The Criminal Justice System Was A Huge Focus At The DNC. But It Can't Stop There.

PHILADELPHIA ― The criminal justice system and its problems received prominent attention this week during the Democratic National Convention.

Hillary Clinton vowed to reform it “from end to end.” Mothers whose children have died in racially charged situations gave impassioned pleas for those in power to do something about gun violence and a law enforcement system exhibiting widespread civil rights violations.  

Their stories have been heard before. The deaths of their children rocked the country into consciousness over the past few years. But they were never given a platform like this: a primetime slot at one of the major political party conventions, broadcast on every major network for millions to see.

Moments before those mothers took the stage, former Attorney General Eric Holder explained why he thought an overhaul of the criminal justice system was necessary. “When 1 in 3 black men will be incarcerated in their lifetimes, and when black defendants in the federal system receive sentences 20 percent longer than their white peers, we need a president who will end this policy of over-incarceration,” he said on Tuesday.

Clinton, Holder and the mothers of Sandra Bland, Trayvon Martin, and Michael Brown ― to name a few ― weren’t the only ones talking about the issue. Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.) mentioned it in their speeches. President Barack Obama advised voters to not look to the commander in chief alone to fix the nation’s legal system.

The attention paid to the criminal justice system this week at the DNC undoubtedly sent a signal, but it will mean little if the next president and Congress fails to prioritize reform. That’s where activists and organizations focused on revamping the country’s incarceration institutions will need to fill in the gaps ― not letting up once politicians have moved on from the convention.

Heightened racial tensions across the country in the last month may not seem directly connected to criminal justice reform legislation ― which would reduce mandatory minimum sentencing for nonviolent offenders, dedicate resources to reduce recidivism, and give judges greater discretion in sentencing for low-level drug offenses ― but they are.

“Part of the economic malaise of the whole country is bolstered by racial tension, which is bolstered by injustice in the criminal justice system,” progressive Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) told The Huffington Post earlier this week. “I mean, part of the way you can convince masses of Americans that they should tolerate the mistreatment of a group is by convincing the masses of Americans that those people somehow deserve it because they are somehow criminally inclined.”

Watching the Democratic convention alone, it would be easy to assume passing legislation addressing the overpopulation of America’s prisons would be a no-brainer for a Congress struggling to find bipartisan bills in a turbulent election year. It’s not.

When the new session started in January, criminal justice reform was the first thing lawmakers mentioned when asked what, if anything, they could pass during Obama’s last year in office ― not to mention during a contentious election year that shortened their work calendar.

Seven months later, legislation has yet to reach the floor in either chamber. Shortly after lawmakers left for their summer break, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said he would start bringing criminal justice reform bills to the floor in September. Ellison isn’t holding his breath, quipping that just because Ryan said that to the press doesn’t mean it will happen.

“It’s going to take a movement to make sure he keeps that promise,” Ellison said. “The movement has to keep the heat on.”

That’s just the House. A bipartisan coalition of senators revised sentencing reform legislation in April to attract more Republican cosponsors, hoping that would prove to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) that now is the time to bring it to the floor. Instead, months went by, and senators like Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) have grown increasingly frustrated, blaming McConnell for listening to vocal Republicans who oppose criminal justice reform altogether.

In addition to the DNC speeches, Democrats and Republicans included criminal justice reform in their respective party platforms, adopted days before their conventions. Democrats went further in calling for an end to mass incarceration and the abolishment of the death penalty. The Democrats’ platform changes were monumental, advocates said.

Steve Hawkins, president of the Coalition for Public Safety, the nonprofit affiliate of U.S. Justice Action Network, said the platforms are a sign that what happened for decades in the system has been “morally unjustifiable” and “fiscally untenable,” as well as “an overreach of government” that led to the “ruining of people’s lives.”

Pressed on why the two parties were beginning to push this now, as opposed to four years ago, Hawkins pointed to the growing movement in the states. In this past year, Hawkins said, 24 states passed some form of justice reform, including efforts to alleviate crimes previously defined as felonies for nonviolent drug offenses and reclassifying them as misdemeanors.

Applying Pressure

Advocates present in Philadelphia this week know that the only way Congress will move is by keeping the heat on. That’s what Jessica Jackson Sloan intended when working with organizations to make sure the voices of people impacted by mass incarceration were heard during the DNC. Jackson Sloan is the national director of #cut50, a nonprofit dedicated to bipartisan solutions to cutting jail and prison populations across the U.S. by 50 percent in the next 10 years.

Across town from the Wells Fargo Center ― where Democrats nominated Clinton to sit atop their ticket ― #cut50 and Rock the Vote created a pop-up art exhibit meant to engage young voters and address political and social issues. A number of the art pieces touched on police brutality, gun violence and criminal justice reform.

In the same building housing the exhibit, #cut50 and Rock the Vote hosted three days of discussions centered primarily around the criminal justice system. The entire project kicked off Rock the Vote’s Truth to Power campaign aimed at mobilizing millennials. Panel discussions ranged from “A world beyond prisons” and “The militarization of police” to “Will criminal justice reform ever happen?”

Why choose to do this in Philly at the same time as the Democratic convention? It fell under one of Jackson Sloan’s short-term goals when launching #cut50 two years ago ― to get every presidential candidate talking about criminal justice reform.

