Welcome to online-astoria.com

By Michelle DeWitt

No one has had a busier week than Shirley Sherrod. After a video of her appearing to explain racist behavior against a white farming family (Sherrod is black) surfaced, she was promptly fired from her position at the USDA. Once the full video was examined it became clear that she was judged based on a clip that was taken out of context. The White House and President Obama personally have profusely apologized for their rash decision, but the damage had been done.

This incident has dominated the media this week and raised some important questions about race in America. In the aftermath of Obama’s presidential campaign, in which he promised to meet these issues of race head on, that goal is proving to be easier said than done.

This nation is terrified to confront issues of race. We would rather sweep them under the rug and claim that they don’t exist, a tactic that has the potential to blow up in our faces, as this week’s events have shown.

I’m not suggesting that we all run around shouting racial slurs in order to be more open about things. I am suggesting that we stop running around entirely, slow down and actually figure out what is going on before we fire someone from their job and pat ourselves on the back for conquering racism.

Sherrod’s comment and subsequent speech were about her personal journey to look beyond her own prejudices and if you listen to the whole speech, that is clear. And that is what Americans need to do. Listen to what people are actually saying.

I admit, some people are racist pigs who aren’t going to change. But some people are misinformed or speaking out of fear or ignorance. These are the people that we need to listen to and figure out where their positions are coming from, so we can attack the ignorance with full knowledge of what we are attacking.

Michelle DeWitt

This past Thursday, the Senate passed the financial reform bill with a vote of 60-39. If you’re anything like me, then the passing of this “landmark”  legislation was met with “oh cool….wait what?”

Reading anything with business jargon or having to do with numbers puts me to sleep faster than a stiff shot of NyQuil. But I was nevertheless determined to gain even a superficial understanding of what this bill is about. So, without further ado, here is what I’ve learned so far…

• There’s an oversight committee made up of 10 regulators who assess risks to the financial system.
• An independent office will monitor mortgages, credit cards and the like, to establish regulations and keep these entities operating responsibly. Auto dealers and other businesses will be exempt from this regulation.
• Big banks have to have as much money as small banks do to keep things from getting really messed up.
• Everyone needs to stop being so shady about trading derivatives and trade them in the open.
• Credit rating agencies actually have to know what their talking about and if they don’t they can be held legally responsible.
• Mortgages can only be given to people who can actually afford to pay for them.

There’s a lot more to it, but this is just a little overview. So, what do you think? Is this good, bad or are you indifferent until you see some actual results?

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/16/the-highlights-of-the-fin_n_648912.html

By Michelle DeWitt

The Pentagon got down to serious “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” business recently with a survey they distributed to 400,000 active duty and reserve troops. The goal of the survey is to get a feel for how members of the armed forces will respond when “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is repealed, allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military.

In theory, this is a really good idea and an important step toward acclimating the military community for the repeal of this law. But the Pentagon can always be counted on to make something good not so good.

The survey was released to the Washington Post and has recently come under fire for questions that makes my eighty-five year old grandparents look progressive. Some of the questions ask whether they currently think that any of their colleagues are “homosexual,” while others ask about interactions with colleagues if “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is repealed. And of course, no insensitive survey about gays and lesbians would be complete without an obligatory shower question.

It kind of reminds me of the surveys you find in Cosmopolitan magazine, but instead of finding out if you’re “BFF is really on your side” (talk about a hot button issue), you can find out if you kind of don’t want DADT to be repealed, really don’t want DADT to be repealed, or totally don’t want DADT to be repealed. Let the fun begin.

I think the executive director of Servicemembers United, Alexander Nicholson, put it best when he said, “The Defense Department just shot itself in the foot by releasing such a flawed survey to 400,000 servicemembers, and it did so at an outrageous cost to taxpayers.” And that is really the icing on the cake; not only did they do something potentially offensive and absolutely stupid, but it cost American citizens $4.5 million.

There is no doubt that the survey needs to be reevaluated and remade to reflect the fact that there are some who feel that the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would be a positive change.