China has taken jobs and even the Hummer from the United States.  Tom Qian of  Shanghai Daily reports that Qiu Xuefan, vice director of Wenzhou Chamber of Commerce, has announced plans to construct a smaller version of Neverland  at Xianghua Town of Chongming County, which is about an hour drive from downtown Shanghai.  The project which will cover  667,000 square meters is expected to cost 100 million yuan (US$14.6 million) and be completed in a year.

Meanwhile Gerald Posner of the   Daily Beast reports that a senior executive of Colony Capital which controls the original Neverland states that it will not be used as a  Michael Jackson museum. 

No wonder China is growing economically while the U.S. is declining.  Chinese business leaders recognize opportunities that Americans do not.

Michael Jackson may or  may not have been the "greatest entertainer of all time" as his supporters claim, but he continues to be very popular.  His fans are at least as dedicated to him as Elvis Presley's fans are to him.   Elvis Presley's home Graceland continues to attract his fans 32 years after his death.  Paul Simon even wrote a popular song about Graceland.

Opening a museum to Michael Jackson isn't about Jackson, it's about his fans.   They deserve  a place  they can go to  feel close to him and remember him.

Those who aren't sentimental or dislike Jackson should consider the economics.   A Michael Jackson memorial would create jobs.  People would work at the site.  Others would provide services to those going to and from the site.  Visitors from other states and countries would want lodgings and meals.

The Chinese recognize the potential value of a Neverland.    Why should  Michael's fans have to travel to China to visit his memorial when we have the original?

If Colony Capital cannot recognize the value of Neverland, perhaps the citizens of California could pass a referendum to preserve the site and even make it a state park.  The referendum could authorize issuing bonds to finance purchase of the site by the state of California.  The bonds would be repaid through admission fees, memorabilia sales, etc.  The bonds might be so popular they would become a collector's item themselves.

California legislators who want Michael's  fans to vote for them might want to go ahead and authorize the project without waiting for a referendum.  Any excess fees from "Michael Jackson State Park" could be used to fund other state park activities.  Then there are  the tax revenues that tourism would generate.  Perhaps Congress could provide funds to upgrade roads to the site. 
     
American music companies have often accused China of pirating American CD's etc.  Will American apathy allow China to pirate Neverland too?  I see no harm in China providing a duplicate for Michael's Asian fans who cannot afford to come to the United States.  Americans shouldn't have to travel to China to visit Neverland.

China's Neverland won't be ready for a year.  The original  already exists and could be opened at any time.

Unless social conservatives were responsible for Sen. John McCain getting the nomination instead of a Washington outsider like Gov. Mike Huckabee or Gov. Mitt Romney,  they were not responsible for the GOP loss  of the presidency.

McCain lost because he had the disadvantage of being a Senator and a member of the incumbents  party when the economy was going the wrong way.  It was natural for voters to think  McCain would continue Bush's  economic policies. 
    
An  outsider might have been able to avoid being held responsible for the economy, particularly running against an incumbent Senator.  A Republican governor could have run against both the president and the Congress by blaming both for the economy.

Many political analysts ignore the fact that most voters base their votes on issues other than social issues like abortion.  Most voters are more interested in issues such as  economic policy, foreign policy or crime.    

Of the voters are consider abortion an important issue, most who support abortion would likely vote for Democrats anyway.  Many of those who oppose abortion are more inclined to the Democratic positions on economic issues, particularly with a bad economy.  Many conservative leaders  were complaining before the election that Barack Obama was attempting to convince social conservatives he wouldn't make that many changes.   

Without the social conservatives, John McCain would have lost by an even bigger margin.  If Republicans want to improve their chances of winning they need to find more appealing positions on economic issues.      

A Democratic victory may have been inevitable considering that  since the Depression every president has been succeeded by his vice president or someone from another party.  And, only one vice president, George H. W. Bush, succeeded through election instead of through the death or resignation of the president.   Bush's victory might not be that significant considering that from 1840 through 1980 every president who won an election in a year ending in zero was succeeded by his vice president.      

In fact only three presidents who won an election in a year ending in  zero were not succeeded by their vice presidents.  George W. Bush is the first since James Monroe ( reelected in 1820) who wasn't succeeded by his vice president.  Thomas Jefferson  was the other president whose vice president didn't succeed him.

According to the Sherman Anti-Trust Act the leaders of the BCS and the bowl games they work with are guilty of a felony.

" Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony..."

The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled in  NCAA v. BOARD OF REGENTS OF UNIV. OF OKLA., 468 U.S. 85 (1984)  that college football is subject to the Sherman Act.

The BCS is set up so it limits who can  play for the mythical major college football championship.  The BCS system gives an advantage to the  better financed programs over  programs that  have less funding.  Congress enacted the Sherman Act  to prevent larger businesses from unfairly using their size to compete unfairly with smaller businesses.

The BCS contract itself may be described as   illegally  favoring the traditionally dominant football conferences.  According to CNN, "the six traditionally dominant conferences -- the Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big 12, Big Ten, Pacific 10 and Southeastern -- are guaranteed at least one berth in one of the BCS bowls. Each year, they are awarded $18 million, plus $4.5 million for each additional team that appears in a bowl game. Meanwhile, only one team from the smaller conferences -- Conference USA, Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt and Western Athletic -- is given this opportunity. For the 2006-07 post season, an average of $25.5 million in revenue was awarded per large conference, while the small conferences averaged $5 million each."

