Progressive At Cal
Thursday, October 31, 2002
Conservative Trading Cards
The Patriot has gone too far with their "activist trading cards." Here is my response:
Reactionary Cards!
Card1:
Bret Manley 2002-2003 Card
Hometown: San Dimas, CA
IQ: 87
Year in School: Sophomore
Major: Business Administration
Favorite Conservative: Himself
Email: bretgolf@*******
Bret is an avid golfer, always willing to miss a few puts before dark. He is currently president of the always horrible Berkeley College Republicans. After he graduates he hopes to enter the business world with a whimper and then propel any of that failure into the political world. Bret loves going to what he calls "festivities," his favorite being the 9/11 Memorial.
Links:
-Rory Miller on Bret
-Bret Manley at the 9/11 Memorial
-An Introduction to Bret Manley
-Psychological Examination
|
Wednesday, October 30, 2002
Tuesday, October 29, 2002
Daily Cal Letter
Some student this letter to the Daily Cal. It blasts Han Hong and SA and ends with this great line
The fact that an appointee was so vigorously debated is a good thing; this shows that our senate is very much concerned with its own holistic integrity. I applaud the abstaining senators, urge a censure of Han Hong and wish the ASUC smoother business in the future.
Even better than the letter is the writer, one Joseph Hall. As far as I can tell, he's an independent student in the astronomy department. =)
|
Monday, October 28, 2002
Student Action Post Coming
Don't worry, I did not forget about SA. I'm working on a sketch of Student Action with Rory. So far, it has 4 parts:
History
Constituents
Who Benefits
This Year
(and, maybe Boondoogles? =))
It should be published soon.
|
Friday, October 25, 2002
Saturday is the big antiwar demo in the city. Meet at berkeley BART at 10 AM. There could be some surprises at the demo, so make sure not to miss it.
NATIONAL MARCH AND RALLY TO STOP THE WAR ON IRAQ
BEFORE IT STARTS
10 AM Berkeley Students Meet at Downtown Berkeley BART
11 AM Rally at Justin Herman Plaza (Market Street at
the Embarcadero)
March to Civic Center Plaza
1 PM Rally at Civic Center
|
Foot in the Mouth
Han Hong has a priceless quote in the Daily Cal.
"Ms. Quindel, you were part of one of the worst senates. Who are you to be speaking?" Hong said, who served on the same senate with Quindel last year.
Ooops!
|
A Storm at Angry Clam
If you don't normally read the comments on Angry Clam, you have to read this one.
I'll quote it here:
BCR Boy-
Bret's problems are numerous. I'll list the basic ones:
1) he doesn't have a clue about politics, particularly the part about forming alliances. This was particularly glaring when he tried to run the Jones for Governor contingent last year.
2) He's an idiot. See his blog, or ProgCal's numerous posts on the subject.
3) He doesn't deal well with people who know more than he does, even about stuff he should have no reason to know about, like the inner organization of the Republican party.
4) Like #3, he doesn't deal well with getting advice from people who have a lot more experience in handling BCR than he does, like Robb McFadden. In fact, he actively ignores their advice.
those are some of the major ones. Generally, I wish that he had waited a year or two and gotten a better handle on the workings of BCR, or in the alternative, step down and go away, which would do all the Republicans a favor.
The Angry Clam [homepage]
Does anyone at Cal like Bret Manley?
|
Thursday, October 24, 2002
Student Action
What is Student Action? Post your comments in the SHOUT OUT below. I will answer the question soon.
(for example, who do they represent? what's their role in the ASUC?)
|
Wednesday, October 23, 2002
A tidbit about MSA Islam Awareness week literature
I like the MSA. They are way better than most of the Cal campus. Anyway, my amazing and exclusive access to my roommate who is a) a graduate student in a relevant field, and b) much better informed about any of these things than any of the Cal bloggers led to the following discovery.
