the conversion of nations."
"The practical construction of American life is a convention against us. Human law may know no distinction among men in respect of rights, but human practice may. Examples are painfully abundant "

What Frederick Douglass saw is unfortunately still too true for far too many.
In the words of Pete Seeger, when will we ever learn?

ORIGINALLY POSTED TO TEACHERKEN ON SUN NOV 30, 2014 AT 03:59 AM PST.
ALSO REPUBLISHED BY BLACK KOS COMMUNITY AND BARRIERS AND BRIDGES.




This Daily Kos article is more opinion than news, but I think it is truthful. Also, it gives more information than I have ever known before about the history of the Civil Rights laws and court decisions. I was in the 5th grade or so when the earliest decisions came about. I know it took my hometown's school system until my first year in college before they ever integrated the schools.

This article is about the long and rancorous struggle in the South between blacks and whites. The same struggle occurs in all parts of the US, but the South still has more localities that hang onto old practices, such as the police departments' biased interactions with black suspects and school systems that have in my opinion taught less to black students because many teachers didn't believe they could learn as well as white kids. There are also voting rights issues, such as picture ID laws, which have recently been allowed by the Supreme Court on the belief that the Civil Rights Law is outdated – that all the problems blacks have had in the past have been rectified. The problem with a Supreme Court decision is that there is no way to override it, and the only way to replace a member is by the resignation or death of one of their number. Making changes is up to the Congress and Senate now – we can pass an Amendment to the Constitution or a new law that the Supreme Court will allow. I'm afraid we need people like Pete Seeger again to sing us along to a new plateau in American justice.




http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/01/are-college-educated-police-safer.html

AFTER FERGUSON
12.01.14
Are College Educated Police Safer?
By Keli Goff

The sad truth is that we don’t push our best and brightest to become cops. Let’s change that, and then we’ll really see better policing.

When a photo emerged of white Police Sergeant Bret Barnum hugging 12 year-old Devonte Hart, who is black, during a Ferguson inspired protest, it immediately went viral. The reason? Because it provided such a striking contrast to recent images of police—particularly when it comes to their interactions with African American males—from the shooting of unarmed teen Michael Brown to the even more recent shooting of unarmed 12-year-old Tamir Rice. The role of race in these cases and those of other unarmed black men has been debated at length. But what is not up for debate is the lack of diversity among law enforcement. And I don’t simply mean racial diversity.

The sad truth is that we as a society don’t expect, nor do we encourage, our best and our brightest to become police officers. Young people who are perceived as smart and compassionate, and who exhibit leadership qualities are encouraged to go into politics, the non-profit world, possibly business, or perhaps law, but only to become lawyers. Rarely, if ever, are they encouraged to wear a badge. This reality crystallized for me when I was discussing an allegation of police brutality with a friend who is white, male, rich, and tilts conservative. He told me he feared the police, something I found hard to believe. His reasoning? “Every time I’ve ever been pulled over I remind myself I’m dealing with a high school dropout with a gun.” His words.

For the record, no I don’t think of police officers that way. I know there are police officers who are kind, compassionate, and smart. I’ve been helped by officers who fit that description. But I also know there are officers who are not. There are those who chose their profession so they could protect and serve, while others chose it because they’ve always been bullies and being a police officer is one of the few professions in which you appear to be rewarded for being one.

In light of the Michael Brown shooting, others have come forward to share their own stories of bullying, and harassment by police. Statistician Nate Silver, who is white, was widely ridiculed for tweeting about his experience of being briefly locked up. The criticism Silver elicited for being somewhat tone deaf ultimately overshadowed what seemed like a pretty legitimate story about abuse of power. Which brings me back to the diversity issue.

It is worth noting that according to reports, despite the fact that Ferguson, Missouri’s population is 67 percent black, only 5.6 percent of the police force is. Perhaps surprisingly, the most recent studies have found that racial bias does not influence whom officers shoot—at least not in the way many of us assumed. While the video game studies (which you can read about here) found that those in the general public are substantially more likely to simulate shooting if the unarmed suspect is black, when the game was tried by members of law enforcement they were less likely to commit similar race based errors.

But recent studies have also found significant racial bias in whom officers stop—whether in a car orsimply walking down the street. The statistics regarding New York’s infamous “stop and frisk” program were particularly troubling. Nine out of 10 of those stopped and frisked were completely innocent, according to the NYPD’s own data, and 88 percent of those stopped and frisked were black or Latino. That means that while officers may not intentionally set out to shoot unarmed minorities at greater rates, the stage is set for such tragedy due to the unconscious bias they engage in beforehand. Which is why who chooses to become a police officer in the first place is just as much a part of the issue as what happens after he or she is on the job. And yet the majority of those in law enforcement fit a profile that is not diverse: usually white, usually male, and usually lacking a college degree.

