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 Thu Oct 3, 2013 at 12:00 PM ET
Deep religious ponderings.
I don’t believe my religion is right and other religions are wrong.
But if pressed….I do like to think my religion is just a little bit superior to yours.
You know, classier, I guess.
Maybe a bit more “uptown” and perhaps even a little more sophisticated, too.
I guess what I am trying to say is that we Presbyterians, as a denomination, tend to do better at cocktail parties than our competitor denominations.
For example…..I just had a couple of Church of Latter Day Saint women drop my my house to share some literature with me. Thought it was UPS but when opened the door saw no brown but did see the The Watchtower publication being held by one of the ladies— and instantly knew that it wasn’t UPS —and didn’t appear to be FedEx or DHL either.
I admire Mormons a great deal. But I am glad my religion doesn’t go door-to-door to evangelize. Telemarketing to evangelize would be beneath us too. We are better than that. We use mass mailings, for example. And try to keep telemarketing campaigns to minimum.
Of course, I didn’t say anything to the Church of Latter Day Saints ladies about any of this. Just thanked them and suggested they talk to a neighbor who had friends last weekend park in my driveway.
Debating religion on my doorstep wouldn’t have been very Christian of me. Especially when it would be easier for me to wait and just talk about them behind their backs on Facebook.
And I would never bring up something like this at a cocktail party.
But wouldn’t put it past a Methodist.
===
What is the world’s most popular “unsaid” daily prayer?
My guess is….
“Why can’t the rest of the world just behave! So I don’t have to.”
I recommend saying it at least once out loud. After that, I find I ave a hard time even thinking it to myself.
Sometimes saying something out loud–and hearing it–helps me stop thinking it to myself.
“Strength does not come from physical capacity. It comes from an indominable will.” ~ Mahatma Gandhi
Personal fitness is like life; you need discipline to be successful, it requires strength and will and no matter how much it hurts or you want to quit, you must keep going. We can learn much from Gandhi; a believer in inner peace and happiness, as well as the quest to always better yourself.
This weekend I found a picture (see right) that listed Gandhi’s “10 Fundamentals to Changing the World.” These are really just steps to changing yourself, ultimately improving and making a better YOU.
Now lets take this list and apply it to fitness:
1. Change yourself- your habits dictate your outcomes. In order to get the result you want you MUST change something that is preventing you from attaining it. What is it? And are you willing to change it?
2. You are in control- there is not much we are in control of in life, however what we are in control of is; our attitude and how we perceive the world. Always remember nothing is stronger than self, it can beat anything.
3. Forgive and let go- this is a life quality. We spend way too much time mad at people and some of us use it as ammo for our fitness goals. Do not try to improve your body out of spite to your ex-boyfriend. This motivation only lasts for so long. Forgive, move on and grow.
4. Without action you are not going anywhere- reality is most people are scared to take the necessary steps to improve their selves. However, you can hope, wish and pray to have the body of your dreams but without hard work, nothing is possible. Actions speak louder than words.
5. Take care of this moment- We age everyday and we are not promised tomorrow. Take care of the precious moments we have, try something new and be better for it. Life is short, enjoy it while you have it.
6. Everyone is human- including me and you. We all make mistakes and we all make bad choices. As long as we learn from them they are not mistakes, just learning experiences.
7. Persist- persistence is a virtue but which all people should possess. If you want something be persistant about it, do not let it go. Get your rear end into the gym and make things happen.
8. See the good in people and help them- the ability to motivate is a special gift and a gift that must be replicated. See people for the good in them instead of the bad, you will appreciate people more this way. Plus, you never know who you will run into that might just change your life.