“There’s so much money spent on these conventions, and they’re a pipeline into every living room across the country,” Jackson Sloan told HuffPost. “So you get the folks up there talking about this in the right way and explaining the issue … and they’re changing hearts and minds across the country.”

Michael Skolnik, one of the producers of the Truth to Power exhibit, put it bluntly. “We have to be here,” he said, adding that it’s important for Clinton and Sanders to “hear us loud and clear.”

Skolnik also sits on the board of the Trayvon Martin Foundation. He expressed frustration with elected officials, and when pressed on what’s different this time around that will make lawmakers listen, he admitted the movement made a mistake in years past.

“We learned our lesson the hard way,” he said. “In 2008, we went back to our respective communities, we weren’t as engaged in the Obama administration as we should have been.”

This time around that won’t happen, he said. He and others, whether it’s Black Lives Matter or organizations like Rock the Vote and #cut50, will keep at it. Skolnik has been fighting against mass incarceration and police brutality from a young age. He doesn’t expect the kind of change that’s needed to happen overnight, especially given the 40-odd years that law enforcement raged a war on drugs, locking people up rather than helping them with treatment.

“So I hope that when it’s over is when my last breath is taken on this earth,” he said.

Giving It A Human Face

In the end, it isn’t just about keeping criminal justice reform in the spotlight for #cut50 and the larger movement, but humanizing the issue while “everybody’s watching,” Jackson Sloan said.

To do that, Jackson Sloan gets personal. Roughly 12 years ago, her husband went to prison on drug charges. One year into his sentence they divorced, stretched too thin by a lack of income, a house entering foreclosure, communication prohibited by the prison (she couldn’t even send him a letter), and the cost of phone calls once allowed ($21 for 15 minutes). Later, her husband was moved to different housing where they made him work every day for a 52 cent-per-hour wage.

“As somebody whose husband was incarcerated, I just saw how it ripped apart my family, how it left my child to grow up without a father the first few years of her life, and all because of a drug addiction,” she said. 

Currently, 2.3 million Americans are incarcerated in the nation’s prisons and jails, according to the latest data. And those who make it out are likely to go back ― 77 percent return ― due to poor re-entry or rehabilitation programs and a lack of educational opportunities for incarcerated students.

Russell Craig is no stranger to the criminal justice system. He was imprisoned on drug charges three different times. Now he’s trying to find relief in his art.

Craig’s work was on display at the Truth to Power exhibit here. Across four canvases, Craig plastered his sentencing and parole papers, documenting his 12 years in and out of county jails and prison. All of it intersected on an eye-catching portrait of himself.

“It’s the alpha and omega of my prison experience,” he said. He used pastels because they don’t completely cover the rap sheets underneath, a nod to the fact that even though he’s moving forward, the system, and society’s view of those who have served time, hold him back.

“The stigma of being a felon still lingers and I can’t get jobs,” he said.

Craig said the state and federal government need to create a better support system for people who want to change.

“I did my time, but even when I do it and I come out I’m still criminalized,” he said. “It kind of destroys you forever.”

What’s Next? 

If Congress does manage to pass criminal justice reform in both chambers this year, the fight won’t stop there. The bills currently up for consideration aren’t comprehensive enough that they address every systemic problem within law enforcement and the nation’s prisons.

Hawkins, the Coalition for Public Safety president, who dedicates much of his work to building up grass-roots support across the country and bringing in unlikely partners, wants to look at streamlining the process of moving people out of prison, and re-evaluating parole boards.

“There is a backlog because the system we have has incarcerated so many people that we don’t have a full body of mechanisms to release people,” he said, noting that parole boards are not fully staffed and equipped.  

Jackson Sloan is looking into something similar. She’d like Obama to sign an executive order granting mass clemency for inmates that meet the four criteria the administration has set: 1. In on a first-time drug offense. 2. Served 10 years already. 3. No violent crimes, including actions in prison. 4. Would not have received sentence under today’s rules.

“I think if you’d sign an order like that there’s roughly 10,000 people it would affect,” Jackson Sloan estimated.

With the convention done, #cut50 will also be pivoting toward the states, focusing on pretrial detention. There are 450,000 people in U.S. jails right now who haven’t been convicted. And #cut50 has a re-entry summit coming up in California to talk to 100 corporations about hiring second-chance workers, or people with felonies.

As for how long it will take to reform a system barely turning away from its austere practices, Jackson Sloan isn’t sure, but says it comes down to “the public. You’ve got to move the public.”

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Motivated Reasoning: Seeing what you want to see (or don't want to see) in Tim Kaine

Is it possible for a major-party candidate to be both too liberal and too conservative? That was the quandary of the Washington Post in an article headlined, “Kaine Not Liberal Enough? Just Ask Virginians.” The Post points out the irony between the criticism among groups claiming to speak for progressives (“a loyal servant of the oligarchy”) and his record in public service (“near-perfect scores from an array of liberal interest groups”).

A lot of people are learning about Kaine for the first time, or at least looking at a mass of information about him to develop an opinion. The rub is that, as I’ve written about before, our opinions tend to drive how we process new information rather than new information driving our opinions. This process, where, as Simon & Garfunkel put it so beautifully, “a man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest” is known as motivated reasoning. The way we think about new information is driven by our existing belief system and frame, in this case whether you are to the right or left, resulting in Kaine being criticized for being both too liberal and not liberal enough all at once.