Ironically, a promotional leaflet for MSA's Islam Awareness week, states that Islam began in the 6th Century. But it didn't, not by any reasonable stretch. The Islamic calendar starts in 622 AD, which is the 7th century. It seems like an innocent mistake though (you know the whole century thing, 20th century = 1900-2000), but then the leaflet goes onto say something to the effect that Islamic civilization been contributing to world progress for over 1400 years. Well, the leaflet follows the western calendar, and Islam has only been around 1380 years (2002-622).
So the ironic part is that this is a flyer for Islamic Awareness week, but whoever made it should improve their own awareness.
|
Holy shit, did I just read this on Justin's Blog?
A bookstore on Telegraph advertises celebrating books which were "Banned, Burned, Censored, or Vandalized." I went in, and they weren't celebrating my high school math book at all. That thing got vandalized by more students than the average girl got raped by. Maybe, just maybe, the fact that something is disliked doesn't grant it any special value.Justin, I am witholding your status as "moderate" pending further investigation of this incredibly troubling use of the English language. See a shrink and a good professor (try the rhetoric department) for more information about how to reclaim your property.
|
Tuesday, October 22, 2002
Alex Kipnis' Voters' Outline
Check out Alex's voters' outline. I agree with his California choices.
|
Kriss Worthington
Paul Hogarth has a great editorial in the Daily "what, we have to tell the truth the first time??" Cal.
Vote for Kriss, here's why:
No one on the City Council has more strongly advocated for students than Kriss Worthington. In his tenure, Worthington has appointed more students to city commissions than anyone else in Berkeley's history. He has pressured the university to build more student housing, and has supported housing projects that are affordable. Worthington has pushed to have Southside businesses, such as Fred's Market and the Durant Food Court, stay open later for students.
More disturbing to me is the people who support Micki Weinberg's campaign against Worthington. Berkeley landlords like Jim Smith, Eugenia Ruegg and Robert Ellsworth—the same people who have ripped off students for decades with high rents and abysmal living conditions—are supporting Weinberg.
And Shirley Dean supports Weinberg. In 1995 Mayor Dean successfully killed efforts to build low-cost housing at the corner of Haste Street and Telegraph Avenue. Seven years later, that site is still a vacant lot. Mayor Dean lobbied the state legislature to pass Costa-Hawkins—which effectively gutted rent control for students and other short-term tenants. She also pressured Chancellor Berdahl to decrease student enrollment a UC Berkeley, as a "solution" to the housing crisis.
Oh, and that reminds me, vote for Bates too.
|
Mano on the Patriot Layout Editor
Taking it to a new low, Philip Lu tries to explain away Hugo's original criticism regarding his frighteningly stupid comments about AIDS. The intro: "It would be very nice if people attacked ideas instead of other people. Would make the world a better place. Instead of going Phil your thinking is flawed because if X then Y, he goes Phil you are a sick bastard!"
But Phil, you are a sick bastard. Readers, keep the "attack ideas not people" comment in mind. It makes for some incredible irony as you read the words of the twisted and confused Mr. Lu.....
** "...My main problem is with the Gay/lesbian/transgender culture... a culture centered on sex. If the their movement was centered on sexual responsibility and equal rights, I would support it 100%."
** "...If we want to make progress, we need to put more effort into stressing impacts on sex today in society. By erecting a memorial, it's almost like implying those who died from AIDS did good things in lives, instead of implying like they made mistakes.
** "...sadly, you will never see a memorial dedicated to "rape victims with aids" because that's not the agenda behind the Gay Aids. Their agenda is to promote their own lifestyle of free, sex without consequence through overfunding of AIDs research, ADs that promote protected sex, not abstinence, abortion, etc."
** "...AIDS already has a cure. It is not a biological cure, but a social one: DON'T HAVE SEX, DON'T DO DRUGS. Giving money to a problem that already has a cure"
Sexual responsibility? The agenda behind gay AIDS? The cure is abstinence? Or maybe the cure is Christianity?
|
Sunday, October 20, 2002
Status of the debate as to whether the hata comment is racist, as it currently stands.