I want to be clear. I am not one of those people who believe that anyone with a college degree is by definition smarter than those without one. My grandmother lacks a high school diploma but is full of more wisdom, and more financial sense, than a lot of people I know. But I also believe that having too much of the same worldview is rarely a good thing. I would question the effectiveness of a police department that was comprised entirely of Ivy leaguers in the same way I question the effectiveness of a police department comprised almost entirely of those who haven’t set foot on a college campus. For instance, think of how often police officers come into contact with college students during a protest. Wouldn’t it make sense that an officer may react differently if he had actually been in the shoes of a college student before? Furthermore, data confirm a connection between education level and police behavior.

According to a 2006 report by USA Today, “In an analysis of disciplinary cases against Florida cops from 1997 to 2002, the International Association of Chiefs of Police found that officers with only high school educations were the subjects of 75% of all disciplinary actions. Officers with four-year degrees accounted for 11% of such actions.” 

Police Chief Magazine similarly published findings that indicate that officers with bachelor of arts degrees performed on par with officers who had 10 years’ additional experience. And yet police departments have struggled to toughen up their educational requirements in part because recruiters are concerned that the relatively low pay offered by most entry-level law enforcement jobs would not be enough to attract college graduates. (According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median salary of those on the police force nationwide is $56,980, but that number includes the highest paid detectives.) Of course this is another part of the problem. We want men and women in law enforcement who treat their jobs as police officers, as what they are: some of the most important jobs in our country that carry a great responsibility. Yet we pay them on par with postal workers.

After George Zimmerman was acquitted of killing Trayvon Martin many people wondered what they could do to make a difference in the aftermath. Tweeting is fine. Marching is great. But as I wrote at the time, actually showing up for jury duty is even better. So many of us complain about verdicts after the fact, but just as many of us have an endless array of excuses regarding why we are too busy to serve. Similarly, so many of us criticize law enforcement—and often rightly so—but how many of us have encouraged a good man or woman we know to serve? Only when we change the face of America’s police force will we see a decrease in the tragedies that have become all too common.




“For the record, no I don’t think of police officers that way. I know there are police officers who are kind, compassionate, and smart. I’ve been helped by officers who fit that description. But I also know there are officers who are not. There are those who chose their profession so they could protect and serve, while others chose it because they’ve always been bullies and being a police officer is one of the few professions in which you appear to be rewarded for being one.... The statistics regarding New York’s infamous “stop and frisk” program were particularly troubling. Nine out of 10 of those stopped and frisked were completely innocent, according to the NYPD’s own data, and 88 percent of those stopped and frisked were black or Latino. That means that while officers may not intentionally set out to shoot unarmed minorities at greater rates, the stage is set for such tragedy due to the unconscious bias they engage in beforehand. Which is why who chooses to become a police officer in the first place is just as much a part of the issue as what happens after he or she is on the job. And yet the majority of those in law enforcement fit a profile that is not diverse: usually white, usually male, and usually lacking a college degree.... “In an analysis of disciplinary cases against Florida cops from 1997 to 2002, the International Association of Chiefs of Police found that officers with only high school educations were the subjects of 75% of all disciplinary actions. Officers with four-year degrees accounted for 11% of such actions.”...

“But I also believe that having too much of the same worldview is rarely a good thing.” This comment brings up an important point. One thing that is changed by four years of liberal arts education at a good university such as UNC-CH is your world view. This happened to me through a series of courses – psychology, world and European History, History of the Labor Movement, anthropology and sociology, Comparative Religion, and Business Law – and through living on or near a college campus rather than in my small Southern hometown. My attitudes on race, religion, politics, and economics broadened out. The fact that my college years were the end of the Civil Rights and Vietnam War era also increased my liberality. I still want a crime-free setting to live in, but I don't believe that means removing all the blacks from the neighborhood, or rounding up some of them whenever suspects are needed as suspects for a crime that has been committed.

The article continues: “Police Chief Magazine similarly published findings that indicate that officers with bachelor of arts degrees performed on par with officers who had 10 years’ additional experience. And yet police departments have struggled to toughen up their educational requirements in part because recruiters are concerned that the relatively low pay offered by most entry-level law enforcement jobs would not be enough to attract college graduates. (According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median salary of those on the police force nationwide is $56,980, but that number includes the highest paid detectives.)” Those four years of liberal arts courses provide a much improved level of performance by police officers over those with a high school diploma, but police departments can't afford to pay over $56,980 at median which is well above the salary of the typical “cop on the beat.” Cities need to get the money together to pay for more well-educated officers. I would also like to say, they need to require an IQ test and a psychiatric exam on each applicant. Policing has the reputation of being a “real man's” job, so I think it draws the same kind of boy who wants to be a professional football player or a soldier of fortune. A lot of those boys are going to be bullies, and if they are, they will carry that characteristic into their adult life in all likelihood. A psychological test might filter those with such a turn of mind out so that they are not hired to the police force. I think the police violence problem would be largely solved if that were to occur. Some ability to use force is required of a police officer, but the egregious violence that happened during the Rodney King beating and other cases that made the news simply should not be allowed. Those officers should have been fired. Days and days of bloody rioting could have been avoided if that hadn't been the result of the “arrest” of King.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/germany-mourns-tugce-albayrak-woman-who-died-defending-teens-from-harassment/

Germany mourns woman who died defending teens
CBS/AP December 1, 2014

BERLIN - A newly published surveillance video on Monday showed the fatal attack on a young woman after she defended two teenage girls from male harassment - a death that has been mourned with candlelight vigils across Germany.