Read the rest of… Josh Bowen: In the Spirit of Indominable Will
GORE ’88 REUNION: A tipster emails: “Over the weekend, Al Gore reconnected with much of his 1988 presidential campaign team at a 25th reunion party at John Jameson’s 150-year-old wood-frame house near Eastern Market. In attendance were: Roy Neel, Peter Knight, Jackie Shrago, Jean Nelson, Jack Quinn, Jacquie Lawing Ebert, Mitchell Berger, Fred Duval, Sonny Cauthen, Alan Kessler, Katie McGinty, Pam Eakes and Ambassador Alan Blinken and his wife, Melinda Blinken. The reunion was organized by former Kentucky State Treasurer Jonathan Miller, who started his political career on the 1988 campaign as director of Students for Gore. One attendee described Gore as ‘fit and full of great energy’ and remembered the campaign as the first presidential race where ‘big ideas about the environment and technology were discussed.’”
Writes attendee David Crossland:
Al Gore looks Fabulous! He’s tan—the ozone factor suits him. He’s dressed to make us feel comfortable, even though his made-to-measure look must cost more than a Nissan Leaf. Tonight, Al is downright sexy.
This is the 25th anniversary weekend of Al Gore’s run for the Presidency back when he sought the nomination in 1988. Then, he was the fresh Senator from Tennessee, still dancing the two-step in his kitchen withJello Biafra’s nemesis Tipper. Everyone is here at John Jamison’s beyond gorgeous home on Capitol Hill, which feels more like Savannah than DC. Is that really Spanish moss?
The texture of this swell Democratic crowd is pleasantly what you’d expect. There’s a two year old toddler weaving through legs, goosing peeps in all the fun places. The Folsom family-an Alabama political dynasty–holds court in the sunroom. Some A-gays (handsome as ever) are on the terrace chatting with Eleanor Clift. An elegant looking grandmother from NC steals a moment to smoke a cigarette under a moon vine in night bloom. It’s old magnolia south, but with an updated passport.
Most famous people don’t know how everybody looks before they walk into a room. Jane Fonda or Oprah walk in to a Georgetown dinner party and everyone has perfect posture. Al’s star is still rising. When he walks in, everyone stands a little taller, and tucks it in—looking a little thinner.
Clearly, the biggest purses south of the Mason Dixie want Al to throw his hat in for 2016, and we are celebrating the guy that could have/ would have steered this country boldly where no man has gone before.
Al preaches to the choir, but his gospel resonates. I can’t help getting angry at Justice O’Connor; now saying she regrets her decision that changed the course of our world. Al is certainly in better shape than Hilary right now, and I bet he could make it. Problem is–Washington treated him so badly. If we ever actually asked the man to dance again, would he?
By John Y. Brown III, on Wed Oct 2, 2013 at 12:00 PM ET
The existential angst of being at that “in between place” in life.
And Facebook.
I am at that point in my life where I am still hopeful enough about life to believe that changing my profile picture on Facebook will yield some small degree of new happiness or uptick of social meaning ; but yet wise enough to anticipate the harsh reality that will settle in moments after changing my profile picture –that I am, in fact, the same flawed person with the same human problems that I was before the change of Facebook profile pics only now a little less dignified for believing something so inconsequential could add something of significance to my life.
And yet still shallow enough to respond to this existential grieving and shame (a la Facebook) to believe that this inner pain can be adequately relieved by changing my profile picture a second time.
===
Aging is a funny thing in how it changes our perceptions and opinions on things.
The older I get, on the one hand, the less inclined I am to support capital punishment for murder.
And yet, on the other hand, the older I get the more inclined I am to support capital punishment for tailgating while driving.
Q: Here’s my problem: I’m secretly dating someone who works on an opposing campaign. I know what you’re thinking: This is like something out of a movie, or like James Carville and Mary Matalin. But we’re just two people who really like each other and don’t want to let the campaign get in the way of a blossoming relationship. Is this too scandalous? Should we take a break, or do you think we can survive it? —Juliet (obviously not my real name!)
Yes, “Juliet,” something about your question suggested that might not be your real name, though I appreciate the clarification. As for you and your star-crossed lover, your situation does sound a bit like a movie—the dreadful 1992 Michael Keaton vehicle Speechless.
