Book Reviews-Chuck Berry, The Mob, and Obama

Brown Eyed Handsome Man

By Bruce Pegg

What thoughts first come to mind when you hear the words "Chuck Berry"?

The TRUE King of Rock-n-Roll? A countrified Black man and the MC Hammer of 1950's popular music? A Black man that was too friendly with white women?  An Oldie McOldster that hasn't done anything new since the early seventies? Someone who Keith Richards stole every lick from? The coolest guitarist ever who popularized such stunts as the duckwalk, riding the guitar, or playing behind his head?  A Brown Eyed Handsome Man? A true poet? A lazy one-trick musician? An extremely mercenary and bitter old man that demands cash up front and EXACT adherence to his contract?

Well all of these descriptions and more make up Mr. Berry's persona. The book Brown Eyed Handsome Man (the title is taken from a Chuck Berry Song) by Bruce Pegg is both a biography of Chuck Berry, a rehab of his image and an history of just how bad it was for Black people-in this context Black musicians- in the forties, fifties, sixties and seventies. I have said it before and I'll say it again and again. I have nothing but wonder and respect at any Black person that came of age before 1970 or so and still managed to keep his or her internal dignity intact. Because it wasn't always easy to do that.

This book discusses Chuck Berry's middle-class origins, his early brushes with the law, his mix of cautious integrationism and prickly if oft hidden pride in his musical skills, business acumen and blackness. "Maybelline", the song that could be said to jump start rock-n-roll was an adaptation and rewrite of an older traditional country tune, Ida Red. With Berry's deliberately "whitened" diction and a mixture of straight-eighth and shuffle rhythms, the tune was a big hit with white audiences but also led to such humiliations for Berry as being turned away from live performances when the promoters didn't know he was black.

Many such Black entertainers, athletes, and musicians have such stories to tell, of course-especially back in the fifties. Nat King Cole was brutally assaulted by the Klan. Bo Diddley's maracas player almost caused a riot/lynching when temporarily overcome by the music, he forgot where he was, jumped into the audience and started dancing with a shapely young Caucasian maiden. Although men like Berry and Diddley were idolized by millions, they STILL had to know their place. Failing to do so could be professionally, legally and personally costly. Ironically some of the same hoodlums who turned out en masse to protest integration or assault civil rights demonstrators were likely Chuck Berry fans. It's a hypocrisy that persists in America to this day.

A musician's life back in the fifties or sixties (or even now really) was not an easy road and it was much more difficult if you were black. Whether it was racial confrontations with Jerry Lee Lewis, royalty ripoffs from his label's owners, the Chess Brothers, shows in which supposedly Berry wound up owing the white promoters money, constant police harassment and intimidation, and spurious "that Negro touched me" charges from white female fans or their jealous boyfriends, Berry has been through the ringer. This culminated of course with his 1962 conviction for Mann Act violations for hiring a 14 yr old hat-check girl of Mexican-Indian heritage. After that sentence Berry became exponentially more caustic, private and distrusting. And he was already moody. The book does not end with the Mann Act conviction but goes up through 2002.

Pegg also does a great job in tracing Berry's musical influences, people like T-Bone Walker, Carl Hogan (Louis Jordan's guitarist), Muddy Waters, Nat King Cole, Charles Brown and Pee-Wee Crayton. This is a great book for music fans and history buffs. Don't be mistaken; it's not a wide eyed fan book. The author also touches on many of Berry's faults: his capriciousness, his refusal to share credit on certain things and his occasional decisions to sacrifice talent for cold hard cash. Chuck  Berry probably isn't someone you would have wanted your daughter around back in the day. Heh-heh. I liked this book. It is a source of confusion and dismay to me that the younger black audience often turns its back on older performers. It's strange. If young whites can appreciate people like Wanda Jackson, Tony Bennett, Keeley Smith, Earl Scruggs and so on, you would think young Blacks might give some of these older Black stars some credit and attention before they're all gone. And there are not many of them still left.

Nothing But Money: How the Mob Infiltrated Wall Street.
by Greg B. Smith

This book is by the author of Made Men and Mob Cops. The title is actually somewhat misleading as in many of the stories detailed the Mob is no more corrupt than any of the Wall Street workers. What the Mob brought to the table was more capital, better connections (a NY mob associate arranges to have would be investors comped at Las Vegas hotels and casinos-the details of which would have been VERY interesting to learn about), and of course the realistic threat of violence. In this story the Mob didn't so much 'infiltrate' Wall Street as it was enthusiastically sought out by rip-off artists looking for well-off partners and the ability to enforce illegal contracts.

The book's focus is on the late eighties through the nineties. Two of the three primary Wall Street crooks in this story made deals with the authorities and either got probation or disappeared into the Witness Protection Program. The fact that one of them was a scion of an old WASP family and the nephew of a U.S. senator likely helped his case. The only one who didn't was Italian-American and he got the longest sentence.