Daily paper Bild published the video on its website, calling on witnesses, including the teenage girls, to come forward with more information about the attack on the night of Nov. 15 in front of a fast-food restaurant in Offenbach in central Germany.

Tugce Albayrak died Friday, her 23rd birthday, after her family gave doctors permission to switch off her life support.

She had been in a coma after reportedly being struck in the head.

Pictures of the pretty woman with long black hair and dark eyes have been all over television, social media and newspapers in Germany in the two weeks since the attack.

Germany's president is considering awarding a posthumous medal to Albayrak.

German news agency dpa reported Sunday that President Joachim Gauck was mulling the honor amid an outpouring of public outrage over the killing.

After candlelight vigils attracted hundreds of mourners in Offenbach over the weekend, about 200 people also came together in Berlin on Sunday to commemorate and pray for the young woman.

The incident involving the girls is not on the video, but witnesses reported that Albayrak stepped in to help after becoming aware of the distressed girls.

The surveillance video of the attack in which she is injured shows an enraged man - identified by Bild as 18-year-old Sanel M. who is currently in police custody - who is several times held back by another young man as he appears to want to run in the direction of Albayrak. Because the incident happened at 4 a.m., it's dark and many of the people's movements on the video are hard to identify.

At some point, Sanel M. appears to hit Albayrak on the head - while the other young man is still trying to protect her - and she falls on the ground and stops moving.

An Offenbach police spokesman said Monday that no further witnesses had come forward since the release of the video.

"We are still hoping that the two teenage girls will get in touch with us," spokesman Ingbert Zacharias told The Associated Press, adding that an autopsy of Albayrak would be performed Monday to determine the cause of death.

Albayrak, a German-Turkish university student who wanted to become a high school teacher, has been lauded by many as a hero for protecting the teenage girls, and more than 130,000 people have signed an online petition asking the German president to posthumously award her a medal for her courageous behavior.

"I painfully miss my daughter and her smile," Tugce's father Ali told Bild. "We hope that her body will be released (by the authorities) Monday, so that we can bury her."




“Tugce Albayrak died Friday, her 23rd birthday, after her family gave doctors permission to switch off her life support.... After candlelight vigils attracted hundreds of mourners in Offenbach over the weekend, about 200 people also came together in Berlin on Sunday to commemorate and pray for the young woman.... The surveillance video of the attack in which she is injured shows an enraged man - identified by Bild as 18-year-old Sanel M. who is currently in police custody - who is several times held back by another young man as he appears to want to run in the direction of Albayrak. Because the incident happened at 4 a.m., it's dark and many of the people's movements on the video are hard to identify. At some point, Sanel M. appears to hit Albayrak on the head - while the other young man is still trying to protect her - and she falls on the ground and stops moving. … Albayrak, a German-Turkish university student who wanted to become a high school teacher, has been lauded by many as a hero for protecting the teenage girls, and more than 130,000 people have signed an online petition asking the German president to posthumously award her a medal for her courageous behavior.”

The attacker's name “Sanel” sounds like a Middle Eastern name. I was unable to find more information than “Sanel M” on the Net. If he was Middle Eastern he may be of the opinion that he has every right to molest teenage girls if he feels like it. Albayrak is Turkish, but was not intimidated by Sanel – maybe Turkish women aren't as oppressed by their men as some Middle Eastern women are. Women even in the US won't usually fight to help someone, but this young woman showed great courage against at least two young men in this case, I hope she is given a hero's award by the government, and that the man is given life or the death penalty if that is available in Germany.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/congressional-aide-elizabeth-lauten-to-resign-after-criticizing-obama-daughters-on-facebook/

Congressional aide resigns after comments about Obama daughters
CBS NEWS December 1, 2014, 10:46 AM

CBS News has confirmed that Elizabeth Lauten, the Congressional aide who faced backlash after criticizing President Obama's daughters Friday on Facebook, is resigning from her post as communications director for Tennessee Republican Rep. Stephen Fincher.

According to CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante, the criticism blew up immediately, proving once again that leaving no thought unexpressed on social media is almost always a dangerous move -- especially when it breaks the unwritten rule that a president's children are off limits.

Lauten's comments stemmed from the White House turkey pardoning ceremony, a quaint Washington tradition. Judging by the body language of 16-year-old Malia and 13-year-old Sasha, they were pretty much over it.

"Do you want to pet him?" Mr. Obama asked his daughters.

"Nah!" Malia responded.