In the case of Bernie Sanders enthusiasts from the left wing of the party reluctant to support Hillary Clinton, they are disappointed in the Kaine choice because of his positions on, for example, trade and banking. To quote the coordinator of a group calling itself the Bernie Delegates Network, “If Clinton has reached out to Bernie supporters, it appears that she has done so to stick triangulating thumbs in their eyes.”

For people starting with that belief system, they don’t see an advocate of smoking bans in Big Tobacco’s backyard or gun control in the home of the NRA. They certainly don’t see someone who is capable of being criticized for being too liberal for Virginia. Bob Holsworth, a political analyst quoted by the Post, said, “Throughout his time in politics here, there has always been this question about whether Tim Kaine was too liberal for Virginia. No one has ever suggested this was a moderate who couldn’t be counted on to support liberal values.”

The partisan critics on both sides are like fans at a sporting event, viewing the calls on the field through the lens of whether the officials are trying to screw their side.

In fact, one of the first and most influential studies about motivated reasoning was conducted among football fans. In “They Saw a Game,” published in 1954 by Professors Hastorf and Cantril at Dartmouth and Princeton, the professors showed their students a movie of a famously rough, violent Dartmouth-Princeton football game: a broken nose, a broken leg, another leg injury, a player kicked in the ribs while he was on the ground, and numerous infractions (called and uncalled) by both sides throughout the game.

From surveys of students watching the movie, you would have thought they were watching completely different games: the number and seriousness of each team’s penalties and the blame for the violence differed radically depending on which team’s fans were asked.

Sounds a lot like the reactions to the Kaine pick.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Why Women Are Smarter Than Men

2016-07-28-1469724093-4140461-WhyWomenAreSmarterThanMenHP.jpg

Trying to compare intelligence and gender doesn’t typically yield much in the way of productive discussion, but sometimes research comes along that’s worth opening this particular can of worms.

Decades of research show unequivocally that men and women are equal in general intelligence (IQ), but that isn’t the case when it comes to emotional intelligence (EQ). There are subtle, and not so subtle, differences in men’s and women’s expression and understanding of emotions that must be explored and understood.

Gender is a common place for people to assign labels around emotion. Such generalizations have pegged women as everything from the “fairer sex” to overly emotional, and men from emotionally aloof to explosive. You’ll find that none of these platitudes are true.

“Women who seek to be equal with men lack ambition.” -Timothy Leary

TalentSmart has tested the emotional intelligence of more than a million people and it’s clear that women have the upper hand. While women’s overall EQ score is just a couple of points higher than men’s, this is a statistically significant difference that shows that women have greater skill in using emotions to their benefit.

It just doesn’t answer the pressing question: why?

2016-07-28-1469724162-1696794-WhyWomenAreSmarterThanMenHP2.jpg

To understand why women outscore men, we have to look at scores for each of the four emotional intelligence skills by gender. There’s a reliable pattern in the data that points to some interesting explanations for the gap.

Self-Awareness

Self-awareness is how well you understand your own emotions in the moment, as well as how well you understand your tendencies–the people and situations you handle well and those that push your buttons. This is the one place where men and women have perfectly equal scores. It’s also a place where men have been given a bad rap. People often assume that men aren’t tuned in to their emotions or don’t understand them. Clearly, that isn’t the case. Of course, men also have a tendency to hop on this bandwagon–by feigning to have no awareness or understanding of their emotions–in the hope of avoiding any accountability for their actions. Now we know better.

Self-Management

Self-management is what you do with your emotions once you’re aware of them. Since you can’t make emotions disappear, effective self-management requires channeling your emotions into producing the behavior that you want. This is the one area where men outscored women. I believe that the best explanation for gender differences in emotional intelligence is how we are socialized growing up (reinforced by societal gender pressures we experience as adults). In the case of self-management, men are often expected to be emotionally “strong” and in control of their emotions, which may explain why they outscore women slightly.

Social Awareness

Social awareness is how well you understand the emotions and experience of other people. This requires the ability to tune in to body language and other unspoken signals, since people don’t usually come out and say what’s going on with them. This is an area where women outscore men by a fairly large margin (statistically speaking). This is also a skill that women are socialized to practice and possess from childhood in ways that men aren’t. Right or wrong, women are expected to take care of other people (and are rewarded for doing so). This gives them an upper hand when it comes to social awareness. Men, to their detriment, aren’t rewarded for social awareness in the same way that women are, and this carries over into adulthood.

Relationship Management

Relationship management is the pinnacle of emotional intelligence. It requires that you use self-awareness, self-management, and social awareness in concert to better your relationships as you interact with other people. You cannot hope to get the most out of your interactions with other people until you understand your emotions, cue in to their emotions, and use this knowledge to adjust your approach on the fly. Women have a slight edge in relationship management for reasons described in the social awareness section above.

The Advantage

Emotional intelligence presents a significant advantage for women in the workplace. Whether you’re a man or a woman, don’t just sit back hoping that you’re one of the high-EQ types. EQ is a flexible skill that you can improve with effort. To that end, here are a few things that you can do to improve your EQ today:

Limit Your Caffeine Intake

Drinking excessive amounts of caffeine triggers the release of adrenaline, and adrenaline is the source of the fight-or-flight response. The fight-or-flight mechanism sidesteps rational thinking in favor of a faster response to ensure survival. This is great when a bear is chasing you, but not so great when you’re responding to a curt e-mail. When caffeine puts your brain and body into this hyper-aroused state of stress, your emotions overrun your behavior. Caffeine’s long half-life ensures you stay this way as it takes its sweet time working its way out of your body. High-EQ individuals know that caffeine is trouble, and they don’t let it get the better of them.