Major college football isn't about "rah, rah, rah" or  "win one for the Gipper".  Major college football is a big business and some head coaches make millions.  19 of the 20 largest football stadiums in the country are used by colleges rather than professional teams. 

The big football schools want to limit competition for players and money.   Schools that have the best chance of playing for the championship can use the fact as a recruiting tool.   
 Schools like the University of Utah might be allowed to play for the basketball championship, but not the football one.

The bowl games that participate  in the BCS  get the periodic opportunity to  claim that  their game is THE championship.  Prior to the BCS system various bowl games might claim this opportunity depending upon which how well sports writers rated the teams in a particular game.  Sometimes three or more bowl games might have claimed one of the teams should be considered a potential champion.

Congress is finally considering doing something about the  phony BCS championship game between two arbitrarily chosen teams.   The  BCS  rating system is badly flawed.  During the season highly rated teams  often lose games to lower ranked teams.

The rating system favors dominant teams in conferences in  years with mostly weaker teams.  Colleges players can only play for four years which means college teams have to rebuild with resulting weaker teams in some years.   In a conference with many strong teams,  the top team is more likely to have one or two losses than dominant teams in conferences with teams mostly having off years.  

Other NCAA championships are determined by participating athletes rather than by computers.  Why is football the only exception?  Some of the traditional football conference powers don't want teams from the less prominent conferences to have a chance to become champion.  Limiting who can become champion means more money for the football powers and encourages the most talented football prospects to attend the traditional powers rather than the other schools.  Getting the best talent makes it easier to fill the giant stadiums of the football powers.  
 
Teams wanting to be champions in major team sports like  basketball and baseball have to earn their way into the championship by defeating other teams.   The same policy should apply to a football champion.

The New Year's Day bowl games could be part of the championship tournament.  The season wouldn't need to be any longer than it is now considering that the so-called championship can come a week after the  New Year's bowl games. 

The basic tournament would include eight teams and involve three rounds.  Unfortunately, Division 1 Football Bowl Subdivision  has 11 conferences which would mean that three teams would need to be eliminated first.

Four conferences  have  fewer than 10 teams playing football -- Big East, Mountain West, Sun Belt, and Western Athletic Conference.  These conferences might be treated as a "super conference" and have a two game playoff to determine a team to join the other 7 conference winners.  

Three bowl games could be rescheduled in late November and/or  early December to accommodate them.  For example, the New Mexico Bowl which pits the Mountain West against the WAC could become a first round game with another bowl game for the Sun Belt and Big East.  The winners of these two bowls would meet in a third bowl game to determine the team that joins the other 7.     Northeastern bowls might be practical in this time period because temperatures aren't as low as they are at the end of the year.
 
Alternatively, two of the larger conferences could be added to this group with the six teams each playing one game to reduce the number to 3 which would join the 5 remaining conferences.  Perhaps what are considered  the weaker two conferences, Conference USA and the Mid-American Conference with 12 teams each, could join the Big East, Mountain West, Sun Belt, and Western Athletic Conference.   The Pac-10 and Big 10 with 10 and 11 teams respectively would also be candidates for the other two teams. 

Under the 6 team situation, the  teams might be rated in some way so that the three strongest teams play the three weakest teams.  Alternatively, two conferences could be paired in an annual bowl type game that would take place the same weekend as the conference championship games for conferences such as the Big 12 and SEC . This option might be particularly attractive to the Mountain West and Western Athletic Conferences whose New Mexico Bowl   could become the qualifying round game.  .  

In the long run, a ratings system might be established based on how each conference's representatives performed in past tournaments.   A conference would receive a point for each  victory in the tournament. The champions of the five conferences with the highest raking would automatically  qualify for the tournament. 

There would be three scheduling options for tournament rounds for the eight teams.

Option 1:  the first round would be played the week after the end of the regular season,  the second (semifinal)   the week before Christmas  and the championship as part of the New Year's bowl games.

Option 2:  the first round would be played the week before Christmas,  the semifinal on New Year's Day and the championship a week later.

Option 3:   The first round would be played on or about New Year's Day as part of the traditional bowl games, the semifinal a week later and the championship the next week.  This option would extend the season by one week. 

Under the first two options the losers would be assigned to specific bowl games in a consolation round.   The losers in the qualifying round would also receive automatic New Year's bowl bids.

A championship tournament wouldn't harm the bowl games any more than the BCS  approach does.  A tournament would make some games more meaningful  and create opportunities for additional bowl games. 

The current strain of the H1N1 virus needs a better name than  the  "swine flu".  The name has been used before for an over rated flu strain and doesn't accurately describe the current virus.   The virus is a new strain and needs a new name. 

Calling it the "Y2009" virus would provide a unique name to separate it from  past virures. Perhaps the "Y2K+9" virus would be more appropriate in the Twitter era.    

The new strain of H1N1 virus was initially called "swine flu" because it contained genes often found in viral strains that occur in North American swine.  A more detailed analysis indicated that other viral genes were also present including genes from European and Asian swine viruses as well as genes from avian and human viruses.  Scientists call  this combination a "quadruple reassortment virus".