In highly polarized Washington, even that teenage reaction got caught up in partisanship.

Lauten went after the first daughters on Facebook: "... try showing a little class... Act like being in the White House matters to you. Dress like you deserve respect, not a spot at the bar. And certainly don't make faces during televised, public events."

The reaction to Lauten's post was unforgiving.

"Whatever your differences with President Obama, you can't lay a glove on either the president or the First Lady as parents," said presidential historian Doug Wead, who wrote a book on children raised in the White House. "They've been absolutely great parents."

Over the years, the privacy of first children is generally respected, but there have been exceptions.

Remember when George W. Bush's daughters, Barbara and Jenna, got in trouble for underage drinking when they were college students? One writer faulted the Bush's parenting skills and asked if there might be a connection to their father's past drinking problem.

Chelsea Clinton's awkward teenage appearance was once a punch line in a "Wayne's World" sketch. Sen. John McCain even joked that she looked that way because then-Attorney General Janet Reno was really her father.

Jimmy Carter's daughter, Amy, was criticized for reading a book during a state dinner in 1977. She was 9 years old at the time.

"The child can't really chose who their parents are, and to throw this burden on them I think is universally accepted that it's unfair," Wead said.

Lauten had second thoughts a few hours later and posted an apology, saying she had judged them in a way she never would have wanted to be judged as a teenager.

The White House had no comment.




"Do you want to pet him?" Mr. Obama asked his daughters. "Nah!" Malia responded. In highly polarized Washington, even that teenage reaction got caught up in partisanship. Lauten went after the first daughters on Facebook: "... try showing a little class... Act like being in the White House matters to you. Dress like you deserve respect, not a spot at the bar. And certainly don't make faces during televised, public events.".... "Whatever your differences with President Obama, you can't lay a glove on either the president or the First Lady as parents," said presidential historian Doug Wead, who wrote a book on children raised in the White House. "They've been absolutely great parents."

Lauten is quoted in the article below as saying she prayed about it and asked her parents for their opinion and reread her words aimed at the two girls, and finally came to the conclusion that she should apologize. Her Facebook rant was heartless. She was clearly having fun with it. She ended with “And certainly don't make faces during televised, public events.” Unfortunately somebody uploaded it to a news agency and Lauten's enjoyment was shortlived. The following article about Lauten's own teenaged years shows that she was actually arrested for shoplifting when she was a teen. These girls are well dressed and honest – good young citizens. They should be left alone. Lauten's resignation is appropriate. She should also get some human relations training before she takes another high profile position. In the old days in the South rich girls used to be sent to “Charm School.” That would be a good idea for her before she becomes a communications director for another Congressman.




http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/Elizabeth-Lauten-arrest-786543

GOP Staffer Who Attacked Obama Girls Was Arrested During Her Own "Awful Teen Years"

The Republican congressional aide who castigated the Obama daughters for their lack of “class” and dressing as if they were angling for a “spot at a bar” was once arrested for larceny during her own “awful teen years,” court records show.

In a November 27 Facebook post, Elizabeth Lauten criticized Sasha and Malia Obama for looking bored while their father pardoned a pair of turkeys the day before Thanksgiving. While noting that, “I get you’re both in those awful teen years,” Lauten, 31, counseled the teens to “try showing a little class. At least respect the part you play.”

In her “Dear Sasha and Malia”note, Lauten remarked that the president and First Lady Michelle Obama “don’t respect their positions very much, or the nation for that matter, so I’m guessing you’re coming up a little short in the ‘good role model’ department.” Lauten concluded by urging the girls to “Rise to the occasion. Act like being in the White House matters to you. Dress like you deserve respect, not a spot at a bar. And certainly don’t make faces during televised public events.”

Until her resignation this morning, Lauten served as communications director for Rep. Steven Fincher, a Tennessee Republican. In the face of criticism about her attack on the Obama daughters, Lauten said that “many hours of prayer” helped her realize that her Facebook screed was “hurtful.”

Lauten, pictured above, was arrested in December 2000 for misdemeanor larceny, according to court records. Lauten, then 17, was collared for stealing from a Belk department store in her North Carolina hometown.

Because Lauten was a first-time offender, her case was handled via the District Court’s deferred prosecution program, which resulted in the charge’s eventual dismissal after the future scold stayed out of trouble for a prescribed period.

Since Lauten was just another teenager caught shoplifting at the mall, it appears unlikely that she was publicly pilloried for her lack of class, nor were her parents criticized as poor role models.





http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/11/30/evolution-and-the-american-myth-of-the-individual/?_r=0

Evolution and the American Myth of the Individual
By JOHN EDWARD TERRELL
 NOVEMBER 30, 2014 7:00 PM

We will certainly hear it said many times between now and the 2016 elections that the country’s two main political parties have “fundamental philosophical differences.” But what exactly does that mean?