Get Enough Sleep

It’s difficult to overstate the importance of sleep to increasing your emotional intelligence. When you sleep your brain removes toxic proteins from its neurons that are by-products of neural activity when you’re awake. Unfortunately, your brain can remove them adequately only while you’re asleep. So when you don’t get enough sleep, the toxic proteins remain in your brain cells, wreaking havoc by impairing your ability to think. Skipping sleep impairs your brain function across the board. It slows your ability to process information and problem solve, kills your creativity, and catapults your stress levels and emotional reactivity. High-EQ individuals know that their self-control, attention, and memory are all reduced when they don’t get enough sleep. So, they make sleep a top priority.

Stop Negative Self-Talk in Its Tracks

The more you ruminate on negative thoughts, the more power you give them. Most of our negative thoughts are just that–thoughts, not facts. When it feels like something always or never happens, this is just your brain’s natural tendency to perceive threats (inflating the frequency or severity of an event). Emotionally intelligent people separate their thoughts from the facts in order to escape the cycle of negativity and move toward a positive, new outlook.

Appreciate What You Have

Taking time to contemplate what you’re grateful for isn’t merely the right thing to do; it also improves your mood because it reduces the stress hormone cortisol by 23%. Research conducted at the University of California, Davis, found that people who worked daily to cultivate an attitude of gratitude experienced improved mood, energy, and physical well-being. It’s likely that lower levels of cortisol played a major role in this.

Why do you think women outscore men in emotional intelligence? Please share your thoughts in the comments section below as I learn just as much from you as you do from me.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

A Tale Of Two Conventions: Hate Vs. Hope

In Philadelphia Democrats had two goals: expose Donald as an erratic bully and elevate Hillary as trustworthy. Helped by Trump liking Putin more than the Khans, it appears that they succeeded in both. BSN was on site cramming the equivalent of 24 cable hours into one 60 minute show interviewing Schumer/Steele/Dionne as well as a leading gay/veteran/congressman/Bernie-or-Buster. Conclusion: HRC will be back to 6+ up by this coming week.

Senator Chuck Schumer: Has it ever happened that a President and Majority Leader came from the same state and will it make a difference? “I don’t know if it’s ever happened before. But we’ll trust each other [like Obama and Reid did]. We’ll have a moral, economic and political obligation to show that government can work for the middle class. She doesn’t want to just give big speeches but get things done.”

How did a person so adored by her staff, friends and colleagues get so publicly reviled? “The right wing machine stuck her with being a prevaricator. But Senators get to know pretty quickly who’s a phony and who’s not. And I never saw that…The Senate is the only place where two people have the same job and it took a year for us to get used to each other. And then we really worked well together.

Smart commentators say that, even then, you can’t get anything through the House because Speaker Ryan can block everything. But isn’t he as much a pol as an ideologue and will deal since he’ll have at best a much reduced majority? “He’s hard Right for sure but doesn’t say my- way-or-highway. He does have a problem controlling his 60 Tea Party members who don’t want to do anything. But I think we might be able to get Immigration done and also an Infrastructure Bank tied to i tax reform…if he wants to keep his majority in 2018.”

Hillary’s prospects? “She should win by a margin to Obama’s [ seven and four points] and then we’ll take the Senate.”

Michael Steele, former RNC Chair: How did the GOP politically allow Obama & Clinton to come off as the patriotic pro-family, anti-Russian party this past week? “Because Republicans foolishly left optimism on the table and they picked it up!” Did that happen because your party is so extreme, irrational, ungovernable? “For so long they’ve been lied to and promised things that never happened, plus W was a Big Government Republican when it came to debt and Schiavo. So the base rebelled.”

Let me ask you as I did Schumer — how did the GOP so successfully tarnish Clinton? “People have gotten to know her over 30 years and she’s often her own worst enemy. Like taking nine months to say much of anything about her email server. Like not having a press conference since last December. As nominee, she should now answer all questions, as Trump does, or people will continue not to trust her.” But what about the Right-Wing onslaught against her — Whitewater, Vince Foster, Benghazi etc.? “Oh that’s just standard politics.”

Should Clinton win as expected, won’t the party just say that ‘Trump wasn’t conservative enough’ and repeat the cycle of anger and loss? “There will be a real fight among the neo-cons, Tea Partiers, constitutional conservatives, reformers for the soul of the party. Some will say that while others will complain that the party didn’t rally behind Trump.”

In 2020, who’d have a leg up — Pence, Ryan, Cruz, Kasich, Rubio, Cotton? “At first, Pence as the past VP nominee. But then of course alot will happen during the primaries. There will be no one figure who can unite all the party’s elements we we’ll see who can do that best.”

EJ Dionne, columnist for Washington Post. What will America look like if it’s governmentally run by Clinton/Schumer/Pelosi or Trump/McConnell/Ryan? He laughs. “Remember how everyone has at some time in past that x election was the most important of our lifetimes? We lied! This one certainly is. I’m proud of my Washington Post for running a full page editorial saying that while Clinton is a normal flawed politician, Trump is a real danger to Democracy.”

How could he then be running so close to Clinton? “Given partisan splits, no nominee can really get below 40%. But I don’t believe that Trump can win. Women and minorities basically won’t let him win. And even some ‘angry white male employees’ won’t like how he stiffs contractors and workers.”

