Please sign the petition below to remove the statue of Jefferson Davis currently in Kentucky’s Capitol Rotunda, and replace it with a tribute to Muhammad Ali, “the Louisville Lip” and “the Greatest of All Time.”
I just heard from the Ali family: It is the Champ’s belief that Islam prohibits three-dimensional representations of living Muslims. Accordingly, I have adjusted the petition to call for a two-dimensional representation of Ali (a portrait, picture or mural) in lieu of a statue.
UPDATE (Tuesday, December 2, 2014)
In this interview with WHAS-TV’s Joe Arnold, Governor Steve Beshear endorses the idea of honoring Muhammad Ali in the State Capitol (although he disagrees with removing Davis). Arnold explores the idea further on his weekly show, “The Powers that Be.”
Click here to check out WDRB-TV’s Lawrence Smith’s coverage of the story.
And here’s my op-ed in Ali’s hometown paper, the Louisville Courier-Journal.
UPDATE (Saturday, June 4, 2016)
In the wake of the 2015 Charlestown tragedy, in which a Confederate flag-waving murderer united the nation against racism, all of the most powerful Kentucky policymakers — U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell, Governor Matt Bevin, Senate President Robert Stivers and House Speaker Greg Stumbo — called for the removal of the Davis statue from the Rotunda. Today, as we commemorate last night’s passing of Muhammad Ali, there is no better moment to replace the symbol of Kentucky’s worst era with a tribute to The Greatest of All Time.
UPDATE (Wednesday, June 8, 2016):
Great piece by Lawrence Smith of WDRB-TV in Louisville on the petition drive to replace Jefferson Davis’ statue in the Capitol Rotunda with a tribute to Muhammad Ali.
UPDATE (Thursday, June 9, 2016):
Excellent piece on the petition drive by Jack Brammer that was featured on the front page of the Lexington Herald-Leader.
Highlight of the article:
Miller said he has received a few “angry comments” on his call to honor Ali.
“One of them encouraged me to kill myself,” he said. “You can quote me that I have decided not to take their advice.”
UPDATE (Friday, June 10, 2016)
The petition drives continues to show the Big Mo(hammed): check out these stories from WKYU-FM public radio in Bowling Green and WKYT-TV, Channel 27 in Lexington:
UPDATE (Saturday, June 11, 2016):
Still not convinced? Check out this excerpt from today’s New York Times:
By John Y. Brown III, on Wed Oct 9, 2013 at 12:00 PM ET
It has been over a week since I first learned (as part of several other “spoiler alerts”) that Walter White of the TV series Breaking Bad dies in the series finale.
Even though he was only a fictional character in a fictional TV series, I got attached to Walter (or Walt, as I –and those who knew him well–preferred to call him). And even with nearly 10 real days having passed to grieve the death of a made-up person, I am not progressing well and unable to fully come to grips with his demise (as well as the show’s demise).
It’s not that I support glamorizing meth dealers in any way. Nothing could be further from the truth. But there’s something about Walt that I related to and made me cheer for him, despite his morally ambivalent situation that turned into morally atrocious nightmare but still somehow was understandable at some level.
I had a soft spot for Walt from the start because in my college intro to philosophy course we were given a hypothetical question about a husband and wife where the wife was dying of a terminal disease and the husband had to break the law to obtain the life saving drug he couldn’t afford. I was the only one in the class who vocally supported the husband stealing the life saving drug as morally justifiable under the circumstances. And I still do. And would like to hear my former classmates explain to their spouses tonight–for old time’s sake–why they wouldn’t be able to justify stealing the miracle drug to save their life.
That hypothetical was, more or less, the basic plot for the series Breaking Bad. With a few new variables….and unintended consequences.