The book does go into the brutish way that the Bonanno Family (the primary family initially involved with the stock scams) enforced discipline. Word to the wise-if the boss has said do not take any sell orders on a stock, do not take any sell orders on a stock and do not let anyone THINK you have taken any sell orders on a stock, otherwise you might get an extended beating with an office chair in front of the entire workforce.
The book shows how the Bonnanos react and respond when other Families get wind of how lucrative and almost risk-free the stock swindles, pump-and-dump and other crimes can be.
Again, though the ideas, brain power and business models for these things were primarily provided by people not in the mob or at best mob associates. Cary Cimino, Jeffrey Pokross and Warrington Gillette were shady (and wealthy) people long before they hooked up with Mafia members Robert Lino, Jimmy Labate or Sal Piazza. None of this criminality would have been possible without the active assistance of non-mob actors like banks (who set up and paid phony id accounts), institutional investors, realtors, and other upperworld people.

Interesting fun fact: Stock swindlers prefer seniors, men and people from the Midwest to target for nefarious deals.
"The operating assumption was that if you lived in the Midwest you were a drooling rube who might be a genius about cow breeding methods but was surely dumb as a fence post about securities.

The Obama Syndrome: Surrender at Home, War Abroad
by Tariq Ali

I have mentioned before that sometimes a book's title and cover tell you exactly what it's all about. I just finished this book. I can't wait to see what Mr. Ali makes of this latest deal between the Republicans and Obama. Look, I'll be very frank. If you are a Obama diehard partisan, please don't read this book. You won't like it. It will raise your blood pressure. You will have agita. You may start by yelling out loud and end up throwing it across the room. You will be interested in finding all sorts of reasons why Mr. Ali is wrong in his argument but you will also find that he has anticipated most of your objections and ripped them apart in the next chapter, if not the next page.

But if you are a progressive, liberal or radical who is not irredeemably wed to either the Democratic Party or to the notion that Obama is just the best President that ever was or ever will be, I strongly endorse this book. It was written shortly before the 2010 midterms and details all the ways in which the author feels that the President is just a continuation of Bush policies. He says Obama is just putting a friendly face on imperialism. This includes a health care reform package that is a bonanza for insurance companies, indefinite wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, total appeasement of the uglier politic in Israel, more drone attacks in Pakistan, etc. The author is a proud hard left man and has no patience for not telling the truth as he sees it. He sticks to facts. He goes down the list and says on issue after issue after issue, "If Bush did A and Obama did A, why is Obama any better".

Ali predicted the Democratic loss in the midterms though I think even he would be shocked at the magnitude of the loss. Ali may come across as pessimistic and even petulant but that would be a misreading of his objections. Ali firmly believes that a better world is possible and he's been working for that before Obama was born. This is not a book based in personal issues. It's about the movement.

Listen to him here. He does NOT pull any punches.

School Integration-What's in it for you???

People moving out/People moving in

Why/Because of the color of their skin

Run,Run,Run but you sure can't hide

Ball of Confusion-The Temptations

As you may have heard, Detroit has lost a lot of people.

The census report states that Detroit is currently home to about 713,000 people.  This means that Detroit stands to lose revenue sharing funds from the State of Michigan as well as from the Federal government. Detroit will also (unless the state legislature rewrites the laws) lose the ability to levy an income tax on non-Detroit workers or add fees to utilities bills or several other Detroit-specific actions. The reasons for the increasing population decline are myriad but are mostly centered on such issues as 1) crime 2) poor public schools 3) high taxes and high insurance costs 4) lack of job opportunity 5) older housing stock.

Of course the local political establishment demanded a recount but it’s rather unlikely to get one or reach the magic ceiling of 750,000 residents, which allow it access to all the items mentioned in the above paragraph. That’s all neither here nor there. Anyone paying attention locally would have seen this coming a long time ago. What IS interesting though is that unlike the initial wave of departures in the fifties or the accelerated exodus in the sixties or seventies, those leaving Detroit in waves now are mostly Black people. In fact proportionately so many Black people left the city that Detroit’s proportion of citizens who are white may have increased.  Again, there are still more reports to be released.

This Black hegira has had some positive and negative results. South East Michigan (Metro Detroit) is no longer the most segregated area in the nation.

We’re number 4. Whoopie. Believe it or not, 3 of the 10 most segregated census tracts are found in Michigan.

Not Mississippi. Not Alabama.

Michigan.

That’s the positive side (the slight decline in segregation) -if you consider integration to automatically be a good thing. This also might mean that in the suburbs at least both major political parties might have to start competing for black swing voters, which could mean a slight decline in race-baiting or in being taken for granted.

The negative side though is that the arrival of large numbers of Black students in suburban public schools has led to increased white parental removal of their students from those schools.  Some white parents are sending their children to public schools further away; some are choosing private schools, charter schools or home schooling.  Although most people are too polite to say why openly, bottom line is that when they have any sort of choice, many whites simply do not want their children attending primary schools with large or even noticeable numbers of blacks.  There is a tipping point and it seems to be somewhere between 5-10% Black enrollment.