Why can’t Clinton Democrats shift more blue-collar workers their way by pointing out how little a Trump really cares about them while Dems produce more jobs and services? “It would be a moral failure for Democrats to leave the working class to Trump. We need leaders who can explain globalism, de-industrialization and an incomes policy, which can unite both white workers and urban minorities, like RFK did. Wouldn’t it be great if Hillary does that.”

Paul Reickoff, founder of IAVA – Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America. Says his membership split a third Rs, third Ds, third Indys. While Trump’s attack on McCain and a gold star mother and praise of Putin has hurt him in this group, Hillary has burden of explaining and changing VA after the scandal.

Rep. Joe Crowley of NY: He gave a very well-received speech from podium about how 9/11 cannot be a partisan issue and told us that he’s optimistic about gains in the House “because House Democrats are so identified with the gun safety issue.”

Jacob Berlin, a 20 year old Bernie supporter. Who you gonna vote for in November? “I’m going to wait until the debates.” How the hell can you call yourself a progressive and not vote for the nominee who’s progressive on choice, immigration, taxes, climate etc over a neo-fascist? Beyond the merits, you want a future in this party?” Allow me to say, this smart young Democrat will go back to Pittsburgh and vote for the Democratic nominee over Trump.

David Bender, gay advocate, author, producer, Air American. This is Bender’s 13 straight Democratic Convention — and he shares his historical perspective how the divide among Democrats this year is nothing compared to Chicago, 1968. Also: as a Bernie supporter earlier, he schools our audience on why “Trump is an existential threat to our values and country. The choice has never been so stark. Donald Trump has no impulse control and cannot have his finger on twitter much less the nuclear button.”

Host: There’s unanimity that a) Bloomberg did an effective job explaining to swing voters why Trump is a business fraud, b) WClinton42 and the Obamas did well humanizing and credentializing Hillary and c) the Convention’s high-moment, unexpectedly, was when Capt. Khan’s father defrocked Trump as well as Joseph Welch exposed McCarthy. Finally.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Pwa Lay Than Than 👵 …

2016-08-01-1470017021-7902772-image.jpeg

2016-08-01-1470017090-2829144-image.jpeg

Some have all the money
Some have all the fame
Some have all the titles
Right behind their name …

Some have all the courage
Some have all the flair
Some have all materials
Shown from here to there …

She though lives a life
Peaceful and so calm
Never wants for anything
Maybe Tiger Balm ? …

Never asks for much
Never owns a lot
Never travels far
Yet she is so smart …

Always so contented
Eating simple meals
Lives a simple life
Lives a life so real …

Stories up her sleeve
Tells with such aplomb
Such a lovely person
Such a lucky mom …

Loved by everybody
Cared by all them too
Beauty in her smile
Fresh like morning dew …

Humour at its best
Always up for laughs
Size wise not so generous
Average persons half ?? …

Flanked by all her children
All eight siblings still
Nothing much in money
Nothing in her will …

Yet a love that flourishes
Each and every day
Giving all her tenderness
Any possible way …

A smile A hug A look
A chuckle here and there
A knowing that you’re loved
From simply anywhere …

A heart that is so pure ✨
Just oozing with such love
A light within her eyes
A warmth from up above …

A voice so sweet and gentle
Her face a tender hue
Just everything about her
Can make my ❤️ so true …

If ever there’s a person
To show that has it all
My 102 yr old Grand Aunt
The Belle of Life’s Grand Ball
✨✨✨✨✨✨✨✨✨✨✨✨✨✨!!!

__________________________________

Soe Moe Lwin
7:00 am
01/08/2016

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

On 50th Anniversary Of First Campus Shooting, Texas Students Can Now Carry Guns

Half a century ago, a sniper perched on a University of Texas tower unleashed a killing spree that left 16 dead, and for the first time since then the school will hold an official memorial for an event that shocked the nation.

But overshadowing the anniversary of the Aug. 1, 1966 tower shooting is the start of a new law backed by Republican lawmakers to allow more guns in more places at public universities.

The lawmakers say the “campus carry” law, which goes into effect August 1, could prevent another mass shooting, while many survivors of the university tower shooting half a century ago see it as a chillingly wrong-headed approach that could spark more killing.

The campus carry law allows those over 21 with a concealed handgun permit to take guns into classrooms and several parts of the campus.

“Guns do not have a place on campus. A university is a battleground of words and ideas, and not of weapons,” said John “Artly” Fox. In 1966, he was a 17-year-old student who crossed one of the killing fields on campus to help carry a pregnant woman shot by sniper Charles Whitman to safety.

[Related: Texas Nobel Laureate: I Will Break The Law To Ban Guns In My Classroom]

“The university could be criticized. Obviously, 50 years is too long. But back then, no one knew how to handle situations like this,” he said in an interview in late July.

The Texas shooting in which Whitman, a 25-year-old former Marine who brought a cache of weapons to the tower’s observation deck about 250 feet (76 meters) in the air, was considered one of the seminal events of the era and the first U.S. mass shooting of live, national TV news.

Whitman was killed by police after he unleashed 90 minutes of terror by shooting more than 40 people from one of the highest spots in the Texas capital.