At least part of the schism between Republicans and Democrats is based in differing conceptions of the role of the individual. We find these differences expressed in the frequent heated arguments about crucial issues like health care and immigration. In a broad sense, Democrats, particularly the more liberal among them, are more likely to embrace the communal nature of individual lives and to strive for policies that emphasize that understanding. Republicans, especially libertarians and Tea Party members on the ideological fringe, however, often trace their ideas about freedom and liberty back to Enlightenment thinkers of the 17th and 18th centuries, who argued that the individual is the true measure of human value, and each of us is naturally entitled to act in our own best interests free of interference by others. Self-described libertarians generally also pride themselves on their high valuation of logic and reasoning over emotion.

Philosophers from Aristotle to Hegel have emphasized that human beings are essentially social creatures, that the idea of an isolated individual is a misleading abstraction. So it is not just ironic but instructive that modern evolutionary research, anthropology, cognitive psychology and neuroscience have come down on the side of the philosophers who have argued that the basic unit of human social life is not and never has been the selfish, self-serving individual. Contrary to libertarian and Tea Party rhetoric, evolution has made us a powerfully social species, so much so that the essential precondition of human survival is and always has been the individual plus his or her relationships with others.

This conclusion is unlikely to startle anyone who is at all religious or spiritual. When I was a boy I was taught that the Old Testament is about our relationship with God and the New Testament is about our responsibilities to one another. I now know this division of biblical wisdom is too simple. I have also learned that in the eyes of many conservative Americans today, religion and evolution do not mix. You either accept what the Bible tells us or what Charles Darwin wrote, but not both. The irony here is that when it comes to our responsibilities to one another as human beings, religion and evolution nowadays are not necessarily on opposite sides of the fence. And as Matthew D. Lieberman, a social neuroscience researcher at the University of California, Los Angeles, has written: “we think people are built to maximize their own pleasure and minimize their own pain. In reality, we are actually built to overcome our own pleasure and increase our own pain in the service of following society’s norms.”

While I do not entirely accept the norms clause of Lieberman’s claim, his observation strikes me as evocatively religious. Consequently I find it more than ironic that American individualism today — which many link closely with Christian fundamentalism — is self-consciously founded on 17th- and 18th-century ideas about human beings as inherently self-interested and self-centered individuals despite the fact that what essayists like Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau wrote back then about the “natural state” of humankind at the beginning of history was arguably never meant to be taken as the gospel truth.

Case in point, Jean-Jacques Rousseau famously declared in “The Social Contract” (1762) that each of us is born free and yet everywhere we are in chains. He did not mean physical chains. He meant social ones. We now know he was dead wrong. Human evolution has made us obligate social creatures. Even if some of us may choose sooner or later to disappear into the woods or sit on a mountaintop in deep meditation, we humans are able to do so only if before such individualistic anti-social resolve we have first been socially nurtured and socially taught survival arts by others. The distinction Rousseau and others tried to draw between “natural liberty, which is bounded only by the strength of the individual” and “civil liberty, which is limited by the general will” is fanciful, not factual.

This is decidedly not what Enlightenment philosophers wanted to hear. According to Rousseau and others, our responsibilities and duties to one another as members of society do not come from nature, but instead from our social conventions. Their speculations about the origins of the latter generally asserted that the most ancient of all societies was the family. Yet in their eyes, even the family as a social unit was seen as ephemeral. As Rousseau wrote: “children remain attached to the father only so long as they need him for their preservation. As soon as this need ceases, the natural bond is dissolved.” When released from obedience to their father, the next generation is free to assume a life of singular freedom and independence. Should any child elect to remain united with the family of his birth, he did so “no longer naturally, but voluntarily; and the family itself is then maintained only by convention.”

In fairness to Rousseau it should be noted, as I observed earlier, that he may not have meant such claims to be taken literally. As he remarked in his discourse “On the Origin of Inequality,” “philosophers, who have inquired into the foundations of society, have all felt the necessity of going back to a state of nature; but not one of them has got there.” Why then did Rousseau and others make up stories about human history if they didn’t really believe them? The simple answer, at least during the Enlightenment, was that they wanted people to accept their claim that civilized life is based on social conventions, or contracts, drawn up at least figuratively speaking by free, sane and equal human beings — contracts that could and should be extended to cover the moral and working relationships that ought to pertain between rulers and the ruled. In short, their aims were political, not historical, scientific or religious.

However pragmatic their motivations and goals, what Rousseau and others crafted as arguments in favor of their ideas all had the earmarks of primitive mythology. As the anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski argued almost a century ago: “Myth fulfills in primitive culture an indispensable function: it expresses, enhances, and codifies belief, it safeguards and enforces morality, it vouches for the efficiency of ritual and contains practical rules for the guidance of man.” Myths achieve this social function, he observed, by serving as guides, or charters, for moral values, social order and magical belief. “Myth is thus a vital ingredient of human civilization; it is not an idle tale, but a hard-worked active force; it is not an intellectual explanation or an artistic imagery, but a pragmatic charter of primitive faith and moral wisdom.”