Forgive my tone, Juliet, but, really, chill. By today’s standards, what you’re doing isn’t very scandalous, unless of course you’re leaking poll numbers and television ad scripts. In fact, someone else on your campaign is probably hooking up with someone on an opposing campaign as well. Politics is a small and horny world. So go ahead and date—quietly for now if you prefer, but openly if you like. Assuming that your boyfriend on the other campaign isn’t a 15 year-old intern, I’d suggest that this cycle’s candidates have rendered your love life rather quaint.
Q: Did you see the Washington Post article about the longtime Hillary Clinton aide getting mixed up in shenanigans during the 2008 campaign where she appears to have coordinated a so-called independent expenditure on behalf of the campaign? It reminds me of what you got in trouble for. What’s the difference, and what do you think will happen to her? —M.E, Washington, D.C.
Well, one big difference is about $600,000 (the expenditure in question was nearly $609,000, whereas the expenditure during my 2004 race was approximately $10,000). A second difference is that—at least according to the Post article—the Clinton aide in question, unfortunately, allegedly put some things in writing, unlike my campaign aides who met with an outside consultant. But the biggest apparent difference is that none of her closest friends wore a wire and got her to talk, so it may be possible for her to explain away alleged emails that strongly suggest illegal coordination but leave some ambiguity. “I was merely providing Sen. Clinton’s campaign schedule for an old associate who wanted to invite friends to some events,” she might say; or “I provided information about our field operations to an associate who said he knew some willing campaign helpers, but I had no idea he was planning any sort of independent expenditure.” I should stress that I’m not accusing anyone of a crime here but speculating about possible defenses. Given the woman’s status as a longtime Clinton aide and the high stakes as Hillary contemplates 2016, I’d expect she’s receiving top-flight legal advice. The outcome is difficult to predict without seeing the actual emails, but it will sure be interesting to watch it unfold.
Read the rest of… Jeff Smith: Do As I Say — A Political Advice Column
By Jason Atkinson, on Wed Oct 2, 2013 at 8:30 AM ET
Contributing RP Jason Atkinson continues to pump out exciting and sometimes hilarious films about its adventures in the great northwest.
Here’s his latest, “Spring Skwala,” a film featuring Jason, Jim Root and Ken Burkholder chasing Brown Trout on the Owyhee River during the Spring Skwala Hatch.
By John Y. Brown III, on Tue Oct 1, 2013 at 5:00 PM ET
A post, a question and a response. And an apology.
Earlier today I posted my thoughts on the government shutdown.
“Great leadership is the ability to successfully blame others for your failures…..Said no one never.”
A longtime friend then asked if I was suggesting others shouldn’t be held accountable or tbat it was bad form to blame.
And here’s my response:
I don’t mean to say either of those things. I am saying that when the people we elect to represent us utterly fail as a body to function to the point that the entire system is shut down, I really don’t give a flip who they think is to blame until they first want to talk about their own failure to do the job they were elected to do. And that job, in my view, isn’t prissing around the halls and floors of Congress to see who can point their finger most forcefully while shrilly blaming another because someone didn’t get their way.
I am embarrassed at my country’s leadership right now. Not because they disagree but because their cause has become so petty, so limited, so thinly-veiled, so self-serving and so antithetical to a governing body that once was the envy of the world.
We should be embarrassed that our leaders have taken a pivotal policy issue of our day and while marshalling our greatest policy minds and medical and technical resources have turned the entire debate into an exercise demonstrating NOT how a great country solves its problems but rather demonstrating how petty a great nation is capable of being–in spite of its greatness.
And we as voters and citizens are complicit in this breakdown. Our elected leaders are, after all, only a reflection of ourselves. That is the good news and bad news of a democratic system.
The government shutdown is, in my opinion, hardly our finest hour in modern times as a nation. Of course, it is not our nation’s darkest hour in modern history either. But it is certainly one of our nation’s most frivolous and unenviable moments. And I hope we can muster the decency and self-respect to make it a very brief one.
—And in the spirit of my response, here is my apology.
I would like to speak for myself now and say that as a citizen and voter I have failed to take the time I should have to read and understand adequately the complex issues at the center of our nation’s healthcare debate. I have failed to listen intently and seriously to those whose politics are different from mine. I have at times sneered and dismissed those who disagree with my party’s position and selfishly sought refuge inside an echo chamber of partisan commentators, news sources, and websites.