[Related: Report Reveals Terrifying Flaws In College Campus Gun Laws]

Unlike the mass shootings in recent months and years that are followed by vigils, remembrances and counseling, the remnants from the carnage were quickly cleaned up and students soon returned to their business.

Fox went home after his act of heroism and did not meet the woman he helped pulled to safety, Claire Wilson James, until a few years ago as part of documentary that was being put together on the shooting.

James, then eight months pregnant, survived the attack but lost her baby. Last year, she lobbied unsuccessfully to have Texas lawmakers halt campus carry.

[Related: Texas Lawmaker Believes Students Already Bring Guns To Class]

On Monday, the university will unveil a stone monument selected by a committee of the victims that bears the names of those killed when it holds its first official ceremony. It will turn off the tower clock for 24 hours, starting from 11:48 a.m., when the first shots rang out from the perch 50 years ago.

The school did not know how to respond in the aftermath of the shooting, with many thinking the best response was to get over it, not talk about it and just carry on.

Survivors found each other in an informal 2014 remembrance and through the making of a documentary called “Tower” on the shooting that came out this year, with many saying in the movie they still feel emotional scars from that day. They formed a group and pressed the school to mark the event ranked by news services AP and UPI as the number 2 news event in 1966 behind the Vietnam War.

Gregory Fenves, who became president last year after joining the university’s administration in 2008, said the school has tried to keep the anniversary ceremony separate from the start of campus carry. He has spoken to shooting survivors about the memorial.

“A lot has changed as a society and for institutions since then. We understand the healing process, and closure,” he said in an interview.

“One of the lessons is that we do need to deal with the trauma and we need to support the survivors and recognize those who were killed,” he said.

[Related: Texas Professors Warn Allowing Guns In Class Will Inhibit Free Speech]

Texas follows eight other states that allow people to carry concealed weapons on public post-secondary campuses, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Diana Mendoza, who graduated from the university in 2015 and now works at the school, visited the stone memorial on Thursday ahead of its dedication and said it was about time to have an official ceremony.

She is also staunchly opposed to the new campus carry law, which she said is more likely to bring violence back to the school than prevent it.

“Ah Texans and their guns. I am Texan born and raised and campus carry is ridiculous,” Mendoza said. “This could easily happen again.”

 

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

 

 

(Reporting by Jon Herskovitz; editing by Diane Craft)

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

CAT AND DOG – Ep.45

function spottoonResize(){
jQuery.ajax({
type : “POST”,
async : false,
url : “https://www.spottoon.com/huff/height”,
dataType : “json”,
data : {book_no : jQuery(“#book_no”).val(),ch_no : jQuery(“#ch_no”).val()},
success :
function(data, statusText, xhr){jQuery(“#ifSpot”).prop(“src”,”https://www.spottoon.com/huff/view?book_no=” + jQuery(“#book_no”).val() + “&ch_no=” + jQuery(“#ch_no”).val());
jQuery(“#ifSpot”).prop(“height”,data[“height”]);
}
});
}
document.addEventListener(“DOMContentLoaded”, spottoonResize);

Updated every Monday

Copyright ⓒ 2015 RollingStory Inc.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

MOSS – Ep.60

function spottoonResize(){
jQuery.ajax({
type : “POST”,
async : false,
url : “https://www.spottoon.com/huff/height”,
dataType : “json”,
data : {book_no : jQuery(“#book_no”).val(),ch_no : jQuery(“#ch_no”).val()},
success :
function(data, statusText, xhr){jQuery(“#ifSpot”).prop(“src”,”https://www.spottoon.com/huff/view?book_no=” + jQuery(“#book_no”).val() + “&ch_no=” + jQuery(“#ch_no”).val());
jQuery(“#ifSpot”).prop(“height”,data[“height”]);
}
});
}
document.addEventListener(“DOMContentLoaded”, spottoonResize);

Updated every Monday

Copyright ⓒ 2015 RollingStory Inc.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Examining Sri Lanka's Current Political Situation

Jehan Perera is the executive director of the National Peace Council, a Colombo-based nongovernmental organization (NGO).

Would you tell us a little bit about the National Peace Council? What sorts of projects is the organization currently working on?

Since its establishment in 1995 the National Peace Council of Sri Lanka (NPC) has been committed to strengthening grassroots and community level support for a political solution to the country’s ethnic conflict and a constitutional settlement based on interethnic power-sharing. Currently its key projects include building interreligious and interethnic bonds by working with local level NGOs and interreligious groups in 16 of Sri Lanka’s 25 districts, and with women’s groups to identify how women would want the transition from post-war to peace to be mapped out. NPC also has a people-to-people exchange program in which youth groups are the focus.

President Maithripala Sirisena took office in January 2015. What are the biggest challenges facing the current government?

The government needs to address the economic livelihood concerns of the people. Economic progress remains slow and the anticipated foreign investment and economic aid from the West has not materialized. The government is in a debt trap, due to the profligate borrowings by the previous government on unproductive investments. There is international pressure to address the ethnically divisive issues of finding a power-sharing solution between the ethnic nationalities and ensuring a transitional justice process that meets international standards of accountability.

How has Sri Lanka’s foreign policy changed over the past eighteen months?

The previous government began to rely heavily on China for both economic assistance and to protect it from the demands of the international human rights community for wartime accountability. It went into confrontation with Western countries on the latter issue. The new government has given priority to mending its relations with the West and accommodating the demand for a post-war transitional justice process. It is closer to the West in terms of political values.