I am not saying that Walt represented getting in touch with the inner meth kingpin that lives deep down in every middle-aged man. Not at all. But he did represent the getting in touch with the inner king, of sorts, that lives deep down in every man and wants to find a voice before he dies. Walt did realize that part of himself before it took over and became an ugly and dangerous tyrant that ultimately destroyed him. But he made the journey. And it was an rewarding TV journey to follow. From milquetoast repressed cowardly “soft man” to living out every instinct he had repressed for so long….and taking it to it’s logical extreme.
“Every virtue, taken to an extreme, becomes a vice” taught the ancient Greeks. I learned that, too, in my intro to philosophy course.
As Walt explains to his long suffering wife in one of the final scenes. “I did it because it made me feel alive.” Isn’t that what each of us is after in our own less destructive and more conventional way?
As fictional characters go, we lost a good one last week.
I think it is agreed by all that our nation is politically fractured. The solution is obvious: cleave in half, becoming two separate but friendly nations with a shared history and a cooperative future.
I make this modest proposal at a time when the government is likely to remain closed for some undetermined period of time and there is an open question about whether we will honor our financial obligations. No one wants these results, but both sides prefer government closure — and potentially default — to forfeiting principle. Rather than a Hobson’s choice why not face the fact that each side should be able to have a representative government that reflects its belief structure? I can claim no special insight in suggesting this reasonable course of action, as the idea originated with Gov. Rick Perry.
For those naysayers who say it cannot be done, I echo Ted Cruz who has asked that we shoot for the moon. How could we determine which parts of America become Country A and which Country B? The answer is clear — we have already picked our future camps. Eighty members of the House of Representatives have asserted that it would be better to have the government close than fund Obamacare. In contrast, other members of the House and large sections of the Senate believe that continuing to fund the government is important, especially since there is no chance that Obamacare will be defunded.
The question of national destiny should be put to a vote, with each House district deciding which country to join. After ten years, the question could be put to the population again. Then the two countries would be set for half a century until there would be one final vote, setting forever the boundaries of two Americas.
Any current U.S. citizen would be free to move to either country — there would be a totally open border. If there would be any areas in which either country might want to work together, they could do so by mutual agreement.
Imagine the relief for both Americas. We could move ahead to deal with such national issues as infrastructure needs, immigration reform, gun control, education, climate mitigation, and such things as harvesting science to advance the national health. Or not. We could predict that one country would include New England, the Washington, D.C.-Boston corridor, the Pacific coastline, and the more populated sections of the west.
Most of the south and portions of the Midwest would make up the second country, supplemented by numerous rural districts in the west and in Pennsylvania. The good people of this second America truly believe “Obamacare” is killing jobs, are opposed to any gun control, would rather have low taxes on billionaires than ensure that babies have sufficient food, believe that global climate change is a fraud and that Voting Rights legislation limits freedom. Given these beliefs, why should they be married to people with such different viewpoints?
And why should the other citizens of America, who believe that a vocal minority of the population have hijacked the nation’s politics and prevented progress, be similarly weighted down?
Give everyone what they want — their own country to govern with cohesive values.
I suggest this not because I have the least personal interest in endeavoring to create two Americas. I have no other motive than the public good of my country, advancing our trade, providing for our children’s future and advancing the hope that some united national purpose may once again bloom, even if it has to bloom twice.