The term "swine flu" was used  for what turned out to be a relatively mild form of the flu in 1976.  In fact the  cure was deadlier than the disease including 3 deaths in Pittsburg among elderly people who received a vaccine to prevent it.     "The swine flu case of 1976 forever reduced confidence in public health pronouncements from the government and helped foster cynicism about federal policy makers...."   

Using the term for this version of the flu could be leading many to believe that this flu isn't  any worse than that one.  Health officials became concerned  in 1976 because of a few deaths, but the subsequent projected death toll didn't  happen.

Calling the flu "swine flu" misleads people into thinking it is transmitted by pork instead of people.  Even if it were in pork, cooking the pork would get rid of it.  The biggest concern in eating should be about the possibility of someone handling the food who has the flu.   

The Spanish flu of 1918-1919 may have killed as many as 50 million  Since then health officials  have become concerned anytime a new  version of the flu has appeared.   

The deaths in Mexico could indicate a dangerous disease, or they could  result from weak immune systems  or not having been exposed to forms of the flu than the flu itself.   The variety of different genes in the virus strain and the fact they come from different parts of the world could indicate the flu strain was brought in by an international traveler.

The diversity of the genetic makeup of the virus might also indicate it is an artificially created virus.  The Obama administration has downplayed the idea that terrorists might have created the virus, but the decision to have Homeland Security play a prominent role in communications with the media indicates administration officials believe the virus might be a terrorist act.  If it is an artifically created virus, it might be more likely that it is a laboratory experiment that entered the general population because of carelessness.

There once was a time when the refusal of a politician to release a document would provoke editorials demanding that the document be made public.  Journalists were suspicious of politicians who kept secrets.  Journalists were concerned that  politicians who kept secrets might be covering up scandalous behavior.

So why  no editorials about President-elect Barack Obama's refusal to release a copy of his  original  birth certificate or at least allow a representative group of journalists examine it?

Would journalists be as trusting of a Republican politician?  Have they forgotten William "I never had sexual relations with that woman"  Clinton?

Obama is from Illinois, a state with bipartisan corruption.  The current governor, a Democrat, seems destined to join his Republican predecessor in jail for selling favors. 

Real journalists should be naturally suspicious of all politicians,  because con artists can sometimes sound more convincing than those who are telling the truth.  
  
Ordinary citizens have to provide copies of birth certificates  to apply for Social Security or  even renew drivers'  licenses they have had for decades.  Why is it unreasonable to require someone wanting to be president to provide something more than a vague Hawaiian "Certification of Live Birth" to prove he is a citizen?  No one is going to use the information to steal his identity.

Hawaiin officials will only confirm that he has a birth certificate on file, but not that it indicates he was born in Hawaii.  Hawaii allows parents who are Hawaiian residents to register the births of children   born elsewhere.

Real journalists would be asking what Obama is covering up instead of supporting his secrecy.  Real journalists wouldn't be surprised that many suspect Obama is covering up a major problem such as the possibility he wasn't born in the U.S..  

After all why else would he want to keep the document secret?  He's already been elected and any embarassing information contained in it cannot change  the election results. Releasing the document won't compromise national security -- the reason often given for wanting to keep foreign policy related documents, such as the Pentagon Papers, secret.

I don't know if Obama was born in the U.S.  or not,  but  I know he could easily have  eliminated doubts by  allowing Hannity and Colmes or some other journalists to examine his original birth certificate. 

By allowing Obama to keep his birth records secret, the media may  cause Obama to think he can get away with refusing to release other documents that might contain damaging information.

Are those who call themselves journalists refusing to challenge Obama because they are afraid if they look behind the curtain that  they will discover  their "wonderful wizard of oz" isn't a wonderful wizard after all. 

 

Was Richard Nixon right?  Are presidents above the law?  Congress seems to think so.  It has no plans to require  Barack Obama to produce evidence that he is a "natural born citizen" of the United States  in order to take the office of President.

If  Congress isn't going to require Obama to prove he is a citizen, it should do the next best thing and enact legislation that insures he qualifies regardess  of where he was born or any subsequent actions that could have compromised his citizenship under existing legislation.  

Failure to insure Obama is a citizen  could create a constitutional crisis if the  courts eventually recognize that they have to  consider  whether or not  Obama is qualified to sign acts of Congress into law and  enforce them.  If an unqualified president can sign bills into law than  it is no longer important whether or not the bills themselves comply with the Consitution.

The courts have thus far rejected lawsuits questioning the "standing" of the plaintiffs to raise the issue.  A person being prosecuted for violating a law would have "standing" to question if the law were properly signed into law.

Failure to insure that  Obama is a citizen could allow nations that have evidence he may not be a citizen to use that evidence to blackmail him into doing what they want.  

Congess wants states to require us to provide proof of citizenship to renew drivers' licenses we have had for decades.  Shouldn't it impose the same requirements on those who want to be  president, or isn't it important whether or not a president complies with the Constitution?

So far Obama has only produced a vague "Certification of Live Birth" that Hawaii issues for babies that might have been born outside of Hawaii, including outside the U.S., to Hawaiian parents.  According to Hawaiian statues:

"[§338-17.8] Certificates for children born out of State. (a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child."

Barack Obama's mother certainly would have taken advantage of this option if her baby had been born in Kenya as some have alleged but not proved.  Pregnant Mexican have been known to cross the border into the U.S. for the sole purpose of allowing their children to be born as U.S. citizens.  Obama's mother would have wanted the same for her baby if she had miscalcuated and been in Kenya at the wrong time.