Because the housing market is so depressed it gave many Black Detroiters who were so inclined the ability to move to the inner ring of suburbs around Detroit. Many whites can not afford to move out yet but if past events are any predictor of future ones, in roughly a decade or two some of these formerly majority white suburbs will be majority black. With a few notable and laudable exceptions the public schools in Detroit are to the point where one local columnist mused that one way to fix the public schools would be to outlaw private schools, on the assumption that if the better off were forced to attend, then something more would be done.

The trend is particularly notable in Macomb County, which led the state in increase in black population, and where one in 10 students takes advantage of schools of choice, often to study in classrooms that are whiter than their neighborhoods.
The result for many of the more than 13,000 Macomb County students now taking advantage of schools of choice programs is daytime segregation and nighttime integration, said Jason Booza, a demographer at Wayne State University who has studied the racial and spatial dynamics of Metro Detroit for a decade.
"It's the continuing self-segregation of groups," said Booza, an assistant professor of family medicine at Wayne State University. "It's a pattern we've seen in Detroit for 100 years."
The connection between race and schools of choice is a hot potato among educators, who maintain that parents make choices based on quality of education, not the color of their children's classmates.
Kurt Metzger isn't so sure. "This is totally about race," said Metzger, a demographer and director of Data Driven Detroit. "There is a tipping point. When schools reach a certain percentage of African-American (students), whites start looking elsewhere."

Metzger, who has studied the racial makeup of schools, believes schools are not comfortable talking about the racial component of schools of choice.

"I believe the white population is much more willing to stay in schools with an increasing Asian population or a Latino population (than an African-American population)," Metzger said. "You hear code words: It's getting rougher, or the quality has gone down."

In the past, white residents uncomfortable with black neighbors sold their homes, Metzger said. Because of declining home prices, many can't move now — but they can move their children.

The impact is an increasing disparity between rich white districts and poor black districts. As students pull out of increasingly minority districts and take their state aid with them, the schools are forced to cut more programs, making more students decide to leave.

"It's institutional racism, and we need to talk about it," Metzger said. "We can't keep closing our eyes." 

Full Article

         

Again, with the exception of comment boards or when they are among an entirely same-race group, many whites are not willing to speak candidly about WHY they don't want their children going to school with Black children. This is something that needs to be addressed honestly. The other thing that needs to be discussed is how long can this game of musical chairs continue. One can not force someone else to like you but de facto segregation also has larger costs for everyone.

QUESTIONS

So what do you think? What does integration mean to you? Is integration automatically a good thing? Is it important to you?  Do you respect someone who tells you upfront that they don't like you or would you rather people hid their feelings behind politeness or passive aggressive behavior? How do you manage the inherent conflict between freedom and equality? What is the solution to the achievement gap in schools?

Film Reviews-Irish Gangsters, Mama's Boys, Alien Invasions and more

The Town
This was a very entertaining film although it used virtually every known cliché of heist flicks/Irish gangster movies/action movies and ran maybe 20 minutes too long. Affleck plays the leader of a tight-knit clan of bank robbers. Affleck's father (Chris Cooper) is incarcerated for similar crimes. Affleck is determined not to make the same mistakes as his Old Man. Also look for a good bit of acting from the late Pete Postlethwaite, who plays an understatedly sinister Irish gangster boss who runs a floral shop. Shades of Dion O'Banion perhaps?

It was testament to Affleck's directing skills that the movie was this good as not every director can make an entertaining film from a story that includes such obvious tropes as "Hot tempered second-in-command", " Unfaithful girlfriend", "Racist Irish", "One Last Job", "An offer you can't refuse", " No cop can outdrive the Kid", "Just like his father", "Four man band", "The good girl", "It's quiet out there-Yeah too quiet", "You were like a brother to me", "I'm not going back to prison" and so on. Unlike the film Takers, this film puts a love story at the center. Affleck is MOTIVATED.  It has a few similarities to the underrated Bluehill Avenue.

The movie looks great (especially on HD/Blu-Ray) and really brings out the beauty of Boston and surrounding areas. Still if you've seen "Heat" or "Takers" you've already seen most of "The Town". The only question is do you like heist movies?

Frozen

I didn't recognize any of the actors in this nifty little horror film and it was just as well because I had no expectations. It's a simple premise. Three college students (boyfriend/girlfriend and a second guy -best friend of the first guy) decide to go skiing together, despite the second fellow's open resentment at the fact that the girlfriend is taking up more of his friend's time.

Through a combination of stupidity and honest mistakes the trio is stranded in a ski lift between 50-100 feet off the ground when the ski resort closes down at night. The ski resort will not open again for four days as there is a holiday. The trio can't call for help as their cell phones are back in their lockers.

The temperature is dropping dangerously. Storms are approaching. They must decide whether they want to wait it out and risk frostbite/gangrene, jump down or try to climb down icy steel cables. A local pack of wolves is attracted to their cries for help. That last item was pretty ridiculous of course but I let it slide.