I often tell people I have 3 boys, ages 17, 20, and 47 – like many men, my husband is an overgrown teenage boy when it comes to some things, particularly his sense of humor when he’s around my actual offspring. They share a love of sophomoric and off-color jokes, ranging from flatulence to ‘that’s what she said,’ and none of them miss an opportunity to point out when an object or a name has any sort of phallic connection. And it’s not just the obvious – e.g. Anthony Weiner jokes. For example, in one recent morning paper I saw a reference to the short-lived Cory Booker scandal – apparently the Newark Mayor and Senate candidate had engaged in some harmless but flirtatious texting with a woman who worked in a vegan strip club. I thought that was funny and read it out loud to my husband and 17-year-old, and after they exchanged a series of lines about what kinds of meat were off-limits, my son chimed in, “So are people who go there vagitarians?” (When my boys were younger, Husband 2.0, who is not their dad, decided he had a novel way to cure them of inappropriate language. One night when I went off to a gig, he informed us all that they would have ‘swearing night’ over dinner, so they could get it all out of their systems. As you may suspect, not only did it not stop the swearing, it actually enhanced their vocabularies. But I digress . . . . )
I don’t have many ways of distancing myself from the frat house atmosphere in which I reside, so when I find one I take advantage of it. I painted my office a distinctly feminine lavender, I listen to classical music in the kitchen, and up til now I refrained from humor about the Speaker of the House, with his teenage-boys-find-hysterical last name. However, his role in the government shut down provides too much inspiration for me to ignore any longer. (That, and I’m probably worn down by the endless Family Guy quotes exchanged at my dinner table . . . )
Hi – I’m Jeff Smith, public policy professor at The New School in New York City, sitting in for Josh this week – a week full of political intrigue. Between Senator Ted Cruz’s theatrics, the government shutdown, the Obamacare rollout, and the looming debt ceiling, there’s a lot to talk about – and the standoff also raises intriguing questions about party alignment. This week we hosted three reporters who’ve been in the thick of it, Politico’s Ben White, Buzzfeed’s Matt Zeitlin, and the Washington Examiner’s Tim Carney.
Alignments typically occur when the dominant issue cleavage in a political system is disturbed by a new set of issues leading to widespread public demand for action. Given a two-dimensional issue space – imagine economic issues on one axis and cultural issues on the other – the minority party will naturally attempt to shift the focus of political debate to issues which will help it divide the other party’s coalition and attract more voters – which is what Republicans are attempting to do by focusing on Obamacare, which unites Republicans but splits Democrats from Democratic-leaning independents. Repeated iterations of such attempts by political parties may gradually produce a rotational movement of party realignment over time in a two-dimensional space. Such rotation helps explain why the 2000 electoral map was almost the mirror image of the 1896 map: it wasn’t that electorates in Nebraska and Manhattan traded their world-views and economic interests over decades; it was that in many respects, the two parties traded places. A realignment, then, comprises two elements: 1) a newly dominant issue cleavage and 2) a transformation not of political preferences generally but of the way that people holding those preferences align by party.
And so, although this week’s show mostly focuses on the shutdown and debt limit default, we also raise broader questions about how these battles may affect party alignment. For instance, does Wall Street’s alignment with the president against the Tea Party portend a broader switch of allegiances to a pro-business Democratic party under the banner of Wall Street-backed Hillary Clinton versus a populist Ted Cruz or Fed-auditing Rand Paul? Or might the emergence of a Clinton candidacy buoyed by Wall Street bundlers inspire a Warren-esque anti-financier insurgency that attracts elements sympathetic to both Occupy and anti-bailout libertarians – particularly if Wall Street-backed Chris Christie is the Republican standard-bearer?
This week, Polioptics fans get to hear three whip-smart young journalists –Politico’s Ben White, Buzzfeed’s Matt Zeitlin, and the Washington Examiner’s Tim Carney – delve into all of this and more. Matt and Ben explain the shutdown’s economic impact and the financial implications of default – globally, and locally – with an eye towards possible shifts in party alignment that might result from Washington’s current battles. And Tim takes a deep dive into the future of the Republican Party – and the conservative movement more broadly. Three unique perspectives not just on today’s news, but on tomorrow’s…and perhaps next year’s as well.
By John Y. Brown III, on Tue Oct 8, 2013 at 12:00 PM ET
Sometimes I stumble across a new website and it is like free falling into a black hole.
I start clicking and next thing I know 45 minutes has passed. Or 2 hours. Or longer.
One topic of interest leads to another topic and so on and so on until you are in a zone and are in the thrall of the thrill of discovering a brand new website that “you get” and that “gets you.”
It can be a time waster, of course…but also very much a reflection of who you really are— and where you are in your life.