I have not done my duty to become a adequately informed citizen and add constructively to the debate. I have chosen easy catch phrases and one-liners in place of a more nuanced and thoughtful understanding of our national healthcare challenges. I understand enough to know there are no easy amswers or obvious solutions and my self-centered and lazy approach has contributed to the trivialization and caticaturing of many important aspects of healthcare policy.
Although I have been careful not to make a habit of using social media to insult those who disagree with my party, I have at times wanted to and in private moments have done just that. I have a role in this national debate and have not asked enough of myself and can’t act too surprised that the debate has culminated today in an unspectacular moment where seemingly everyone loses and no one is to blame.
I am to blame for my failure in my small citizen role. And I hope to make up for these failings going forward. But for tonight, I can at least accept blame in some public way and apologize for my part. And do.
I’ve always prided myself on both keeping an open mind and having strong opinions – sure, it’s a tough balance, but as a former high school debater I still remember the skills we developed having to argue on both sides of any issue. And while I believe I’m in the right about most things, I have always tried to consider the opposite point of view.
Until now . . . the GOP antics about the debt ceiling and government funding have left me unable to comprehend how they can simultaneously argue that it’s already destroyed the economy and killed people while also insisting we have to stop it now before people get addicted to it. And don’t get me started on the congresspeople who have compared it to Naziism, the Fugitive Slave Act or a mass outbreak of cellulite in Hollywood. (Yes, I made up that last one but it makes just as much sense as the others!)
When I contemplated writing a song about the latest from the GOP, I started to worry that I might offend people. And yes, some of my best friends actually ARE Republicans. Of course, I’m in the San Francisco area, so Republicans here tend to be pretty moderate, particularly about social issues like marriage equality, medical marijuana, and reproductive choice. (One of my favorite New Yorker cartoons shows a woman telling her friend about her last date: “He says he’s a fiscal conservative and a social liberal – that means he’s cheap and he sleeps around!” – but I do believe my friends who describe themself the same way . . . )
However, when the subject of politics came up, a friend of mine said, “I’m a registered Republican, and I’m thoroughly disgusted with my party these days!,” and I don’t think she’s alone. So if you look at it that way, making fun of the GOP actually IS bi-partisan . . . .
Given that not a single Democratic voice has surfaced in favor of bending on the House GOP’s demand of a moratorium on the health care law, and since it is unlikely that the House would accept the one remotely plausible counter-offer of a one year delay of the individual mandate, the government shutdown is about to commence.
Whether that eventuality proves to be a blunder that thwarts the recovery and casts Republicans as intransigent extremists is a gamble I would rather Republicans not run. I’m in the camp that fears that shutdown politics will be costly for the party, from Virginia’s November races to the Senate fight in 2014. But even when the crisis eventually resolves, likely through some Senate procedural device that bypasses or outwits the House, the more meaningful dilemma is that the right’s path to brinksmanship has not really been countered by any articulate, influential conservative voice.
The case against the Ted Cruz putsch has been advanced in Republican circles, to be sure, but largely in the context of either the Wall Street fallout or disdain for Cruz’s leveraging of the defund Obamacare strategy to elevate his presidential ambitions. Missing is an alternative, conservative anchored vision of what the political right might more constructively be doing to advance its agenda.
What would such a message sound like? It might, for example, point out that Republicans are sacrificing one of the most principled critiques of the Democratic maneuvers on Obamacare: that the process of passing the law circumvented congressional rules and fed the public’s cynicism about congressional responsiveness to public sentiment. The defund movement’s tactics—risking a government stoppage that every poll suggests is deeply unpopular and seeking to effect a dramatic policy shift without anything resembling the normal process for repealing legislation—resembles too closely the Democrats’ insistence on driving through a healthcare overhaul in the face of broad opposition, through a parliamentary slight-of hand that effectively imposed one congressional chamber’s prerogatives on the other.
Read the rest of… Artur Davis: Where Is the Right’s Answer to Ted Cruz?
Blog this!