Devora says:
Racists address race, preferring one over another. The girl shown wrapped in a kaffiya in the SJP flyer could be Black, White or even of mixed Latino-Chinese descent. There is no way of telling, as her race is not revealed. End of story.No Devora, not quite the end of the story.
Imagine a picture of a girl wearing nothing but a Star of David. Imagine that Bret Manley says this girl belongs to a cult that kills babies and drinks their blood. I’d say, Bret you are being an anti-Semitic piece of shit. Would Devora come to the defense of the comment:
“The girl shown wearing a Star of David could be Christian, Athiest or even from a mixed Wiccan-Catholic-Athiest family. There is no way of telling, as her religion is not revealed. End of story.” ???Jeff goes to the dictionary and comes back with 2 definitions of racism, one of which is: prejudice or discrimination based on race. His reasoning as to why this does not apply to the hata comment is simply a negation of that definition. But this negation was based, in turn, on 2 examples of racism he mentioned at the beginning of the post, in which he just substituted the word generalization for racism. Then later (with help) he realized that in fact, those were examples of racist generalizations. He promised he'd follow up with a clarification but hasn't yet.
Jeff seems to be getting at the same idea as Devora, that since the comment is based on the hata and the way it is wrapped, it isnt racist. To date, noone has picked apart my summary version.
- Equating "Arab/Palestinian" with "terrorist" is racist.
- The comment equates something distinctly Arab/Palestinian (hata/kuffiyeh), with Hamas ("evil"/"terrorist")
- The basis for the comment is the hata and style of the wrap
- The hata implies race/ethnicity and the style connotes resistance
- The assumption is that any Arab/Palestinian struggling against Israel's occupation is a muslim fundamentalist terrorist
Jeff's logic is interesting, because then we can ask, what happens if I switch the hata for a burqa, chador, and/or hijab? If someone attacked a woman wearing this clothing on September 11th (it happened, a lot), is it a racist crime (hate crime)? Or are they were simply exhibiting "clothing discrimination"? By Jeff's argument, the attack only amounts to clothing discrimination, because if the item of clothing obscures the identity of the person, we cannot ever be sure whether (A) the attacker would also attack the woman if she were dressed in a tube top and jeans, and we cannot be sure whether (B) the attacker would call off his attack if he knew the woman underneath was White, or Asian, or whatever, and not Arab. According to Jeff it is only racism if A is true or B is true. [correction made per reader comments on 10/21].
UPDATE Part II:
Going to put this debate to rest. What have we learned? 1) According to most sensible folks, the comment relies on racist symbolism. 2) Even acording to Jeff, if I assume that Kevin was assuming the girl was Palestinian when he called her a Hamas member, AND/OR that he wouldn't call a Chinese Jewish American suburban rebel a Hamas member if he saw her wrapped this way, THEN I am justified in calling the comment racist. 3) If you think this assumption is a safe one, good. 4) If you prefer to assume otherwise, go ahead. You can now get away with speculating that the comment is not racist, and maybe monkeys will fly out of your butt. 5) If you are a raving mad Zionist, monkeys already fly out of your butt. Your fortune cookie says: "You are good with assumptions and bad with the logic that is generally used to tie them together."
|
Psychological Examination of the BCR President
Background
Bret Manley, president of the Berkeley College Republicans (BCR), is also a blogger. I've referred to his blog in the past and I will again today. If Bret edits his blog as he's done before, check out the Google Cache.
Does Bret Manley sincerely care about conservative issues? In a previous posts, I've pointed out how Bret Manley called the 9/11 Memorial a festival, religion a cult, and the leader of Cuba Juan Castro. These peeks of Bret show him to be not only embarrassing ignorant (would someone truly interested in politics not know Castro's name?) but also not exactly conservative. Now, Res Ipsa Loquitar or Rory will state that being part of the religious-right is not a pre-req for Republicanism, but I seriously doubt either will call Christianity a cult. Do I need to mention that most Republicans (and all sane people) would never call a 9/11 memorial a party?