Which makes me a little skittish about boastfully recommending the very compelling, timely, topical and substantive new website I found tonight:
AARP.org.
===
AARP is just too stodgy an acronym to make people turning 50 want to join. It doesn’t sound topical or interesting. Or like it has activities that someone 49 would ever look forward to participating in.Instead, it sounds like a place to go to play bingo and have group exercises in tho pool. With a the cafeteria that serves lots of soup and easy-to-chew entrees…..and probably offers prunes as a side dish at every meal.
It’s re-branding time.
We need a new name. And we know how to do this. Or at least the pharma companies that cater to us do.
How about Flomax! (with an exclamation point)? That sounds like an aging super-hero (with a cape and a dignified cane to beat off the bad guys). But it sounds fun too. Like a group with activities such as white water rafting, skiiing, surfing and Boogie Boards (with hand rails). But it’s better than AARP.
I don’t even know what AARP stands for. Ok. I do now. I just looked it up. American Association of Retired Persons. And if you’ll note that is without an exclamation point.
Who wants to join a group that makes you think of being put out to pasture—but protected somehow. And with some group activities so you don’t reach enfeebled oblivion sooner than expected.
No. No. No. If you look at the website it can clearly be cool to be 50 and over. Or at least 50–55. It’s not that old. Not really. OK, it is “that” old. But it’s not, like, a death march. It’s no the end! Only the beginning of the end. Or…..maybe…..the beginning of the beginning of the end. Or BOTBOTE. Bot and bote. Sounds a little French…but so does AARP. But BOTBOTE sounds like some place I wouldn’t mind seeing on the 4th day of a tourist trip to France. Not looking forward to it….but not dreading either. And keeping the possibility open of being surprised. AARP –if it was on the itinerary of the same trip, on the other hand, sounds like something you’d want to avoid before lunch or dinner. And that you’d quickly snap off a few pictures off and leave —before someone mistakes you for someone who belongs in that group rather than a tourist walking by.
I’m going with BOTBOTE. It’s mysterious. Doesn’t seem to ask a lot of us. But if we are at Barnes & Nobles and want the magazine, we wouldn’t have to buy another magazine (like Pscyhology Today) to hide it under as we walked to the counter. BOTBOTE could be something we buy with our coffee in the cafe. Along with a bowl of fancy tomato soup and a over-sized bran muffin. ; )
New hasbara YouTube sensation “Boycott Israel” could only have been written by musician Ari Lesser.
A political science BA from the University of Oregon, the 27-year-old ba’al tshuva reggae rapper is probably the only musician around capable of undertaking the long hours of research involved in making the extremely informative, catchy six-minute song.
“Boycott Israel,” sponsored by the pro-Israel campus advocacy group Here Is Israel (with the motto “get HII for Israel”), is a fascinating, rhythmically rhymed exposure of the double standards involved in the global BDS (Boycott, Divest, Sanction) efforts against Israel.
The fledgling organization, actively running since July, is trying to create content to appeal to US college students, says Lesser from his Cleveland home.
“The campus can be a rough place for Jews and Israel, I’ve experienced that first hand. There’s definitely some intense stuff out there.”
Lesser was commissioned by HII to create something that would reach college students and show how to defend against BDS claims.
Lesser decided to focus on showing what he calls “the double standard inherent in the boycott argument.”
In “Boycott Israel” Lesser raps about the obscene human rights failings of dozens of countries, from China to Saudi Arabia to the United States. Accompanying the straightforwardly shocking lyrics are graphic images of horrific events, some ongoing, around the world.
“Big props to Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International for going to these countries and doing good reporting. I wouldn’t want to go to a lot of those countries; I’m glad someone else did it for me.”
He’s quick to say that while as a religious Jew he feels a deep connection to the Land of Israel, he doesn’t always agree with what the State of Israel is up to.