Dr Chiyome Fukino has stated:  "Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures." 

However, she has not said that the document states Obama was born in Hawaii.

Hawaii's "policies and procedures" even allow "Amended certificates of birth [to] be prepared and filed with the Department of Health, as provided by law, for 1) a person born in Hawaii who already has a birth certificate filed with the Department of Health or 2) a person born in a foreign country."

Based on past political controversies,  the refusal to state that Obama was born in the U.S. indicates that he probably was not born in the U.S.  Those who blindly accept Obama's claim that he is a citizen have forgotten President William "I never had sexual relations with that woman" Clinton.

 If  I wanted to be president, I would be willing to let the Washington Post publish a copy of my  birth certificate on its front page.  After all who is going to attempt to steal the identity of the President of the United States. Obama's refusal to make his complete birth certificate public indicates he is hiding something.  What else would he be afraid of than that the document shows he was born outside the U.S.?

It is generally accepted that Obama's mother was a U.S. citizen, but some question whether he was born in Hawaii or Kenya.  Congress could eliminate this problem by making provisions in 1986 legislation retroactive to some time prior to Obama's birth.  Any child born to an American parent, or at least an American citizen mother, would automatically be a U.S. citizen.  Congress could require DNA evidence for those who claim an American citizen father.  There is legal precedent for basing a child's legal status  on the mother's legal status.  During the period of slavery a child was considered free or slave based on whether the mother was free or slave.

Other questions about Obama's citizenship involve him becoming an  through adoption by his stepfather Lolo Soetoro.   They cite  a school document indicating he is an Indonesian citizen.  If Obama failed to follow the proper legal actions to negate that citizenship, Congress could change the law so that his failure isn't important.   Another set of allegations involve a suggestion he traveled under a non-U.S. passport after becoming an adult.   This allegation would involve legal restrictions that Congress could easily change so that they don't affect Obama's citizenship

If any of the allegations about Obama.not being a U.S. citizen are correct, there are likely documents possessed by foreign documents that would confirm the allegations.  If Kenya has a document indicating Obama was born there, Kenya could use the document get financial support from the Obama administration or even military assistance in the event of a civil war.  If Indonesia  has documents showing Obama as an Indonesian citizen such as an Indonesian passport, it could use documents to coerce Obama into helping the Indonesian government.  If Obama traveled to another country using a non-U.S. passport the countries he visited might blackmail him.

If Obama isn't a citizen and the courts don't remove him,  or if the fact isn't discovered until after he leaves office,  a precedent would exist for naturalized citizens such as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to become president.

I don't know if Obama is an American citizen or not, but if he is he can easily eliminate any doubt by making his birth certificate public.   His failure to do so indicates he is covering up something. The something he is most likely covering up is that he was not born a U.S. citizen and the only way he can constitutionally serve as president is if Congress changes the law so that he does qualify as a citizen.

If Congress doesn't insure Obama is a citizen and the courts remove him because he isn't a citizen, Congress would have to repass every piece of legislation passed between the time Obama took office and the courts ruled he was not constitutionally qualified to sign legislation into law.   If the Democratic Congress allowed a non-citizen Democrat to become president, the public might react by refusing to ever again vote for a Democrat for any office.

We average citizens have to prove to government we are citizens  just to renew an old  driver's license.  Shouldn't those who want to run our government have to prove to us  that they are citizens before they take office?  Or are elitist politicians above the law.

The current Illinois scandal involving the governor's alleged attempt to sell President-elect Barack Obama's former Senate seat demonstrates we need a constitutional amendment requiring special elections to choose replacement Senators.  In the future, there will always be a question about the possibility of  some type of secret deal involved in a governor's selection of  a new Senator.  How can voters be sure that a political or monetary favor was not involved in the selection?

The timing of the election should be sufficient to allow preparation for conducting the election while insuring selection of  a replacement as soon as possible..

The only possible exception might be in a general election year if there were four months before the scheduled primary or general election.  Conduct of a special election might  hamper preparation for these elections. In this case the legislature, rather than the governor, might be allowed to select an interim Senator from among those wishing the office who would serve until the primary or general election.

 
 

Monday night (12/01/08) Jay Leno asked Cody Willard of Fox's "Happy Hour" about  breaking up the auto companies, then answered himself that it wouldn't be a good idea.

Actually breaking up the auto companies might be a very good idea.  The auto companies, like many companies may be too large to manage effectively.  The business model of one company manufacturing all aspects of complex products  may be outdated. 

I don't mean breaking up companies according to car models.  Car companies should operate more like companies such as the airplane manufacturers. 

For example, Boeing doesn't design and manufacture its own engines and neither should  the auto companies.  The auto companies should concentrate on designing automobile chassis and installing various components developed by other companies on them. Attempting to design everything substantially increases auto company costs and delays development of new engine technology.

Automobiles should be manufactured more like computer systems with interchangeable components that are designed according to strict standards that insure computability.   Companies that concentrate on specific types of technology may have an advantage in development because those developing new equipment don't have to compete for funds with developers of other technology in the company.

Specialized companies have an advantage in that management personnel don't have to understand a wide variety of different unrelated activities.   Managers of specialized companies are thus more familiar with the company's needs and are better able to determine whether the company is making progress on achieving its goals. 