Conclusion
I believe Bret Manley is president of the BCR for one reason: glory. Bret loves the spot light and is active in BCR for only for the attention.
Additional Evidence
Why, you might ask, did Bret choose BCR as the vehicle to his "stardom." This post of his reveals why:
TODAY I TOOK ABOUT 15 REPUBLICANS TO A BILL SIMON FUNDRAISER IN SONOMA. IT WAS ABSOLUTELY WONDERFUL. SIMON ACTUALLY TOOK THE TIME TO CALL US (BCR) TO THE FRONT AND COMMEND US ON OUR EFFORTS IN FIGHTING FOR PATRIOTISM. OH AND WE MADE THE DRUDGE REPORT FOR THE SECOND TIME IN 3 DAYS. IT'S TOO EASY TO BE A REPUBLICAN IN BERKELEY. I LOOK AT THE DEMOCRATS IN BERKELEY AS THE GREEN PARTY. THEY ARE ALWAYS THERE TO LOOK REDICULOUS [sic] AND HELP REPUBLICANS WIN ELECTIONS AND SUPPORT.
As Bret states himself, "it's too easy to be a Republican in Berkeley." It's so unusual that 1) there is less competition is rising up the ranks and 2) (more importantly) the media is always looking to put Berkeley Republicans on air. Does Bret enjoy media attention? See for yourself:
Hello again everyone, it has been a long time since I have written so here ya go. Berkeley has been the hot spot the past couple of days. I just got off the radio with Al Rantrel from KABC. We were talking about the recent events that have been going on here at Berkeley. If you are curious check out the article on-line at www.calpatriot.org.
We were on Fox News last night and we will be on msnbc tomorrow morning. Check us out. We're going global!
Bret Manley is not BCR president because he cares about America. He only cares about going global.
UPDATE:
It appears Blogger.com archives are messed up. View Bret's blog here or check out the Google Cache link at the top of this post.
|
Saturday, October 19, 2002
New Commenting System
Everyone agrees the old commenting system sucked. Comments were lost or duplicated, they took forever to load, and they were gone half the time.
From now on, please use the top comment system. I've left the old ones as a record.
|
Once more, for the folks that don't seem to be getting it.
Equating "Arab" with "terrorist" is racist. The hata=hamas comment equates something distinctly Arab/Palestinian (hata/kuffiyeh), with Hamas (commonly understood by most Americans to be a politically vile and criminal identity). The supposed logical basis for the comment is the way the hata is wrapped. Unfortunately, this logic relies on racist assumptions as well, ie, the idea that any Arab/Palestinian struggling against Israel's occupation must be a muslim fundamentalist, a terrorist, etc.
Incidentally, I've written a response to blogger Devora Liss on my blog, which can be found at lamanonegra.blogspot.com. She wrote a letter written in Friday's Daily Cal which says that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism. The bait? If she can give me the answers I've been waiting for, I might just change my mind about "standing with Israel".
Blogging is doing wonders for my ego (if such a thing is possible). Justin of Beetlebeat calls me a brewing storm threatening the moderate Calstuff hegemony. Jeff of greenthink thinks I am too quick on the trigger in calling people on their racism. And Rory is oh-so concerned that I am a terrorist supporter. Im a triple threat!
Btw, don't worry Rory, I will get to talking about the IRA, at some point. Your overwhelming political ignorance is manifesting itself really nicely in the issue. Why? Well, I haven't said anything about the IRA, and already you are shooting your mouth off speculating about my position. As you condemn me for opinions I havent even voiced yet (and may not even hold) you are drooling factual errors. Cheers - and keep working on the question of the significance of Mano Negra, I know you can do it!
|
Friday, October 18, 2002
ASUC BS (Ball-Shit)
In a year where the senate barely has enough money for student groups, the ASUC Ball Coordinator still has a projected budget of $10,000. This is complete bs, and everyone knows it. The ball is a worthless event and I challenge anyone to prove otherwise.