While as an anthropologist I largely agree with Malinowski, I would add that not all myths make good charters for faith and wisdom. The sanctification of the rights of individuals and their liberties today by libertarians and Tea Party conservatives is contrary to our evolved human nature as social animals. There was never a time in history before civil society when we were each totally free to do whatever we elected to do. We have always been social and caring creatures. The thought that it is both rational and natural for each of us to care only for ourselves, our own preservation, and our own achievements is a treacherous fabrication. This is not how we got to be the kind of species we are today. Nor is this what the world’s religions would ask us to believe. Or at any rate, so I was told as a child, and so I still believe.

John Terrell is the Regenstein Curator of Pacific Anthropology at the Field Museum of Natural History and professor of anthropology at the University of Illinois in Chicago. His most recent book is “A Talent for Friendship: Rediscovery of a Remarkable Trait.”




“We find these differences expressed in the frequent heated arguments about crucial issues like health care and immigration. In a broad sense, Democrats, particularly the more liberal among them, are more likely to embrace the communal nature of individual lives and to strive for policies that emphasize that understanding.... and each of us is naturally entitled to act in our own best interests free of interference by others. Self-described libertarians generally also pride themselves on their high valuation of logic and reasoning over emotion.... Contrary to libertarian and Tea Party rhetoric, evolution has made us a powerfully social species, so much so that the essential precondition of human survival is and always has been the individual plus his or her relationships with others.... And as Matthew D. Lieberman, a social neuroscience researcher at the University of California, Los Angeles, has written: “we think people are built to maximize their own pleasure and minimize their own pain. In reality, we are actually built to overcome our own pleasure and increase our own pain in the service of following society’s norms.”... Consequently I find it more than ironic that American individualism today — which many link closely with Christian fundamentalism — is self-consciously founded on 17th- and 18th-century ideas about human beings as inherently self-interested and self-centered individuals … We now know he was dead wrong. Human evolution has made us obligate social creatures. Even if some of us may choose sooner or later to disappear into the woods or sit on a mountaintop in deep meditation, we humans are able to do so only if before such individualistic anti-social resolve we have first been socially nurtured and socially taught survival arts by others. … The simple answer, at least during the Enlightenment, was that they wanted people to accept their claim that civilized life is based on social conventions, or contracts, drawn up at least figuratively speaking by free, sane and equal human beings — contracts that could and should be extended to cover the moral and working relationships that ought to pertain between rulers and the ruled.... We have always been social and caring creatures. The thought that it is both rational and natural for each of us to care only for ourselves, our own preservation, and our own achievements is a treacherous fabrication. This is not how we got to be the kind of species we are today. Nor is this what the world’s religions would ask us to believe. Or at any rate, so I was told as a child, and so I still believe.”

I really can't think of anyone I've ever known who is not a relatively attached member of a family and in the habit of sharing his or her time with some friends. We talk over issues and share mealtimes in preference to eating and entertaining ourselves alone alone all the time. I spend a lot of time reading my novels and doing my blog, but I also interact on the Internet or the telephone. Most people simply are not hermits. I believe it is not psychologically normal to be an isolate, and I consider my own personal value to be in relation to others.

As a result I believe in helping those who need help, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, and maintaining a peaceful relationship with the world as often as I can. I know, that makes me a Democrat. I believe in the graduated income tax to spread the money around, and the social safety net for those who can't work or can't find a job, especially the very young and the very old or the mentally ill. For real criminals there is prison, but the prisons should go back to the attempts several decades ago when they tried to “reform” criminals or psychologically cure them if possible rather than maintaining a purely punitive structure. I would prefer to see the death penalty abolished because a disturbing number of people in prison are not actually guilty of the crime. DNA evidence has been proving that over the last few years. I think the life term should be substituted instead for severe crimes. The very poor, the black or brown-skinned, the mentally deranged or intellectually disabled all get picked up by police and then are defended by the poorest quality of lawyers if at all. Of course that isn't true of everybody who's in prison, but it too often is the case. Liberals need to be alert to causes that should be supported, and there are plenty of those. I do believe that instinct to help others is in my evolutionary background. People used to hunt and live communally, and learn “social rules” to live by, whether it comes from myths as this article said, or simple love for one another. That's one of our most basic instincts, greater than the instinct to prove our individual status all the time. Human progress is made by cooperation, not by constant and often violent competition.







http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/05/7-colorado-communities-just-voted-themselves-the-right-to-build-their-own-broadband/

7 Colorado communities just secured the right to build their own broadband
By Nancy Scola November 5, 2014

Voters in seven cities and counties in Colorado voted Tuesday to free their local governments to offer Internet service.

The votes marked a defeat for big, traditional Internet service providers such as Comcast that have successfully maneuvered to inject limits on municipal broadband into state regulations over the last decade. Now cities are figuring out ways to push back, including wiggling out from under laws the industry helped put in place.