  Turning over  development and  manufacture of engines to other companies would reduce auto company development costs directly and indirectly.  Other companies would be taking all the risks.  These companies wouldn't have to pass all their development costs to manufacturers of new cars.  In some cases the new engines could be adapted to older cars.  They might even be able to adapt their  technology  to run my old  '76 Ford  station wagon.

Having other companies develop engines would eliminate duplication of effort by individual auto companies develop their own engines with failure not being an option.    

Auto companies wouldn't have to choose between developing electric engines, hybrid engines or some other type of engine.  Individual companies would work on one or more  types of engine. Some of these companies might fail, but some would succeed.

The gifted individuals who develop new technology often are more effective outside of large organizations.  Someone wishing to develop a new engine for an auto company must obtain approval from individuals high in the organization who may have no idea what he is talking about.  It may not be practical to develop a revolutionary  new auto engine in a garage the way Steve Jobs invented his microcomputer, but a small  company would be more likely to take the risk on new technology.  A small company  may have a better chance of attracting investment capital from venture capitalists because small companies don't have a lot of vice presidents to support. 

Large corporations are more inclined to preferring modifications to existing technology which is why the auto companies have been so slow to change engine technology. 

The computer revolution that put computers on everyone's desk top began with several small companies inventing their own computers.  I learned to operate a microcomputer on a SuperBrain.  My first microcomputer was a gray case Osborne 1, the first computer that could be carried around, although not as easily as a modern laptop.    Those who remember the early days of microcomputers remember names like the "TRASH-80" ( the popular nickname for Radio Shack' s microcomputer), the Commodore-64 and the Zorba.  Major companies like IBM didn't enter the market until later.

The auto companies have had decades to develop better engines.  It's time to turn the job over to other companies.

One of the nation's oldest and most important churches celebrates its 200th anniversary this year.   In 1808, 15 "people of colour"  who were members of  New York City's First Baptist Church decided it wasn't appropriate for God's house to have segregated seating and left to form their own church with the assistance of some Ethiopian merchants.  The new church's name came from the ancient name for Ethiopia -- Abyssinia.  Rev. Vanvelser was the church's first pastor.

The exact seating arrangements First Baptist Church used aren't known, but many white dominated churches at the time required black members to sit in the back or in the balcony if the church had a balcony.   Abyssinian wasn't the first black church in New York, but it was the first black Baptist Church.  Mother AME Zion church had been established 12 years earlier in 1796.  Abyssinian would be followed a year later by establishment of   St. :Phillip's Episcopal Church. 

The first building was on Worth Street.  When the building became too small it was sold and the church met in various locations until purchasing property on Waverly Street.  During the ministry of Rev. William Spellman from 1856 through 1885 church membership reached 1,600.  



Perhaps the most significant event in the church's history occurred on December 30, 1908, when the church called New Haven, Conn., pastor Adam Clayton Powell, Sr., to be its new pastor. His son Rev. Adam Clayton Powell, Jr., had been born a month earlier on November, 29.



In 1937 Powell, Sr., retired and his son became the church's most famous pastor.  Under Rev. Adam Clayton Powell, Jr., between 8,000 and 10,000 people were affiliated with the church.



The establishment of black churches played an important role in black social history.  Black churches provided an opportunity for development of social leaders in the black community.  Whites were in the majority and were unlikely to elect minorities to political office.  Even post Civil War southern states allowed black churches to have their own leaders.  



It is no accident that the early leaders of the civil rights movement were preachers.  Contrary to a popular myth, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., wasn't the first preacher to demonstrate for equal treatment.  The movement to obtain equal opportunities and eliminate segregation  began under a preacher at Abyssinian Baptist.  King merely expanded the fight to the south where resistance was greater and the danger was greater.    



Rev. Powell, Jr.'s, duties as assistant pastor of the then largest Protestant Church in the country during the Depression included distributing food and clothing to those in need.  He recognized that people really needed jobs that were in even shorter supply for blacks than for whites.



He established the Coordinating Committee for Employment which used mass protests such as his "Don't Buy Where You Can't Work" campaign to persuade various  businesses,including Harlem Hospital, to hire  more blacks.   In 1941 he used a bus boycott to force the hiring of 200 more blacks by the transit authority.   



These efforts reflected the spirit of those who established Abyssinian Baptist Church in 1808.  They rebelled against being required to "sit in the back of the church" and left to start their own church.  Powell rebelled against black job hunters having to stand at the "back of the employment line" and pressured employers into giving black job hunters more opportunities.  



In 1941, Powell adopted a new tactic, changing government from within.  He successfully ran for the New York City City Council.  Three years later he took advantage of redistricting to win election to Congress where, as I noted in a previous post, he worked to desegregate the military and the District of Columbia.  He also was able to play a direct role in anti-discrimination legislation.  



Dr. King had greater visibility because his efforts involved public demonstrations, but Powell was at least as important because he had direct access to presidents and members of Congress.  Presidents desired Powell's endorsement at election time.    



During this period Powell continued to serve as pastor of Abyssinian Baptist.  He didn't retire until a year before his death  in 1972. 



Abyssinian Baptist continues the effort to help those in need.  It provides housing for the homeless and senior citizens. The non-profit Abyssinian  Development Corporation oversees these projects and is seeking to revitalize the economy of Harlem.