If you are in OP and work for the ASUC Ball, then you are worthless too.
ProgCal recommended budget: $0.
|
"The Trial"
For Student Advocate Alex Kipnis has a great post on why the current "trial" is unjust and improper. Check it out.
|
So now I've stirred up a controversy over on Kevin's blog.
Kevin made the following comment about a flyer for the Wheeler 32 Solidarity event (Kevin and other bloggers keep confusing the solidarity stuff with SJP, but that's a whole other story. We'll sort through that in time, but keep it in mind as they rant and wail about SJP this and SJP that).
Kevin's comment on a flyer featuring a girl fully wrapped in a (Palestinian) hata (kuffiyeh) : "Hamas as a promotional tool? Not very moderate."
I called him on the comment, as it is blatantly racist. To be fair, Kevin is only voicing an association reinforced by the mainstream media, and an association we hear on campus all the time (after all, some folks think the green ribbon campaign represents Hamas, because hey, Hamas likes green - the color of Islam - watch out St. Patrick's Day!), and an association other, less accomplished bloggers make all the time.
The fact is that the image on the flyer is an image from the intifada. Wrapping ones head in this fashion is not a political statement. It is an action often taken by a person in Palestine who is resisting the Israeli occupation. Suicide bombers and folks that carry out attacks inside Israel would not walk around so disguised. You might also wrap your face this way if you were in a sandstorm, but we can all agree that the connotation of the flyer is sufficient to imply (to a non-racist/bigot) resistance to occupation (a.k.a. intifada). This resistance to occupation would not include suicide bombings and would probably be localized to the West Bank and Gaza Strip (WBGS), areas even most 2-state solution folks (soft-zionist or otherwise) would consider Palestine or the site of a future Palestinian State. FYI: one compelling reason behind a need for anonymity in resisting the Israeli occupation is that Israel assasinates, tortures, imprisons Palestinians who resist its occupation and are identified.
The racism in Kevin's statement lies in the leap from a headwrap and resistance to the occupation to an affiliation with a particular group that has pretty shoddy politics and a reputation for blowing up buses with suicide bombers. The hata referred to has no explicit symbolism other than ethnic (Palestinian) to any individual who is well informed about the political situation in Palestine, the wrap style is symbolic only of general resistance.
It is no accident either, to call the flyer a "Hamas flyer." Its racism all over again. Hamas is the most reviled (in the west) of the political armed groups, so the (western) racist will tie any mention of the Palestinian resistance to Hamas. This attempt to create exclusive equivalence between any expression of Palestinian resistance to Hamas is an attempt to frame the conflict as a clash of religion and a war for Israel's survival against fundamentalist Islam which wishes to destroy the Jewish people (it remains to be seen whether this is an accurate characterization of Hamas by the way, but we can talk about that later). Anyway, while the attempt to frame the conflict as such is partisan (in Kevin's case, it probably is), the means employed to do the framing is blatantly racist.
A few other points, Hamas often wear green head-thingys (hoods) to distinguish themselves in marches and the like, and the picture appears to be that of a girl, which makes it impossible for her to be Hamas, and also makes it near impossible that she would be involved in serious resistance fighting, or any of the Tanzim.
So I've hit a very personal chord and offended Kevin, and hes pulled out the stops and is doing his best to make me feel bad. Not going to work. The other thing Kevin has mentioned is that he takes issue with my application of the term racism. He prefers to be called a bigot to being called a racist, because he says Palestinians (whatever they are) are not a race. Whatever, to his credit he seems to have realized the leap he has made. He could, and should just apologize for the comment and set an example for other bloggers.
|
Thursday, October 17, 2002
Ok, well I've decided to throw my hat into the ring, and honor ProgCal's request to blog here. I have a separate blog up as La Mano Negra, but have removed all the previous posts for reasons that are my own. I will post more serious notes there, I will weigh in on specific issues and respond to some of the other cal blogs here.