What has surprised you most about the new government’s performance?

The main thrust of the government’s campaign against those in the former government (who are now part of the opposition) was their corruption and abuse of power. But the probes into these, and the legal actions against those accused of such wrongdoings, are proceeding slowly. In the meantime, they are using their ill gotten resources to mobilize street protests against the government. There is an appearance of surprising laxity on the part of the government.

There have been concerns that the government has done a poor job of communicating its agenda to the public. What’s your view? In terms of public messaging, have there been any improvements over the past couple months?

The problem of communications is in relation to the transitional justice process. Issues of post-war accountability, war crimes and power-sharing are ethnically divisive. They are not popular with the ethnic majority. Politicians do not wish to publicly take positions on controversial issues in which majority sentiment is in the opposite direction. It seems that the dominant thinking within the government is to get the building blocks in place without too much fanfare. Both the transitional justice and constitutional reform processes are ultimately public processes. So far the government appears to be subcontracting that mission to civil society groups.

Transitional justice is arguably the most controversial part of the government’s reform agenda. How much progress has been made on this front?

In September 2015 the government promised the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) to set up four mechanisms to deal with post-war transitional justice. These were a truth commission, an accountability mechanism, an office of missing persons and an office of reparations. The legislation for the office of missing persons has been approved by the cabinet and is pending before parliament. The legislation for the truth commission is being finalized and is expected by September this year. The government says that the most controversial of the mechanisms, the special court for accountability, will be prepared by March of next year, when the deadline for Sri Lanka’s commitment to the HRC will be up. Apart from this, the government has been returning land taken over by the military, reducing the role of the military in the former war zones, and has restored law and order so that acts of impunity are happening much less than they did in the past. All of this could be faster, but it is going in the right direction.

How involved should international actors be in Sri Lanka’s transitional justice process?

Three-fourths of the population are Sinhalese, whose thinking on issues of transitional justice is quite the opposite of Tamils. Most of them think that eliminating the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and ending the civil war by whatever means was justified. This thinking is not shared by most Tamils. But as they are a minority, their views tend to be disregarded. A democratically elected government has to be deferential to majority public opinion if it is to continue in office through elections. In this context, international pressure in favor of meeting international standards in the transitional justice process is necessary to make up for the imbalance in internal political pressure.

Regarding the judicial mechanism to deal with alleged wartime abuses, do you think it’s important to include foreign judges?

There is a need for a credible and independent mechanism to ensure that justice is done and seen to be done. Initially the new government seemed agreeable to having foreign judges sit on the special court as judges. This would give the Tamil people more confidence in the accountability process. But there is strong public opinion from the Sinhalese people that the security forces and political leaders who won the war should not be tried by foreigners. Any government has to be mindful of majority opinion, especially if it is underpinned by nationalism. There could be international technical support and monitoring.

What do you expect to happen in terms of a political solution? In your view, is a federal system of devolution on the table?

The representatives of the Tamil people have long demanded federalism. The representatives of the Sinhalese people have equally long opposed it as paving the way for separation. The positive feature of the present time is that the leaders of the government and of the ethnic minorities, both Tamil and Muslim, are on the same page with regard to their willingness to be mutually accommodative. They appear to be understanding each other’s problems and there is a meeting of hearts and minds. But this goodwill and spirit of accommodation does not necessarily encompass the larger society. There is a need for enhanced devolution of power to the provinces to enable Tamils and Muslims to exercise a greater measure of self-determination. There also needs to be checks and balances that ensure that the possibility of abuse of power is structurally curtailed and that power-sharing happens at all levels, including the central government.

How can the international community help Sri Lanka?

There will be a continuing long-term need for international pressure to counterbalance the unequal ethnic proportions within the country, which cause politicians to give greater weight to the fears and aspirations of the ethnic majority. International monitoring will be important to keep the pressure on the government. In addition, the international community could do more to support civil society groups who champion the unpopular but rightful causes that politicians shy away from.

This interview has been edited for clarity.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Jim Breuer Brings His Marriage Warrior Stand-up Comedy Tour to the Royal Oak Music Theatre, Talks of Heavy Metal Influences For New Music Album

2016-08-01-1470017214-4352623-nathanielshannon_jimbreuer_NJ_IMG_4505.jpg
(Photo Credit: Nathaniel Shannon)

We’ve long known comedian Jim Breuer from his days at Saturday Night Live and his hilarious role in the movie Half Baked, but he’s much more than just “Goat Boy” or his Joe Pesci impression. Breuer has forever been a metalhead, growing up on heavy metal bands like Judas Priest, AC/DC, and Iron Maiden. So much so that this music element has made its way into his comedy, most notably with his Comedy Central special Hardcore in 2002.

Recently, Jim Breuer finally accomplished something he’s wanted to do since the late 1990s, release a full on hard rock music album. With the release of Songs From The Garage on Metal Blade Records, Breuer fulfilled this dream of his and I was able to chat with Breuer after his set with his band The Loud & Rowdy at Chicago Open Air about his journey in making this music album, his musical influences, and how that ties into his comedy.

You’ve long had this mix of heavy metal with your comedy at times, like your special Hardcore all the way to your new album Songs From The Garage. We know what your influences are, but what was your earliest memory of music?