It's current pastor, Reverend Calvin Otis Butts III, is following in the tradition of Rev. Powell by holding two jobs.  Butts also serves as president of State University of New York College at Old Westbury.  Butts wasn't raised in Abyssinian Baptist, but he began working there as a graduate student.  He is actively seeking to eliminate the last remnants of racism as well as seeking to eliminate negative lyrics and images in the recording industry.    

November 29 will be the 100th anniversary of the birth of the black preacher known as "Mr. Civil Rights".  No, I'm not talking about Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., although this man was named after his preacher father. 

Rev. Adam Clayton Powell, Jr, was conducting civil rights demonstrations when Dr. King was still a child in the 30's.   As assistant pastor at his father's Abyssinian Baptist Church he was in charge of providing food and clothing to those who couldn't afford them, on one  occasion he even gave  the shoes he was wearing  to a man who couldn't find his size in the used clothing.  

When  he succeeded his father  in 1935 it was the largest Protestant  congregation in  America.  The  church itself  began as a protest against  the segregated seating at New York City's  First Baptist Church in 1808. A century later the church would call  Rev. Adam Clayton Powell, Sr.,  to be its pastor.

Rev.  Adam Clayton Powell, Jr., recognized that providing food and clothing wasn't the best way to help people, so he began an effort to get jobs for blacks.  His  Coordinating Committee for Employment used mass protests such as his "Don't Buy Where You Can't Work" campaign to persuade various  businesses, including Harlem Hospital, to hire  more blacks.   In 1941 he used a bus boycott to force the hiring of 200 more blacks by the transit authority.    In 1941 he integrated the New York City City Council when he was elected as its first black member. 

In 1944, he became the first northern black from a state other than Illinois to be elected to the U.S. House of Representatives.  Rep. Adam Clayton Powell, Jr., informed Congress:  "I'm the first bad Negro they've had in Congress." The other black Representative,  William Dawson of Chicago, had avoided challenging the status quo.

Powell promptly integrated the House dining room and barber shop.  He persuaded other members of Congress to stop using the n- word on the floor of Congress.  He pushed for an end to segregation in the military and the District of Columbia and invented the "Powell Amendment" which, if successfully attached to legislation, prohibited racial discrimination in the use of federal funds.  Many years later  a similar provision later was adopted to require equal treatment for women.

Later he played a major role in getting President John Kennedy's New Frontier and President Lyndon Johnson's Great Society legislation passed.

Unfortunately, late in his career he succumbed to the temptations to misuse power and was eventually expelled from Congress for corrupt activities.  Charles Rangel subsequently replaced him.     Powell died on  April 4, 1972. 

The  focus on Dr. Martin Luther King's contributions has obscured the fact that King didn't start the fight to end segregation, he merely carried that fight to the south where the resistance was greatest.  Rep. Adam Clayton Powell  didn't start the fight either, but he  escalated it.   As a preacher he demonstrated that public protests and boycotts could change the situation.   As a member of Congress he  began the difficult process of changing  government racial policies.  Perhaps the military would have been integrated without his efforts, but his support certainly helped.    He forced Presidents Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower to act against  racial discrimination.  Powell, a Democrat,  later rewarded Eisenhower by  endorsing  him in the  1956 presidential election.

The Supreme Court's decision in Brown v. Board of Education didn't happen in a vacuum.  Charles Sumner had argued before the Massachusetts high court that "separate but equal" was impossible a century earlier in the Roberts case which had served as a precedent for the ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson.  Society had changed, at least outside the south. 

Integration was the coming thing.  The nation's principle government organization, the military, had been integrated as had its most popular sport, baseball.  The justices might have been aware of Dwight Eisenhower's role in eliminating segregated theaters and other facilities on military bases and eliminating segregated facilities in the District of Columbia even though Eisenhower had acted quietly.   

Many  people suggested after the nomination of Gov. Sarah Palin as the Republican vice presidential candidate that she was  comparable to Jimmy Stewart's character in the Frank Capra
movie "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington".   The character in one of the other movies in the unofficial trilogy that included "Mr. Deeds Goes to Town" is  somewhat similar to the  Democratic presidential nominee  Barack Obama.

"Meet John Doe"  is about a man plucked from obscurity because of his inspiring speeches.   In the movie set in the Depression, Barbara Stanwyck plays columnist Ann Sheridan who is one of many employees fired from "The Bulletin" after it is purchased by wealthy tycoon D. B. Norton (played by Edward Arnold who was also in "Mr. Smith..."), a man with apparent fascist tendencies who wants political power.    For her final column after being fired, she makes up a letter by a man called "John Doe" who treatens to jump off city hall because of all the corruption, etc. in the country.  The letter becomes a sensation and  as a condition of rehiring her she has to find someone  who will pretend to be the ficticious author of the letter. 

From a large group of unemployed men who claim to have written the letter, she selects a baseball player with a bad arm played by Gary Cooper (who also had the lead in "Mr Deeds...").  Doe takes the job in exchange for a promise of money so he can have his pitching arm fixed by Dr. "Bonesetter" Brown.  

The paper then proceeds to carry a series of protest columns ghost written by Sheridan under the John Doe byline.  Norton decides to put John Doe on the radio and Sheirdan's mom persuades her to provide a more positive speech instead of the negative columns.  Norton notices his servants are entralled with the speech and decides to start a national movement   in John Doe's name.