Hopefully, I'll be able to give you info that actually comes "from the horse's mouth" as it were, as opposed to "from the horse's ass" which is what you get on certain other cal blogs. The Mano will provide some real answers and analysis on certain hot button campus issues, because the Mano is actually involved in a real way. I plan to provide insight about stuff I actually care about or find important, so expect me to be invested in my opinions, have thought about things before I write them down, and be willing to actually back up insight with facts and coherent analysis. Also, dont expect me to weigh in about much local shit unless it has some bearing on the world at large.
Onto motivation. One of the things that has driven me into this lame world of blogs, its that so many cal bloggers are just picking and choosing snippets of news stories that they want to snipe at. The reader deserves more insight and analysis and I think bloggers ought to extend themselves a bit more and try to take a comprehensive look at what other folks are saying, and respond to the ideas, as opposed to the specific tactics, or oneliners taken out of context. Incidentally, if you know what the Mano is, or was, and can correctly analyze the use of it here, the Mano will provide you with a decent bottle of the beverage [type] of your choice.
Cheers. [If I fail to keep my promises, let me know. Editing also appreciated]
|
Tuesday, October 15, 2002
Student Action Attacks Ackerman
If new senator Ian Ackerman wasn't sure what to make of Student Action before, he does now. Kevin Sabet, former SA signatory, has a letter in todays' Daily Cal attacking Ackerman's beliefs. (For those of you who didn't know, Sabet was president -- and the only member -- of a pro-drug war group while here at Cal.)
This is definitely strange; why would an SA alumnus jeopardize SA's attempts to strong-arm the Senate by attacking an independent?
|
Monday, October 14, 2002
Site Stuff
I'm thinking about changing the templete (mostly because stupid blogger won't show my archives no matter how much I republish.) Please comment whether you like this format or not.
Also here's my rating for various Google Searches:
Bret Manley -- #2
Cal Patriot -- #3
California Patriot -- #4
I love knowing that people looking for information about the Patriot and its leaders stumble here...
|
Sunday, October 13, 2002
Philip S. Lu is Sick
Well, I had originally thought that Philip Lu was a decent enough member of the Patriot. After all, he rarely attended meetings and didn't even know who "Edward" was. Then, I saw this post(Oct 13):
"Additionally, many people are patting themselves on the back after spending millions on the nation's first AIDS memorial in San Fransisco. What a waste of money. It's unfortunate that these people died, but AIDS is a disease that affects people who make certain choices, and to erect a multimillion dollar memorial to the public to remember them gives the impression that they great things in their lives. Memorials for AIDS victims should be kept in the private realm, for the families or relatives of the victims. It would be more morally right to put up memorials to those who died to brain tumors, breast cancer, or other sickness that doesn't have such a strong correlation with personal choice. Oh well, screw around, shoot around, and get remembered when you die."
Are you insane? "Make certain choices"? What about the MILLIONS of people who have died from AIDS in Southern Africa because they were raped? (Did you know it commonly held that sex with a virgin cures AIDS?) What about the MILLIONS of children who are born with AIDS because their mother had it (many of these children were of course victims of rape)? What choice did they make, Philip Lu? Where's the "strong correlation with personal choice"??
Oh, and don't think this is just a problem affected 10 of millions of innocents in Africa. Don't you realize how many people here in American have AIDS/HIV because of rape, being born with it, blood transfusions, or accidental contact?
My God man, get a freaking heart!
For clarity: Philip Lu is the layout editor and webmaster of the California Patriot. He also runs the phatutopia blog.
|
Friday, October 04, 2002
Thursday, October 03, 2002