Nearly two dozen states have laws limiting the ability of local governments or their partners to offer their own broadband services, often passed with the encouragement of big commercial broadband providers who complain about unfair competition. But Colorado's version of the law is unique in that it offers an escape hatch. The 2005 state law allows municipalities to provide high-speed broadband Internet if "an election shall be called" and a majority of voters signs off on the idea.

And that's what these Colorado municipalities did Tuesday.

In Boulder, locals voted on whether the city should be "authorized to provide high-speed Internet services (advanced services), telecommunications services, and/or cable television services to residents, businesses, schools, libraries, nonprofit entities and other users of such services." As of late Tuesday night, the city of 100,000 people, which already owns miles of unused fiber, had approved the measure with 84 percent of the vote.

Similar overrides also passed by large margins in the towns of Yuma, Wray, Cherry Hills Village and Red Cliff and in  Rio Blanco and Yuma counties, according to KUNC, a public radio station in northern Colorado.

How were they able to secure such a big victory? There might be some factors at work that are bigger than even Colorado. Comcast, the state's largest cable provider, did not fight the referendum, perhaps because it is focused on getting its proposed merger with Time Warner Cable approved in Washington. (Comcast declined to comment for this report.)

The local popularity of municipal broadband puts traditional Internet service providers in a tough spot. There's a debate taking place on the national level over whether the federal government should step in to overturn laws like Colorado's, which prohibit municipal broadband. Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler recently signaledthat he might be willing to do so.

At the time, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) shot back that, "We don't need unelected bureaucrats in Washington telling our states what they can and can't do."

That becomes a bit harder argument to make, though, when it's the smallest of small government -- counties, and even cities -- making those decisions for themselves.

Have more to say on this topic? Join us today for our weekly live chat, Switchback. We'll kick things off at 11 a.m. Eastern time. You can submit your questions now, right here.

Nancy Scola is a reporter who covers the intersections of technology and public policy, politics, and governance.




“The votes marked a defeat for big, traditional Internet service providers such as Comcast that have successfully maneuvered to inject limits on municipal broadband into state regulations over the last decade. Now cities are figuring out ways to push back, including wiggling out from under laws the industry helped put in place.... But Colorado's version of the law is unique in that it offers an escape hatch. The 2005 state law allows municipalities to provide high-speed broadband Internet if "an election shall be called" and a majority of voters signs off on the idea.... high-speed Internet services (advanced services), telecommunications services, and/or cable television services to residents, businesses, schools, libraries, nonprofit entities and other users of such services." As of late Tuesday night, the city of 100,000 people, which already owns miles of unused fiber, had approved the measure with 84 percent of the vote.... The local popularity of municipal broadband puts traditional Internet service providers in a tough spot. There's a debate taking place on the national level over whether the federal government should step in to overturn laws like Colorado's, which prohibit municipal broadband. Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler recently signaledthat he might be willing to do so.”

Is this the wave of the future in Internet activity? If Net Neutrality is killed by the bad boys COMCAST, AT&T, etc. (by Tom Wheeler at their behest, actually) maybe local government will take up the slack with it's own services. I wonder if they will be able to connect to foreign countries, however, as we can today. If not, it won't be as good as what we have now. I'll try to clip everything I see on the subject of Net Neutrality and other Internet issues.





Some hardline views in Iran are weakening
By ELIZABETH PALMER CBS NEWS
November 30, 2014, 8:47 PM

TEHRAN - Iran's Supreme Leader today called for a continued military buildup, apparently with little regard to the ongoing Vienna talks over the country's nuclear program.

Not everyone in Iran shares those hardline views.

Friday Prayer at Tehran's central mosque is more than a religious ritual. This is where Iran's Islamic leadership speaks its mind on politics, and sets out the hardline position on national issues.

Hardline religious conservatives still wield a lot of power in Iran, but huge chunks of society disagree with their politics -- and their policies.

Even the loyal foot-soldiers of the Islamic Revolution appear at times to have lost their zeal. At a ceremony this week , it was clear that members of the Basiji, an Islamic militia, had heard it all before.

Meanwhile, millions of young, educated Iranians have simply moved on, sidestepping the hardliners and their censorship.

Nader Talebzadeh, who hosts a talk show on regime-conttrolled state TV, admits it leads to some weird contradictions.

The president as a Twitter account, and he tweets his position on things and yet Twitter is blocked in Iran. "It's very paradoxical, as many things are, said Talebzadeh.

He agrees that it makes a mockery of the rules, but "it's not as crazy as some other things."

Other things like the constructive diplomatic relationship between Iran's Foreign Minister and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.

While back in Iran, hardline supporters are still marshalled to chant anti-US slogans.

But why should America deal with a country that sends its people into the streets to shout "death to America?"

"If America showed some good faith for the past 35 years, not just now," said Talebzadeh. "Things would have been different."

But as to whether or not a year of talks is good faith: "I think that what's happening on the streets is one thing; what's happening at the table is another."