My mom worked every day and my dad also, so they would trot me off to what they call now a nanny, a babysitter. The only station my dad would play was country. The first real two songs that I ever really remember was Glen Campbell “Like A Rhinestone Cowboy” and the other one was “Take This Job an’ Shove It”. It was Johnny Paycheck. But then after that, it was Sha Na Na, and then Johnny Cash. It just kept getting a little better as I got older (laughs).

Going back to your Hardcore special, you had that hilarious AC/DC “Hokey Pokey” bit. Did AC/DC ever give you their thoughts on that?

Brian Johnson did. Brian called me and he hunted me down and he said (in a Brian Johnson voice), “Yo Jim. I saw you doing the ‘Hokey Pokey’ and I’m coming for you my son.” He actually asked me to do a charity event for him for his wife. That’s how we started to get to know each other. So if it wasn’t for me doing the “Hokey Pokey”, I’d probably wouldn’t have it him now on the record with that “Mr. Rock-N-Roll” song.

Speaking of the new record, how did that idea original come about to do a full-length music album?

I always wanted to do it, but I just didn’t have the confidence. A comedian making a record is always like “OH GOD! What is this?!?! This is corny! What you singing about? Farting?” I always wanted to do this and I’ve been trying since 1999 pretty much, maybe even earlier. Not until I got the confidence was I able to do it. That confidence started around 2010. I had a radio show and I would get to sing “The Devil’s Child” with Rob Halford and some songs with Sebastian Bach, and did some stuff with Metallica, but I was still know as “Hey! It’s the goofy, funny guy who likes metal and does metal comedy here and there.” But James Hetfield would talk about fear and what’s the big deal with failure. He had no clue he was indirectly talking to me. Then it was Brian Johnson, who was like (in a Brian Johnson voice) “Jim ya know? Just for shits and giggles you should try singing me son. You got some serious pipes in ya.” Once I got the band set, I knew I wanted to do this. I don’t think anyone has ever pulled it off as a comic to make a full blown record where its not a comedy album. There’s songs that got funny niches but there’s other songs that like there’s nothing funny about the “Unexplained” or “Wannabe”. It’s a unique style that I’ve been trying to do forever.

When’s the first time you realized you had some pipes to sing?

Oh God! As a kid! I would imitate Halford for hours! My parents would come in the basement like “WHY ARE YOU SCREAMING!?!” I’m like “I’m doing Rob Halford! SCREEEEEEAMING FOR VENGEANCE! What? What’s going on? Rob Halford! He’s metal!” So I would imitate him. I would imitate Iron Maiden. I would imitate anyone. I knew since high school I had pipes, but I just, again, didn’t know how to play it and I didn’t have the confidence to do it.

On the Hardcore special, you had a band with you. How did that idea come about?

Again, with the album, I started in 1995 putting a band together when I was at Saturday Night Live and I did a character called Gunner Olsen, which was the “Heavy Metal News”. That was my way of letting everyone know (in a heavy metal voice) “Hey guys! Just want to let you know that I’m into metal and I can sing and you’re going to see it in the future!” In 1999, I did a special and had a band. It was called Heavy Metal Comedy. I had no right doing a special. I didn’t do stand up for like four months. I was shooting really B-movies and put this band together, and we just really improv’d. We filmed the thing. I toured after that until like 2004-2005 with a band and that’s where the Hardcore thing came from.

We all know about a lot of your character and impersonation like Joe Pesci, but you have all these great stereotypical stoner, wasted guys and metalheads. Do you base these characters off of people you actually know?

The stoner in Half Baked. I’m not a typical stoner. I don’t listen to Grateful Dead. I can’t listen to songs that are an hour and half long. I’m a headbanger, so it puts me to sleep or its great when I’m barbequing. So when I got Half Baked, I had a voice. (In his Half Baked character voice) “I had this voice, man!” I didn’t know what the character was. My niece was into the Grateful Dead and I watched three VHS tapes of documentaries. On the last documentary, this guy was going through a security line and he had a flower in his hair and he was dancing and he was all happy. Even when he came up to security, they were frisking him. He just kept dancing. He was happy. I was like that’s the guy. I’m going to be that freakin’ guy! The metal guys are pretty much me as a kid. That was all me.

Music and comedy does cross paths at times. What do you think they both have in common from a performance standpoint?

It’s a specific crowd. It’s a little nerdy. When I would do strand up, I would talk about the bands I’m into and I could tell who the metalheads were. It would be like 5% of the people going “YEAAAAAAAAH!” and the rest going (in old squirrely person’s voice) “I have no clue what he’s talking about. What is an Iron Maiden? Isn’t that English history?” I think we all share a common thing that it’s a club. It’s something we’re all into. I think most metalheads consider themselves anti-pop, we’re anti- the whole cultural Hollywood nonsense, fake scene. We’re all so nerdy and can relate. It’s just like any other gang or society.

You’re currently doing a stand up tour also, what are you talking about during our set?

It’s all kind of new. I don’t follow politics, but I talk about people’s reactions to politics. I talk about raising my teenage girls. I talk about what I think of society, news, and what it’s like turning 40 and over, and my body and facing death, and lining up people to wiped my ass in the next thirty years. It’s just where I’m at in life. I’m almost 50, so whatever a 50 year old is going through.

Jim Breuer is set continuing on his Marriage Warrior comedy tour and will be landing at the Royal Oak Music Theatre in Royal Oak, Michigan on Saturday, August 6th. His full-length music album “Songs From The Garage” is available now. For more information, visit officialjimbreuer.com.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.