Even though this movie had a low budget and limited area of action it worked for me. It certainly didn't LOOK low budget. It felt like something that really could happen to careless people. Have you ever locked yourself out of your car/house or waited too long to get a car repair? Decisions have consequences and in this film they're grim. Maybe that's you up there in the lift. The acting was good but the move worked primarily because of the tension and suspense. In some respects this was a throwback to 70's movies in which directors assumed the audience actually had an attention span. The film manages to be scary without over the top gore.

The eXperiment

Behavior modification stories have always fascinated me. People will often do wicked things if they think that they have permission. This movie examines that phenomenon.

A group of financially needy men sign up for a study. About 1/4 of them are to play prison guards while the other 3/4 will be inmates. They will be locked away from the outside world for 2 weeks. At the end of that time they will each get $14,000. No violence or rule breaking is allowed. Supposedly they are being watched at all times and any violence will cause a red light to come on. If the red light comes on the experiment ends and they don't get paid.

The leader of the guards is played by Forest Whittaker, a Bible reading man who is gentle and firm (on the outside) while the inmate leader is played by Adrien Brody-a liberal antiwar pacifist (on the outside). Whittaker's character wants to get money to help his mother get an operation while Brody wants to have enough money to join his girlfriend on her trip to India.

Of course the situation causes both men to behave in shameful ways. Whittaker's role is particularly meaty and his lazy eye comes in pretty handy in helping his character to look extremely disturbed as his sadistic and authoritarian personality elements come to the forefront. It is a little too predictable and things go downhill too quickly, but otherwise not bad.

Cyrus

You know you're getting old when you remember when Marisa Tomei was playing a fresh faced kid on It's a Different World or the young hottie girlfriend in My Cousin Vinny and now she's playing middle aged women of fading beauty (The Wrestler, Before the Devil Knows You're Dead). She still looks nice but the years are catching up. So it goes. It will happen to all of us. Nobody gets younger.

Anyway this is an odd film that also stars John C. Reilly, Catherine Keener and Jonah Hill. John (Reilly) is a lovable loser who flips out when his ex-wife (Keener), with whom he still has a friendly relationship, tells him that she's getting remarried. She will no longer be available to be a platonic girlfriend/sister/buddy for him. She invites him to a party where he meets (and is intimate with) Molly (Marisa Tomei). Things are looking up. However John discovers Molly has a twenty something son, Cyrus, (Jonah Hill) with whom she has a WAYYYYYYYYYY too close relationship. Cyrus obviously wants emotional and physical intimacy with his mother, although he won't admit it to himself. He launches a quiet war against John. John has fallen in love with Molly and at first tries to turn the other cheek to Cyrus' subtle attacks. Of course this doesn't work and John is forced to go to Plan B.

This could have been played for gross laughs but actually the movie mostly remains adult about the challenges that parents and children face in growing up/letting go as well as how middle aged desperate people meet each other. It's quiet and except for a few threats of physical violence by the male characters, slapstick is mostly avoided. Jonah Hill is 27 but could easily pass for 34-35 or maybe even older. This adds to the creepiness.  Some might think this film is a broad comedy (similar to Stepbrothers in which Reilly was playing a similar character to Hill's but without the Oedipal overtones) but it really isn't. Don't be fooled by the trailer. If you like offbeat subtle stuff, this may be for you.

Skyline

I don't know what to say about this movie other than it stunk. This was a bad sci-fi film. I wish I hadn't seen it. I wish to warn others against it. So there will be nothing but SPOILERS here-including the ending so if you intend to see this film, (which you really shouldn't) stop reading here…

100% SPOILERS BELOW!!!!!!!!!

100% SPOILERS BELOW!!!!!!!!!

100% SPOILERS BELOW!!!!!!!!! 

A woman and her nerdy boyfriend travel to LA to visit the boyfriend's old school buddy, the Black Guy.

The Black Guy is played by Donald Faison (Turk from "Scrubs") and he is evidently a successful music or movie producer;it's unclear. He has a white wife (Brittany Daniel) on whom he cheats with his jailbait appearing assistant. After a party at Black Guy's suite, sometime around 4 AM the next morning everyone is awakened by noises outside. They go look. There are blue lights moving through the sky. If you look at them too long you get cataracts, really bad skin rashes and then disappear.

Most people would leave but these Mensa members decide they should remain where they are and wait for help. When the Sun rises they notice that there are these ½ mile wide spaceships all over the place along with several smaller alien beings/machines. All these machines are literally vacuuming up people or snatching them off balconies after hypnotizing them with aforementioned lights. After more arguments and gnashing of teeth everyone decides that yeah maybe they ought to leave the building. Black Guy has produced a semiautomatic pistol which he holds sideways. It's because he's cool like that. Black Guy wants to lead the way and drive away with his wife but his Saxon Queen has discovered video of Black Guy and assistant doing the do and isn't having it.