Exactly. Two Irans....and Two visions. Locked in an epic struggle to determined the country's future.




“Hardline religious conservatives still wield a lot of power in Iran, but huge chunks of society disagree with their politics -- and their policies. Even the loyal foot-soldiers of the Islamic Revolution appear at times to have lost their zeal. At a ceremony this week , it was clear that members of the Basiji, an Islamic militia, had heard it all before. Meanwhile, millions of young, educated Iranians have simply moved on, sidestepping the hardliners and their censorship.... But why should America deal with a country that sends its people into the streets to shout "death to America?..."If America showed some some good faith for the past 35 years, not just now," said Talebzadeh. "Things would have been different." But as to whether or not a year of talks is good faith: "I think that what's happening on the streets is one thing; what's happening at the table is another."

Iran has recently spoken out about possibly sending some troops to fight ISIS, but both Obama and some Republicans have spoken against trusting them. I think Iran is changing toward a more open society since Hassan Rouhani became President. He shows a generally more amenable attitude toward cooperating with the US, and frankly, he seems more benign and intelligent than Ahmadinejad. The following article is about his likely attempt to return to office as President.


http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/11/06/is-ahmadinejad-making-a-comeback

Is Ahmadinejad Making a Comeback?
The former Iranian president appears to be keeping his name in the public and trying to forge new alliances for his political comeback.
By: Arash Azizi, Contributor for Al-Monitor
Al-Monitor
Nov. 6, 2014

A three-story building in a quiet one-way alley in northern Tehran is the headquarters of an unlikely campaign that opposes both the administration of President Hassan Rouhani and many of the Islamic Republic's establishment figures.

The Velenjak building is the base of activities for former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has his offices on its third floor. 

Ahmadinejad has been relatively quiet since the ascendance of the moderate Rouhani, but the Iranian Labor News Agency (ILNA) is only one of many outlets that have reported on his desire to make a comeback.

According to Amir Mohebbian, a leading political analyst, Ahmadinejad's attempt to return to power is obvious as he "quietly awaits favorable conditions and occasionally tests the waters."

The provincial trips that the former hard-line president makes are one indication.

In addition to making many trips to southern and northern Iran, Ahmadinejad celebrated the end of Ramadan by visiting Taleqan with the family members of four celebrated Iran-Iraq war "martyrs" in a trip that, according to ILNA, was coordinated by the Quds Force, the formidable international arm of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.

In April, Ahmadinejad ruled out a return to politics but many of his supporters beg to differ.

They are tirelessly organizing and insist on his return. These are an unlikely bunch. Their young cadre runs many blogs and social media accounts. They draw controversy by their occasionally unconventional mixing of Islamism with an anti-wealthy and anti-establishment discourse, and many have spent time in jail for their activities. Their targets are not only the Reformists but many of the traditional conservatives.

Take Ahmad Shariat, who heads the Internet committee of an Ahmadinejad organization. In his blog, he attacked the policy of backing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, called for a boycott of the last Majles elections in 2012 (because many Ahmadinejad forces were barred), attacked establishment religious figures such as Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi and, finally, dared to criticize Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei himself (the latter, in early 2013, led to the closing of Shariat's blog and his arrest).

These supporters leave no doubt as to their allegiance to the ex-president. One name they go by is "Homa," a Persian acronym for "Supporters of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad." An online newspaper with the same name (Homa Daily) opened last week on the occasion of Ahmadinejad's 58th birthday. ("Square 72" is another outlet, named after Ahmadinejad's neighborhood in northeastern Tehran). 

Abdolreza Davari — who was a vice-president of IRNA, the national news agency for the administration under Ahmadinejad — is a leading organizer of Homa. A controversial figure who was fired from a teaching post for "political activities," Davari was reported by ILNA as one of the top three media campaigners attempting an Ahmadinejad comeback.

"As an Iranian, I hope for the return of Mr. Ahmadinejad to politics," Davari told Al-Monitor, before adding that he thinks the ex-president is currently focused on "scientific" activities.

To my question about the regular meetings of Homa in the Velenjak building, Davari says that such meetings are not organized but that "all kinds of people, commentators, students or ordinary people come to meet and talk to Dr. Ahmadinejad."

Davari also denies that Homa is attempting to organize for next year's Majles elections. Ahmadinejad's return to power needs no less than "changes in the current relation of forces," Davari says, seeming to imply that many of the establishment figures wouldn't want the ex-president back. Many such figures are especially opposed to Ahmadinejad's entourage.

Enter Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei, Ahmadinejad's chief of staff, who was openly rebuked by Khamenei for his maverick mixing of Shiite millennialism, Persian nationalism and leftist language. Despite Khamenei's personal rejection and the sustained attacks of many who accused Mashaei of leading a "deviationist current," the ex-president has continued backing his close friend (whose daughter married Ahmadinejad's eldest son) even after the Guardian Council rejected Mashaei's candidacy in last year's presidential elections.