“It’s not to say that Israel is always right — I definitely criticize when I disagree — but I don’t think a boycott of the whole country is honest.”
“Really, you see if you’re not willing to boycott every major country — and minor country — in the world, then BDS is anti-Semitism, or anti-Israelism, or whatever.”
By Nancy Slotnick, on Tue Oct 8, 2013 at 8:30 AM ET
The above title is my tribute to Jamie Foxx’s brilliant monologue this past weekend on SNL. I won’t use “How black is that?” because coming from me it will sound racist. From Jamie it just sounds so smooth. I love the concept about Obama too- that his first term was his white side at work. Now we’ll get to see the black man in him- fierce, fit and full of passion with nothing to lose. That’s the most impactful Obama- and I, for one, am so excited to see it. Israel is already taking notice. How snack is that?
So back to dating and relationships, since that’s my area of specialty. I used to own a real café, with a dating service for our customers. How snack is that? We served rice krispy treats iike the one you see here- they were so popular- why? First of all they were HUGE. (How snack is that?) Secondly, they were reminiscent of childhood. Thirdly, they were sweet and delicious. Need I say more? And people ignored the messy, digging right in and sharing with friends. Finger lickin’ good. Just like snacktime when you’re a kid. Pure fun. No worries. How snack is that?
No worries. I hate when people say that over text. It’s never coming from someone who really has “no worries.” What it really means is“I’m angry at you but I’m just going to pretend I’m not because I think of myself as the kind of person who is very Zen and nothing gets me mad. We can deal with our anger over text by dismissing it and we’ll be fine.” How snack is that? Not very. That was Obama in the first Romney debate. Obama in the next debate was all: “I’m gonna kick your butt so far from sideways that when we’re done I will have no worries.” And that’s just what happened. How black is that? (Sorry, I slipped.)
So I’m gonna suggest that when you meet someone new you ask yourself, “How snack is that?” when you’re on the date. That’s the litmus test for going out again. Clients always ask me: “I wasn’t attracted to him. Should I give him another chance anyway? I don’t want to hurt his feelings.” Not very snack. Why would you be doing him a favor to let him pay for another dinner with no chance of booty just because you feel guilty? You’re wasting your own time and his.
Please call me if you want to change that up- 212-712-0500. Consider it your personal wake up call. Snacktime for your lovelife! Get messy, have something sweet and fun, so that you can soothe the pain involved in growing up. Stretching outside of your comfort zone. Challenge yourself to know what you are feeling and face feeling bad. I am like your personal trainer for dating. There’s milk and cookies on the other side of the rainbow if you trust me, and you do the work. It’s not easy but it can be fun.
Now if you’re in a relationship, I have an exercise for you too. Every time before you call, text or email your spouse or your boyfriend, ask yourself: “How snack is that?” In other words, is what I’m calling or texting to say very important? Is it fun? Is it sexy? Is it a rice krispy treat for him/her? Or is it collard greens that have been sitting out too long at the Korean grocery salad bar? Challenge yourself to be more snack. Don’t let yourself get stale. Don’t be too Wonder Bread. Be unpredictable. Be Jamie Foxx.
Speaking of Jamie Foxx, though- I don’t know if he’s in a relationship. How snack is that? He’s quite a catch. He deserves an awesome girl who will admire him and put him in his place at the same time. When my husband filled out his profile at Drip, my old café (the day before we met, incidentally,) he was asked “What are you looking for in a partner?” His reply “Not a pushover.” I guess he likes a challenge- good thing for me.