Norton wants to use the movement to help him and his crooked friends take over the White House with Norton as the candidate.    Doe overhears the plot and leaves town.

In the real life version Barack Obama is the person plucked from obscurity because of his ability to deliver inspiring speeches and the wealthy tycoon is George Soros who decides to have his "John Doe" run for the presidency, possibly because Soros, who was born in Hungary, is ineligible.  Obama unlike John Doe decides to go along with the plot and run for president.  

Are we in a  Frank Capra movie?  We'll know Tuesday.  A victory by  Sen. John McCain  could indicate we're in a Frank Capra movie and everything will eventually turn out okay.   A victory by  Sen. Barack Obama could indicate the movie is by someone like Roger Corman and we don't know how things will turn out.       

Are you a conservative who would like to avenge Barry Goldwater's loss to Lyndon Johnson?  Do you have the knowledge and equipment to produce a video for YouTube? 

Have I got an ad for you.  In 1964 Lyndon Johnson produced an ad called  the "Daisy Ad"  that featured a little girl with a daisy followed by a  video of a growing mushroom cloud.
 
Barack Obama's  repeated threats to invade nuclear armed Pakistan to capture or kill Osama bin Laden make him  a perfect subject for  a modern version of  such an ad.

The ad would begin with a clip of Obama in the second debate saying ""And if we have Osama bin Laden in our sights and the Pakistani government is unable or unwilling to take them out, then I think that we have to act and we will take them out."

Next would be a news anchor, or possibly two reporters.  The anchor or 1st reporter would say: "President Barack Obama today told Pakistan to turn over Osama bin Laden or the United States would take care of him."

Then the anchor or 2nd reporter would say:  "The government of Pakistan has responded to President Obama's ultimatum by stating that it does not take orders from the United States and any attack on Pakistani civilians would have grave consequences."

Next would be a video clip of a little girl with a daisy followed by a video of a mushroom cloud.

 I have an 8 year old computer and dialup, so I'm not in a position to make such an ad.  I believe such an ad could harm Obama the way the original ad harmed Goldwater.

I don't have time right now to check to see if any of those newspaper editors and columnists who are calling for Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens to resign are also endorsing Sen. Barack Obama.  If any are doing both they are  hypocrites and probably partisan or even racist.  

Sen. Ted Stevens was recently convicted of not reporting various  gifts and home remodeling work from a powerful oil services industry company.  Sen. Barack Obama received money from the University of Chicago hospital in the form of a doubling of his wife's salary after he was elected to the Senate and then attempted to circumvent the normal National Institutes of Health grant process by earmarking  brain trauma research money for the hospital. He also attempted to earmark $1 million for a hospital expansion project.    Ironically, one of the critics of Obama's  research earmark was  Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens.

Both Senators have accepted favors from those who wish their help in obtaining government benefits.  That used to be called bribery.  Why should one Senator who has taken a bribe  have to resign and another allowed to become president? 

Is it because one is older than the other or of a different party or has a different skin color? 

We apparently have different standards here in Kansas than they do in Washington.  One of the county commissioners who is retiring this year has an auto dealership. When the county purchased vehicles that his dealership bid on  he abstained from participating in the decision. Local city council members abstain if a decision impacts their outside interests.

If Sen. Stevens  were honest he wouldn't have accepted favors from a company that did business with government.  If Sen. Obama were honest he would have stayed out of any decision involving his wife's employer instead of actively attempting to obtain funds for the employer.

Perhaps Obama could be excused on the grounds he is too young to know any better, but if so he is also too young to be president.

We should have the same standards for all Senators regardless of their party affiliations. Young Senators should be held to the same ethical standards as old Senators. 

Not all racists are anti-black.   Some racists believe that blacks are less capable of being honest and thus shouldn't be held to the same ethical standards.  I believe that blacks are just as capable of being honest as whites and should be expected to adhere to the same ethical standards.   I don't recall ever working with a black person whom I thought was dishonest, but there were a couple of white law enforcement officers who  became crooks.

I've seen occasional recent references  comparing  Pakistan to Cambodia during the Vietnam War.  If the Bush administration, or Barack Obama, thinks the two are comparable it is making the biggest miscalculation since the U.S.  made the mistake of getting too close to China in the Korean War.   Obama wants to expand the current Bush attacks on border areas to include an attack on Osama bin Laden where ever he might be in Pakistan.

U.N. forces had routed the North Korea Army and appeared to on the verge of winning when China became concerned that the Americans might decide to go ahead and conquer China as well because China had been supplying the North Koreans.  China responded by sending in its army.  President Harry Truman decided that it was best not to antagonize the Chinese any more than necessary and prohibited  bombing supply bases in China.

Enemies using sanctuaries  isn't a new situation for the U.S.  Andrew Jackson faced such a situation  along the border of what was then Spanish owned Florida during the administration of President James Monroe.  Jackson took care of the problem by in effect declaring war on Spain with nothing more than an ambiguous letter from President Monroe. Jackson invaded Florida without any authorization from Congress and captured the Spanish governor at a poorly defended fort at Pensacola.  Spain after a protest decided Florida wasn't worth the trouble and ceded it to the U.S.

