Homefront: How WWII and the US Military Provided the First Spark for the Civil Rights Movement 3 / 3

by Nomad

In the previous installment in this series, we examined how the a progressive president's wife, a black workers' union and an imposed reform of the armed forces all combined to helped to jump-start the civil rights movement in the US. In the final part of our series, we will show, how a military president from the Republican Party took a very different view.

The Little Rock Crisis and Why Eisenhower Intervened

For moderate Republicans, President Dwight D. Eisenhower is the one president - outside of Theodore Roosevelt- that they can point to as in any way, reformist. They tend to cite Eisenhower's stand on ending segregation in the South as proof that he was committed to equality for the races and progress in general. 

Despite evidence that Eisenhower was a moderate, the part he played in the story of civil rights was much more of a result of his military background, rather than a question of morality or an appreciation of fairness for African Americans. 

It was actually a matter of proper organization.    

When we look a little closer, we see that Eisenhower's attitude toward integration was much more ambivalent than it is commonly painted. Scholars still debate how firm his commitment was to civil rights. 

It is true that he signed civil rights legislation in 1957 and 1960, but he was overly-enthused about having to deal with racial issues.

He never endorsed the Supreme Court’s ruling in 1954, Brown v. Board of Education (Kansas), that racially segregated schools were unconstitutional, and he failed to use his moral authority as president to urge speedy compliance with the court’s decision.

Claiming states' rights, many governors, and legislatures, particularly in the South, refused to recognize the SCOTUS decision.

It was clear that the some politician leaders were ready to rebel, and they planned to use the state militias to protect their state's rights.

In the autumn of 1957, the epicenter of this battle of wills became Little Rock when Governor Orval Faubus of Arkansas announced his absolute refusal to comply the court's ruling. 

While the Fayetteville, Charleston, and Hoxie school districts integrated without incident, the attempt to desegregate Little Rock Central High School in the fall of 1957 led to a crisis, as Faubus tried to block the attempt to integrate the school by nine black students (the “Little Rock Nine”).

Why the Cuban Thaw Puts GOP in Danger of Losing Corporate Sponsors

by Nomad

Rejecting Obama's new policy for Cuba could be the biggest political blunder the Republican Party could make.
In 2016, American corporations will not forget or forgive who put the brakes on the significant business opportunities in Havana.

It's obvious that Republicans hate everything President Obama does. It's hard for them to deny it. And why should they? Being against President Obama has always been a vote catcher. Fox News misrepresents the issue, the Internet sites stir up the hate, the Republicans get the support from the un-informed voters and their corporate sponsors dish out the cash to ensure the Republican Congress will happily vote accordingly. It's a beautiful little machine.

Let the Rants Begin!

So it was no great surprise that when the president announced a restoration of diplomatic ties with Cuba, Republican politicians began to rant and foam at the mouth. 

The Hunt For Vladimir Putin's Troll Nest

by Nomad

In Vladimir Putin's hometown of St. Petersburg, journalists uncovered one of the Russian leader's covert operations. Paid by the Kremlin, online trolls are paid to blog and comment, praising Putin and vilifying his opposition and all things American.

Reporters for the St. Petersburg Times recently infiltrated a covert online operation which acts as pro-Putin mouthpiece. Employees, the report alleged, were being paid to write  "pro-Kremlin postings and comments on the Internet, smearing opposition leader Alexei Navalny and U.S. politics and culture."

Professional Comrades

In August of 2013, journalists received a tip from the public. It seemed plausible enough. The insider described her interview with a company called St. Petersburg Internet Research Agency. She described the location as a “posh cottage with glass walls” in Olgino, a village in St. Petersburg’s Kurortny District.
She told the reporters:

The office occupying two rooms reminded her of an “internet club with lots of computers and people.” Employees in one room wrote blog posts for social networks, while those in the other room specialized in comments.

The unsuspecting interviewer was quite upfront about the technical details, about what to write and which political party to support. According the tip:

Each commenter was to write no less than 100 comments a day, while people in the other room were to write four postings a day, which then went to the other employees whose job was to post them on social networks as widely as possible.

Employees at the company, located at 131 Lakhtinsky Prospekt, were paid 1,180 rubles ($36.50) for a full 8-hour day and received a free lunch...

The employment ad- which has since been deleted- invited “goal-oriented people who like to surf the Internet” to join its “successful team.” “Now you’ll be able to surf the Internet and receive money for it,” it said.

The Long Russian Winter of Vladimir Putin

by Nomad

Russian President Vladimir Putin may not be as popular as he once was. Of late his policies both internationally and domestically have raised more than a few eyebrows. 

While it may not be a return to the days of the Cold War,  many in the West might be thinking the present chill in relations seems much more like an awfully long Russian winter.

Putin's PR Problem

 A recent Gallup poll suggests that a majority of Americans now take a negative view of Russia, more so that any time in the last two decades.

Only 34 percent of poll respondents have a favorable view of Russia, while 60 percent have an unfavorable view. This is quite a swing since 2012 when only 44 percent had an unfavorable view in 2012.

As we shall see, analysts have a barrel-full of reasons to explain this decline. Russia's handling of Greenpeace and Pussy Riot activists, anti-gay laws and the whole Edward Snowden affair  may all have played a role in the Russian public relations problem. 

Since politics in the former Soviet nation is too often a one-man arrangement, it's no great surprise that this dislike seems to be focused on  Russia's leader.