So Black Guy and assistant get into car and drive off at which point the primary directive of films like this is executed.

The Black Guy dies first!!!!!

A big alien monster steps on the car, and kills assistant. Nerd Guy gets out of his car to try to help his friend but of course monster snatches Black Guy away. Perhaps this is a not so subtle warning about the dangers of interracial marriage? Or maybe it's just the writers' and director's subconscious feelings taking charge? If I wrote stories in which the white man was virtually ALWAYS the first to die, don't you think people might notice that? Why do Black actors put up with this?

Anyway the team is panicked as the monsters are inside the parking garage. Everyone runs around screaming until Hispanic Guy (the building manager) smashes his SUV into the nearest alien machine/monster and joins the team, giving them access to a brand new list of stereotypes. Hispanic Guy is even more macho than Black Guy, curses in Spanish, and is constantly kissing his crucifix. He's also not above throwing Nerd Guy a beating or two. That's just how he rolls, man.

More arguments ensue about the safety of leaving. The Air Force shows up and detonates a nuclear missile on the primary alien ship. Not only is NOTHING in the immediate vicinity harmed by this-no mushroom cloud or immediate incineration or black rain, the alien ship is barely harmed. Again a NUCLEAR BOMB goes off about 1 mile from the apartment building and no glass even breaks.

Finally Nerd Guy discovers his yarbles (by this time he had learned his girlfriend was pregnant). Standing up to violent Hispanic guy (who later commits suicide while swearing in Spanish and kissing his crucifix-cause that's just how he rolls, man), he and his lady run to the roof where despite a pathetic last stand they are both captured by aliens. There, they find out the hard way that the aliens need human brains!! That's right; a species that developed light years away from Earth apparently can't survive without human brainzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!!!

Nerd Guy is decapitated. His brain is inserted in an alien construct. But wait, his brain overrides the construct, because obviously out of ALL the millions of people similarly treated, ONLY this man had TRUE LOVE.  The construct (Nerdstruct?) takes a fighting stance over the woman.

Book Reviews-Black Panthers, Heaven's Fall and Vampires

Black Panther-The Revolutionary Art of Emory Douglas

Emory Douglas was the Minister of Culture for the Black Panther Party. He was its best known and most skilled and provocative artist. Often times political art, not to put too fine a word on it, stinks. Douglas’ work is the notable exception to this rule. Douglas has a commitment to social change and an ability to bring forth both strong engaging images of both humanity and depravity. These abilities work hand in hand to animate his art. If you know anything at all about the Black Panther Party and the movement of the sixties and seventies, you know who he is. And even if you don’t know who he is, chances are you’ve seen his art.

Black Panther:The Revolutionary Art of Emory Douglas is a collection of Mr. Douglas’ art. The book is over 200 pages with index, paperback and is about 8.5” by 13”.  It also combines the artwork with analysis of what was going on at the time, personal memories and media depictions of the era. The preface is written by the actor Danny Glover, who states that “ Certainly the art and images that Emory Douglas created played a significant role in that whole process which in turn created a sense of empowerment and entitlement. We are all the better for it.” If you want to talk about social realism, Douglas embodied it. This is a very worthwhile book. Recollections or praise are also shared by such luminaries as Kathleen Cleaver, Sonia Sanchez, Ishmael Reed, Amiri Baraka, John Sinclair,  Malaquias Montoya, Boots Riley, and Bobby Seale.

 

The Tempest Tales by Walter Mosley.

Have you ever read any of the Jesse B. Semple stories by Langston Hughes? Semple is a man, who is just as his name implies, is not the smartest man in the room but he has a sort of wisdom and insight that allows him to explain and understand more complex politics. He’s also not the sort of fellow that will make the same mistake twice, though he might make a variation on that mistake.  With a twinkle in his eye and tongue planted very firmly in cheek, the author Walter Mosley updates the Semple character (he dedicates the book to the memory of Langston Hughes) for modern readers.

Tempest Landry is not quite a thug or criminal although he doesn’t mind stealing if he can get away with it. He has a wife, a girlfriend and quite a few women on the side. He has a gaggle of children. He’s been in his share of fights but he rarely starts them. He’ll work hard when he has to but prefers not to do so.  

Tempest is “mistakenly” shot dead by the police when they are searching for another Black man. When his spirit appears in front of St. Peter, St. Peter reads a long list of sins and violations that Tempest has committed throughout his short life and condemns the man to hell. However Tempest is tired of being pushed around. He had good reasons for making some of the choices he made.  He honestly believes that he has not done enough wrong to go to hell and so refuses to go. This is the first and only time that any soul has ever challenged St. Peter’s judgment. The secret is that mortals must willingly accept their entry into heaven or hell. Otherwise heaven itself will fall and Satan will be in charge.