 During the Vietnam War communist forces started using areas  of Cambodia along the Vietnam border as sanctuaries for supply depots and troop bases.  Cambodia with a population of only 7 million and no military force to speak of couldn't force the Vietnamese out and was afraid that acknowledging their presence would draw the country into the war.  North Vietnam denied having any forces in Cambodia. 

The U.S. occasionally bombed these forces and sent in commando type forces, but denied doing either.  The U.S. didn't want to formally enter the country because it didn't want to  risk forcing Cambodia to ask for assistance from someone like China or the U.S.S.R.  Cambodia also ignored the actions of  the U.S. claiming it wasn't aware of the presense of foreign troops or any bombing. 

In early 1970 Prince Norodom Sihanouk's efforts to keep the country out of the conflict failed and he was overthrown in a coup by pro-U.S. officials.   The new government  invited the U.S. in to eliminate the communist bases.  Subsequently the country endured a civil war that resulted in over a million deaths.

Pakistan with an estimated 2006 population of 165 million is the 6th most populous nation in the world with a population equal to the population of Iraq plus the population of  Russia.  It has the world's 7th largest military force, including nuclear weapons and missiles to deliver them.   Pakistan's population is approximately equal to the combined populations of World War II Germany and Japan. 

Militants are a potential threat to overthrow or even take over the government.  They would welcome an incident  they could use to attract support for  a  Jihad type war. 

Al Qaeda may be using Pakistan as a sanctuary as part of a  strategy to create an incident to draw Pakistan into their Jihad.  Osama bin Laden  might welcome  being killed if he could  achieve martyr status  and induce Pakistan to declare war or to start supplying his forces with conventional or nuclear weapons. 

Pakistan has already had a problem with a government scientist helping other countries develop nuclear weapons without government approval.  Other government officials might respond to a U.S. incident by allowing militants to "steal" nuclear weapons.  If those militants could also "steal" a missile that could be fired from  a ship, they might be able to destroy a U.S. city.

The United States have enough to handle without having to take on a major military power like Pakistan.  Al Qaeda sanctuaries in Pakistan do increase the hazards of those serving in Afghanistan just like the Cambodian sanctuaries increased the  threat to those of us who served in Vietnam.  The rockets and mortars fired in my direction may have been stockpiled in Cambodia before being provided for attacks.  The Viet Cong and North Vietnamese forces where I was took their R & R in Cambodia.

However, the potential threat of a  much wider war makes the risk of attacking sanctuaries, or attempting to attack Osama bin Laden as Barack Obama wants to do,  too great to take the chance.  Pakistan isn't a weak nation like Cambodia or early 19th Century Spain. Pakistan has a stronger military force than China had during the Korean War.  Little Iraq ignored an ultimatum. Why would any intelligent person think Pakistan would take orders from the U.S.?

Sen. Joe Biden speaking to Democratic donors in Seattle has revealed a major secret that Sen. Barack Obama didn't want revealed.

Biden warned supporters that our enemies would very likely  test  Obama  within the first six months if he is elected president, much like Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev tested newly elected president John Kennedy.  Biden also warned that Obama might not handle it well.   Obama's "gonna need your help to use your influence within the community to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."

For those unfamiliar with the Kennedy administration, Khrushchev decided he could take advantage of the young president because Kennedy appeared weak at a summit meeting and had mishandled an invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs.  Khrushchev  responded by constructing the Berlin Wall and preparing to place missiles in Cuba.  Khrushchev eventually pulled the missiles out of Cuba after moving to the brink of nuclear war, but he got what he wanted with  a guarantee of a communist regime headed by  Fidel Castro in Cuba.  The Berlin Wall remained until 1989.

The pro-Obama New York Times attempted to minimize the significance of the remarks by quoting Obama's efforts at damage control.  

“A period of transition in a new administration is always one where we have to be vigilant, we have to be careful,” Mr. Obama said. “We have to be mindful that as we pass the baton in this democracy that others don’t take advantage of it - that’s true whether it’s myself or Senator McCain.”

One likely test of Obama would come from Osama bin Laden.  Obama said in the second debate:  "And if we have Osama bin Laden in our sights and the Pakistani government is unable or unwilling to take them out, then I think that we have to act and we will take them out."

If Obama is elected, bin Laden may  challenge  Obama by saying "here I am. Come and get me."  He will know Obama's statement saying he will order Pakistan to turn over bin Laden will prevent the Pakistani government from moving against him.

Obama doesn't understand that the government of the nation of 145 million people  will not give in to any  American ultimatum like it were some tiny Latin American country.  Pakistan has nuclear weapons and can easily destroy any attacking force.   Any Pakistani government foolish enough to appear to be taking orders from the U.S., which many Muslims refer to as "The Great Satan", would be overthrown by radicals.  Many of these radicals would be willing to take a chance on a nuclear war with the U.S. because they would not mind dying to further their "jihad" to help radical Islam take over the world.

If Obama were foolish enough to attack Pakistan by attacking bin Laden, Pakistan might feel it had no choice but to destroy the base that launched the attack or even declare war on the U.S.   Pakistan might even  secretly provide al Qaeda with one or more nuclear weapons.

If Obama backed down from his threat, bin Laden would portray it as a sign of weakness and  use it to increase  recruitment and plan for terror attacks against the U.S..  Bin Laden  might  also be able to use Obama's apparent weakness to increase recruitment for new operations in Iraq.