So Jamie, if your people are reading this, and you are looking for true love, please have them contact me. I can help you figure out this crazy little thing. Because it’s complicated, just like the Facebook status says. Sometimes you need an expert, even if you’re a celebrity. I will respect your privacy. I’m good like that. I do understand that there’s a snowball’s chance in hell that your people will call me. And even less of a chance that you will. But that is my real number and my confidential voicemail. I’m willing to put it out there- that’s all I can do. Now it’s your turn. It was probably a white SNL writer that wrote that monologue for you anyway. Please have him contact me instead. No worries! 😉
By Erica and Matt Chua, on Mon Oct 7, 2013 at 1:30 PM ET
When I think of Bolivia, I’m immediately transported to the Tarabuco Market. The smell of stewed meat fills my nostrils and the vibrant colors of woven textiles dance before me, this is how I remember Bolivia. I loved following the Gringo Trail through the Salt Flats and reaching the summit of Huyana Potosi, but Bolivia really came alive at the bustling markets. While women went about their weekly shopping, children in tow and tourists bargained for alpaca sweaters I roamed along the dusty side streets taking in the sights, sounds and smells. Here is what I found:
The Tarabuco Market is held every Sunday and spans far beyond the busy central square where much of the tourist souvenirs are sold. Wandering past the main square I found a huge vegetable market, a live animal auction and several side streets lined with artisan shops. All the neon blankets, shawls and belts are beautiful, but the people is what caught my eye. The indigenous Yampura women almost seemed to have a uniform, every one in a bright colored A-line skirt accompanied by an embroidered blouse, topped off with a bowler hat. Children were attached like accessories to the back, side or front.
The penetrating stare of a Bolivian woman at the Tarabuco Market (above). Her smile was as intense as her eyes when I shared the photo she allowed me to take of her and her daughter. Bolivians are not known to be welcoming or friendly to visitors, but when you are rewarded with a smile you can be sure it is genuine.
Read the rest of… Erica and Matt Chua: Tarabuco Market
By John Y. Brown III, on Mon Oct 7, 2013 at 12:00 PM ET
Does it pay to be an author?
Of course it does.
Sometimes it pays a whole lot.
Other times not so much and you just have to hope to aim higher and hit the next time around.
And at still other times, depending on what sort of math calculations you choose to use, writing can actually cause you to lose money and make you wonder, “Is merely having a book listed on Amazon.com worth the money you are in debt to make this book?”
I can say that of the three categories I am probably most familiar with the third category.
Above is a copy of my first check for profit on my book Musings from the Middle. I chose not to try to make money off it and charge only about a dollar profit a book just to cover costs.
As you can see my first check (which I have been advised is going to be by far my biggest) is $119.12. Now that’s nothing to sneeze at, of course, and is clearly in the “three figure range.” At least until you realize that has to cover a family of four including two teenagers with one in college and one just a few years away. When looked at that way, $119.12 doesn’t sound like as much as it did at first blush.
Given today’s college tuition prices, $119.12 will only cover about 33 minutes of one class your freshman year at a state university.
When you factor in the help I got putting the book together, organizing it, designing a cover, etc, well….all that cost about $400. So when you add the $119.12 to that figure you get something like….well, about — $280.
So let’s assume that over the next year (or five years), I get other checks totaling this amount? I am trying to be realistic. My book is currently ranked on Amazon.com at #1,972,197. Again, nothing to sneeze at. Until you realize that means that 1,972,196 books are ranked ahead of you.
So if I do get a total profit on the book of $240 that means I am only in the hole a mere $160.
Click here to purchase
Which now leads to the big question. Would I pay $160 to be able to say I have a book on Amazon.com?
The answer is, I apparently already have.
Had I not yet done it, I would be willing to pay…..hmmm…..maybe $150. And could see myself caving in if pushed on $160. So, I guess, all in all it is a good deal. And 33 minutes in a class at a state university is nothing to sneeze at–with today’s college tuition prices.
Blog this!
So I’m gonna suggest that when you meet someone new you ask yourself, “How snack is that?” when you’re on the date. That’s the litmus test for going out again. Clients always ask me: “I wasn’t attracted to him. Should I give him another chance anyway? I don’t want to hurt his feelings.” Not very snack. Why would you be doing him a favor to let him pay for another dinner with no chance of booty just because you feel guilty? You’re wasting your own time and his.