So Tempest is embodied again and sent back to earth with an angel as a minder, who must convince Tempest to accept heaven’s judgment. Of course Old Scratch has heard the news and is just as determined to convince Tempest to remain steadfast in his initial refusal.  Tempest is bound to teach both the representatives of heaven and hell something about what it means to be a black man, a poor black man in America.

This is a short book, barely more than a novella. Mosley does his usual good job of attention to detail and background. But the body of the book is really quite serious. It asks about what is the meaning of free will and predestination. It goes into some philosophical musings about religion. It has a blues sensibility. Good stuff.

Bite Marks by Terence Taylor

This is another addition to the vampire genre.  It’s set in NYC in the mid eighties. I wanted to like this book more than I did. It was good but there’s really not a lot of new stuff here. The twist is that the origin of vampires is moved away from Eastern Europe and given to a Moorish magician/alchemist.

Other than that a lot of the story will be quite familiar to readers. There are “good” vampires, who want to remain anonymous and confine their feeding to those who won’t be missed and “bad” vampires who have thrown their humanity completely aside, see all humans as either cattle or slaves and want to come out of the closet and rule openly.

Although the hook of the story is that the putative heroes, a feuding interracial bohemian couple , Steven and Lori, stumble across real life vampires while struggling to finish a book on vampires, the real protagonists of the story are the French vampire Queen, Perenelle, the leader of the faction of “good” vampires, and the Moorish magician and vampire who turned her , Rahman.

Rahman is searching for a way to reverse the curse of vampirism but still maintain immortality and he’s not too picky about how this is done. The monster of the book is Adam Caine, a vampire who has very strong ideas about who’s the master race. He sets much of the book’s events in motion.

This was an okay read but I was expecting a little more. It is first in a trilogy. His next book in the series “Blood Pressure” was much better. Taylor used to be a writer for children's television so it is interesting and a little unsettling in some respects that he had a story this grim and bloody just percolating in his head all those years that he was working for PBS, the Disney Channel or Nickelodean.

Tips to Survive in Corporate America

I've been in corporate America for a while now. I've learned from that experience. Although I wrote this with Black people in mind it really applies to anyone who works for other people. If you work for yourself, I salute you.

I want to share some tips on surviving in corporate America that I've learned either from my own adventures or observing those of other people. I'm not saying I do or have done all of these.

1) Always strive for excellence:  There's no reason you shouldn't be the best at your job. Ok, maybe there is a reason but you should certainly TRY to be the best. And if you fail try harder next time. This is especially important if you happen to be Black as likely there are more than a few people in your company who have negative stereotypes about your intelligence, your credentials, your work ethic and the quality of work that you produce. But Black or not, one of the best ways to keep your job and/or rise in the company is to have an unblemished reputation for quality work and for being able to pick up new assignments quickly. Bosses love subordinates that can take on difficult assignments with aplomb and make the bosses look good. This leads to the next point.

2) Never stop learning:  So you have a bachelor's degree or a master's degree (or two), or maybe a Ph.D, or a J.D or a M.B.A. or an M.D. or so on. Good for you. But what have you done to increase your knowledge lately? The knowledge base changes quickly. You need to keep up. This may involve on the job training or classes or it might mean online, night or weekend classes at a local community college. It might mean shadowing the local experts at your job until you learn everything they do. It might mean getting that extra degree. It could mean obtaining additional certifications in your field. It might mean getting involved in outside organizations set up for people in your field and attending conferences, writing papers or giving lectures. Maybe you should also learn your co-worker's job.

3) Always touch base with your boss: Generally speaking bosses don't like surprises. You need to let him or her regularly know the project status.  Although some bosses are more hands on (something I find greatly irritating) many are not. All they care about is hearing "Yes, the assignment was completed/deal was closed/etc" at the appropriate time. Don't ever mistake a boss' friendliness for him or her being a true friend. Their interest is in your production. Just because you may happen to share gender and race with your boss, don't think that you have leeway to let things slide. Your boss has to answer to supervisors just as you do.

4) Use Careful Communication: In terms of emails, instant messages, written documents, text messages, chances are that your company either views what you write or maintains an archive of what you wrote. Some companies use key-loggers.  And I'm not even going to get started about inappropriate internet usage. There are different rules at various companies but a good rule of thumb is that if you wrote it over their network, it's theirs. They can look at it if they want to do so. So if you really don't want HR reading the salacious IM's you and the curvy young lady from General Ledger send each other or if you realize that the partner probably wouldn't be amused by the scatological joke emails you and your buddy in Purchasing exchange, don't send those things in the first place. This also applies to work related email exchanges where people from different departments get snippy with each other over who's to blame for a mistake. As a department head told me once, "Shady, just pick up a phone and call him!! No need for the email chain". 

5) Don't be afraid to ask for or offer help: You don't know everything. So there will be occasions when you need help. There's nothing wrong with this. Everyone does it. Occasionally I have seen Black people that were scared to ask for help because they thought it might confirm some stereotype. Silly. You do what it takes to complete your assignment. Being helpful to others is also a good idea because it forces you to explain and teach something that you know. This can work to your advantage because not only will you get wider recognition as an expert but it also puts people in your debt. And one day, and that day may never come, you will be able to call upon them for assistance.