The poll also found that the 61-year-old Russian president, Vladimir Putin has also become an unpopular figure among Americans with a steady rise in unpopularity since 2002, starting at 18 percent to the present figure of a whopping 63 percent this year. 

Interestingly, Americans aren't alone in their view of Putin. Europe too might be a little less than pleased.

In particular, European leaders are growing concerned. Russian policy in Ukraine has created a serious rift with Europe, the tone of which we haven't seen since the days of the Cold War. When Vladimir Chizhov, Russia’s ambassador to the EU, warned European leaders not to 'test Putin’s patience' it was hard to ignore that things had sunk pretty low.

Before PRISM: The Curious History of the US World-Wide Surveillance Network- Part One

by Nomad
Recently many people seemed altogether mortified, shocked and angry when whistle-blower Edward Snowden, former contract employee of the National Security Agency (NSA) supplied both the Washington Post and The Guardian details about two top- secret surveillance operations.

The Snowden evidence describes one operation which was an effort to collect data from Verizon about millions of phone calls. The other operation was called PRISM. In that operation, metadata was harvested from millions of Internet sites. Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube and Apple were all apparently involved in the PRISM operation. 

Although both programs seem to have been overseen by Congress and a top-secret court, the extent of the operations came as a shock to a lot of people. 

One source describes PRISM like this:

“Its establishment in 2007 and six years of exponential growth took place beneath the surface of a roiling debate over the boundaries of surveillance and privacy.”

What PRISM does is to allow the NSA and the FBI to tap directly “into the central servers of nine leading U.S.Internet companies, extracting audio, video, photographs, e-mails, documents and connection logs that enable analysts to track a person’s movements and contacts over time.”

Who, the reporters and public asked, could have imagined that the United States government- for whatever reason- would engage in such violations of personal privacy? Conservative voters feel as though their worst fears about Big Government and about Barack Obama have been confirmed. Many stunned liberals are asking:Why would President Obama launch such an attack on our freedoms?

Perhaps the only truly shocking aspect of the recent whistle-blowing revelations is the fact that anybody should be shocked at all. People who have been paying attention should have known the extent of this type of surveillance.

Perhaps the only truly shocking aspect of the recent whistle-blowing revelations is the fact that anybody should be shocked at all. Everybody -those who were not sleeping-  should have known the extent of this type of surveillance. 

Much- but naturally not all- of the information about these operations had been made public a long ago. The American people (at those who were awake) were warned and chose to ignore the challenge to their civil liberties.. until now. 

The present anger – much of it unfairly directed at the Obama administration- comes a little late in the day. The evidence of these (and even more extensive and intrusive) electronic spying operations has been right under everybody's noses for over a decade. As we shall see in this report it is especially disingenuous for Republicans to bluster now.

The problem of the government’s covert spying on its own citizens began long before Obama, before Bush, Reagan or even before Nixon.

Inside Grover Norquist: The Jonas Savimbi Connection

by Nomad

The name, Grover Norquist, made a name for himself by crusading against taxes. Though he has never been elected to political office, his influence in the Republican party has made him a fixture in every election.

Yet, most people are unaware that the man has a long and colorful history in conservative circles. 

The Advocate of Bad ideas

Michael Grunwald of Time’s Swampland once called Grover Norquist “an idealistic advocate of bad ideas." His ideas, however, haven't always been confined to thoughts alone. When Norquist's principles led to action, the results, at least, for one African country led to the carnage of war and misery of the innocent.  

Most of us are familiar with his bad idea of “Taxpayer Protection Pledge" to oppose all tax increases and under all circumstances. We all know how he has bullied Republicans after they foolishly committed themselves to the poorly conceived notion.

However, there’s another less publicized bad idea hidden in Norquist’s background that has failed to get a lot of attention in the mainstream media. Actually, that’s a shame because his famous war against tax cuts represents a small part of the colorful Norquist biography. In this post, we will take a closer look at his Angolan connections. 

What sparked my interest was this remark. Norquist once told an interviewer: 

"During the eighties, l was very active with the Afghan resistance, and in Mozambique and Angola.” 

That intriguing remark, (confirmed by his own mother), is worth a closer look. 

American Dreams: My Father, Karl Marx and the Man who Sold the Rope 1/2

by Nomad

Let’s Begin With My Father

My father, born in 1929, grew up in the midst of the Great Depression, in what most people would consider extreme poverty. His father died one week after his birth leaving his widowed mother to raise her five children alone. Had it not been for a productive farmland, it is doubtful they would have survived. “We didn’t have two nickles to rub together,” he’d often tell me,”but we never even realized we were poor. Everybody we knew was in the same situation as we were.”

In 1951. he left the farm to join in the Korean War to fight the spread of the Communist threat. The Red Menace- China- was on the verge of expanding across the border into Korea. Following that, he received credit from a GI loan which allowed him to buy a very humble mobile home to start his married life.

In the economic boom of the 1950s, my father found employment as a precision sheet metal worker at a aircraft manufacturing plant. Along with thousands of other unskilled workers returning from Korea, the company trained my father with the idea of steady long term employment. In turn, my father worked at the company for thirty years. He did not particularly desire to rise up in the hierarchy of the company. He told me that he’d prefer not to have the stress that went with the responsibility. He preferred to spend more time at home at the end of his shift. There was also the goal that he knew that his children would, by his hard, boring and unsatisfying labor, have a better life than he did. It was an attainable goal. Through the use of collective bargaining of his union or the rare labor action, my father’s wage steadily increased.