6) Avoid sensitive topics at work: If you work with adults, you won't be able to change their mind on much. Anyway that's not your job. Unless you're working for a politically, religiously or socially driven organization, you are probably  working with some people that hold views you would consider anathema on such topics as politics, race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc. Some of these people may even be your bosses. Although I do not advise that you ever submissively agree with their foolish ideas, neither do I think it wise to get involved in long drawn out debates with your boss about why the Afghanistan/Iraq Wars were poorly planned and probably illegal. Yes I did that once. Stupid.

7) Always have one eye on the exit: There may come a time when you have done everything you can do in your position. You may be bored. You may be eager to move up. You may be burned out. You may be overqualified for your job. You may have a boss that hates your guts. You may be discriminated against. You may work for an incompetent organization. You may be able to get your work done in 2 hours and spend the next 6-8 hours goofing off/surfing the net. Whatever the situation is, recognize it and take steps to address it. If you're not being challenged any more, perhaps a transfer is in order. Maybe you need to leave the company. Maybe you need a career change. Do not let your work ethic, skills and drive stagnate. If you remain in a bad position-one in which you're not happy or not growing you will come to hate yourself and hate the job. Your work will suffer and your bosses will notice.

8) You don't see everyone that sees you:  You have primary responsibility to your boss but there are several other people that will have influence (direct or otherwise) over your career. If you make the mistake (even unknowingly) of irritating one of your boss' peers, I can guarantee that your boss will hear about it from her. So watch yourself when you're at work. You are being evaluated by several other people whether you know it or not.

9) Connections count/Life is not fair: One of the hardest lessons that I had to learn was that education, experience and work ethic aren't the Alpha and Omega of getting hired or getting promoted. People hire people who look like them. This is a problem if you happen to be Black. But people also hire and promote their friends, their relatives, people who their friends, spouse or relatives vouch for, folks they worked with at other companies, old school acquaintances, people they want to sleep with or have slept with, their church members and so on. This is never going to change. So you can a) impotently rage against the machine, b) quit and start your own company, or c) learn how to network. Networking includes not only reaching out to groups of people you've helped in the past, but also includes many other opportunities. This could be attending the office holiday parties, volunteer outings and occasional off site meetings. It means regularly going to lunch with your buddies in other departments and joining internal company groups or external groups that are designed for people of like minds to exchange knowledge. Keep in touch with recruiters and people who do your job at other companies. By keeping plugged in, you will often get information about hirings and firings long before they are "official". And networking can often make the difference between a boss that wants to promote you b/c you have another boss asking her at their monthly lunch  "When is Shady going to get a shot?" vs. a boss that could not care less if you do the exact same job for the next two decades.

10) Research and Document: A company would be delighted to pay you $50K/yr for a job where the going rate is $80K and the boss' favorite is making $100K/yr. That's business. The method in which you guard against that, since you generally won't have access to everyone's pay records, resumes, academic transcripts and the like is to do extensive research to see exactly what the going rate is for a job and then ask for more.  Also you must document everything. One thing that incompetent or malicious bosses love to do is to give you poorly defined assignments to which THEIR name is not attached. You must guard against this by getting as much as possible in writing. Draw them out. And if you are ever in a situation in which discriminatory language is being used, well there's a reason voice activated recorders exist.

11) Avoid Personal Entanglements: I have seen a handful of people at work that were "hit by the thunderbolt", fell in love and married, I have also seen many more people that thought they fell in love but were actually motivated by different emotions. These dalliances generally didn't last. If you still have to work with the person who now hates your guts with the same intensity with which they used to "love" you, this can become a very unpleasant experience indeed. And if you are a man or you had some authority over this person, rest assured HR is being contacted. Don't ever fool yourself that your fellow workers didn't know what was going on. Everybody knew. You aren't that clever. Bottom line, unless it really IS "the thunderbolt", don't dip your pen in the company ink. It's a BAD BAD BAD idea.

12) Relax, it's just work: Never let work get and keep you down. Maintain a strong distinction between work and home. Work is something that you do to make money. Hopefully it is also something that you like doing and are good at doing. Either way don't bring negativity home.

Libya War: Constitutional or Not?



You don't look like who you say you are



"Just trust me."

People may accept those words from a spouse or loved one. But when it comes to business, to the parts of our lives that are not experienced under an umbrella of mutual intimacy, people are less trusting. Few would accept those words from someone on the other side of the negotiating table, a used car dealer, a boss or rival at work, or a political leader.

And yet that is what President Obama is asking the US citizenry to do. The President has claimed that he thought very long and hard before committing to intervening in the war against Libya. Well, bully for him. How wonderful that he is a thoughtful, deliberative man.

Problem is as Kucinich and several other political leaders have pointed out, it's not HIS decision to make.

There are three major arguments to make against this war-constitutional, pragmatic and political. I think the constitutional one is the strongest so that is where I will start. I will also briefly address some of the common counterarguments. The one argument that I won't address is that other people did it too. That doesn't work when someone is charged with bank robbery and it shouldn't apply here.

Constitutional

The US Constitution is clear on this. Congress and Congress alone has the power to declare war.

Obama, as a candidate, said this to the Boston Globe.

Q. In what circumstances, if any, would the president have constitutional authority to bomb Iran without seeking a use-of-force authorization from Congress? (Specifically, what about the strategic bombing of suspected nuclear sites -- a situation that does not involve stopping an IMMINENT threat?)

OBAMA: "The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."

"As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent."

Of course like many other people, he changed his mind once HE was the person in charge. If we accept this it shows that despite our protestations to the contrary we really don't want a constitutional republic. This is dangerous. A major pillar of this 200 year+ experiment in separation of powers is that war is simply too dangerous and too seductive to be left to just one man.

A cursory glance through history shows us that monarchs, dictators and other autocrats have launched wars for bad reasons. Queen Bigmouth doesn't like it when Duchess Roundheels shows up at the ball in the same dress. Duke Dodohead takes offense when he loses at billiards to King Stinkybottom. Prince Greedygut is personally offended that the Baron Greasythumb is giving refuge to religious heretics that the Prince is repressing. And so wars break out. The people that start these wars are rarely the people doing the fighting or dying. That is a big part of the reason that the Founding Fathers decided that if war was indeed determined to be necessary at the very least the people, via their elected representatives in Congress, should be the ones to say yea or nay.

The President is the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces and does have, in the case of invasion or imminent attack, the ability to defend the nation and do what is necessary to repel the attackers. This is simply not the case with Libya. Libya did not attack the United States nor is it in a state of war with the United States. So for the President of the United States to attack Libya without a Congressional declaration or war or even a fig leaf of a resolution is unconstitutional.

There are two objections to this conclusion (a) the President is acting under UN authority and aegis so that makes it legal and (b) the President still has time to consult with Congress under the War Powers Act so quit your complaining.

The UN argument is unconvincing. Treaties or other international agreements do not replace the US Constitution.

The UNPA (United Nations Participation Act) makes this exceedingly clear

Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be construed as an authorization to tile President by the Congress to make available to the Security Council for such purpose armed forces, facilities, or assistance in addition to the forces, facilities, and assistance provided for in such special agreement or agreements.

 

In short, Congress still must approve US armed forces being used , whether it is an UN operation or not. As several Congressmen and Congresswomen have heatedly noted, the President consulted with just about everyone EXCEPT Congress. That's just not good enough. If US citizens want the President to have the constitutional authorization to commit troops to UN approved wars without the approval of the US Congress, if they want the UN security council to be a higher authority for the US than the US Congress, they are of course free to propose, fight for and pass a constitutional amendment stating just that. Until then I say Obama's actions are unconstitutional. And yes I would say that about any President.

We joined the UN under extremely specific guidelines designed to ensure the primacy of the US Constitution. The UN Security Council can not be used to do an end-run around possible Congressional opposition. Just because we joined does not indicate acceptance of UN supremacy over US law.

The War Powers Act argument doesn't really hold water either as far I can see. To quote another representative:

"The president has violated the War Powers Resolution," said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose. Lofgren read the 1973 law aloud in a telephone interview from San Jose. It allows three instances when the president can use force: "(1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."
"Have any of those things happened?" Lofgren asked.

Pragmatic

No one knows how this war will end. It could be over tomorrow. It could drag on.  I do not pretend to be able to see the future or have any information that the blog readers or blog partners don't have. I do know this though. We don't know who the opposition is. We know that many Libyans-especially those in the opposition- are taking this opportunity to rob, harass, assault or do worse to Black immigrants (legal or not) in Libya. Remember that the current hostility we have with Iran dates back to the 1953 coup. The blowback to that is still going on. The same can be said of the really dumb intervention in the Lebanese civil war of the early eighties. We ought to mind our own business.

Political

It is possible, even likely that the US Congress is just making noise for the sake of making noise. Republicans have generally said Obama waited too long to go to war while several Democrats are rushing to Obama's defense. Congress en masse is disgustingly eager to give away the big decisions to the Executive Branch. But there still a few Congressmen/women with fire in their bellies who will not automatically roll over and fetch just because the President tells them to do so. And depending on how long this war takes, Obama's base may be so disheartened that that they stay home in 2012. 2010 may have been a preview of that. If no matter who you vote for, you get more war then something has gone drastically wrong with our system.

Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.

-James Madison

So what's your call? Is this war against Libya constitutional?  Are you bothered that he did not even consult with let alone get permission from Congress? Are you satisfied with Obama's explanation or not? Will your opinion change if this is a quick action ("days not weeks") as the President has said? Do you think any blowback will arrive from this? Do you want more interventions overseas?