policy with pop

A "Precious" Sight: Poverty & Pain

I won two advance screening tickets to an episode of Glee in LA last minute (I’ll blog about the episode in another post)! With a day and half to plan my unexpected trip from Nor Cal to So Cal, I decided to take a train. What I saw before attending the Glee screening was eye-opening and heartbreaking.

The train is a great way to travel. You get to sightsee without the hassle that comes with driving. The steady speed of the train also allows passengers (or at least me) to read, study or even write a blog post without getting a headache!

Anyway, my trip started at 6:40am at the train station. As my train was going through Sacramento, I unexpectedly saw several tents scattered in undeveloped lands. At first I thought it was a little odd to set up camp in Sacramento. But, then it hit me. I remembered reading about the prevalence of people living in tents because they could no longer afford living in a home during the recession. I never saw it in person before.

Sacramento was not the only area with families living in tents. As my train went down the Golden State, I continued to see tents. In distressed towns like Merced and Fresno, I saw rows of tents under bridges.

It definitely made me sad to see so many tents throughout California. I realized how blessed I am to have what I have. But, I also wondered what could be done to help those families. I thought about that during my trip.

When I arrived in LA a day before the Glee screening, I decided that I was going to see Precious: A Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire. Now I’ve wanted to see the movie for months, but after unexpectedly seeing families living in tents, I thought watching this film was timely. Here is the trailer for the movie:

Without giving away all the details, Precious is about the struggles of a poor, obese, illiterate, black teen-mom, who is raped by her father and abused by her mother. Intense. Not only do viewers see the startling assault Precious faces at home, but it exposes the cracks in our inadequate education and welfare system. Now this movie is set in the 1987 but the problems highlighted in Precious still seem to like issues today.

One fear that some have about a movie like Precious is that it is “poverty porn.” That type of movie is one in which the rich and middle class go see to watch a story about poverty/struggle and feel good about themselves for seeing such a movie. In the end, the poor person’s story is exploited and those who enjoyed the film ultimately leave without doing anything about the problems they are exposed to.

After watching Precious, I wondered what can be done to help those like Precious. It’s been two days since, and I’m riding the train back home, passing by those living in tents. Thinking up solutions about addressing the problems of poverty and abuse is a challenge. That’s why I’m hoping to figure it out with you.

As I return to Sacramento, California’s capital, I wonder what the government can do to assist those who have slipped through the cracks. What do you think the government can do? What should it do?

And, what can an individual do to help the poor or the abused? Should we all feel an obligation to help those in need? Or is it every man for himself?

In any case, not to get all Oprah on you, but you have to see Precious.

Congressman Joe Wilson Fries for Saying the President Lies

Decorum? What decorum?

Congressman Joe Wilson (R-SC) screamed at President Obama, accusing the President of being a liar when he said his healthcare plan would not cover undocumented immigrants during the President’s Joint Session of Congress.

If you missed it, here is the clip:

Did you see Speaker Pelosi’s face? Shock and disgust.

And of course, every Congressional Democrat was outraged. Some are even talking about censuring the boisterous Republican. And, of course, they are cashing in on his outburst. Representative Wilson’s Democratic challenger raised more than $400,000 in one day.

While most Congressional Republicans have noted that Congressman Wilson’s outburst was inappropriate (including Wilson himself), some are coming to his defense. The "hottest freshman in Congress" Aaron Schock points out that Democratic membersaccused President Bush of being a liar in the past.

True. But, they made those comments at during their own speeches, press conferences and interviews, not at a Presidential address. Is it better that Wilson made the accusation to the President’s face? Or was the Joint Session of Congress an inappropriate time and place? If so, should he be punished?

Of course, Democrats expressed their displeasure at President Bush’s speeches during his Joint Sessions and State of the Unions. But, they booed and hissed at his policy positions. Is that are arguably different than making a shouted personal attack at President Obama’s character? Or is booing just as disrespectful during a Presidential address?

What do you make of Wilson’s comments? Was he accurate or lying himself? How does his behavior reflect on him and Republicans? And does this news bit help or detract from Obama’s efforts to win support for his healthcare plan?

By the way, what did you think of the President’s speech?

NTV's The District Episode 2: "Barack's Friends Let Him Down..."

Newsweek is at it again. Episode 2 of The District follows the tax problems plaguing some of President Obama’s cabinet nominees.

What do you think of Obama taking responsibility of his nominees’ mistakes?

And, what’s up with adding clips of The City and The Hills After Show? I know The District is spoofing them but I personally think the inclusion of those clips detracts from The District. What do you think?

Vivica A. Fox's Psychic Friends... Seriously!?!

Ummm…

How did Vivica A. Fox go from blockbusters, like Independence Day, Soul Food and Kill Bill: Vol. 1, to spokeswoman for The Psychic Friends Network infomercial? Oh, how the mighty has fallen. Or has she?

Fox released a statement, declaring: “Vivica A. Fox is no friend of The Psychic Friends Network.” She alleges that the network is “using her unauthorized likeness, footage, voice and photographs as an endorsement of their service.” As a result, Fox wants it to stop.

I’m confused. It would be understandable if she’s outraged had the network only used her image in photo ads without her permission. But, Fox is in the commercial with dialog no less. It seems like she consented… sounds like Fox is now ashamed... Could you blame her?

But, really, should she be ashamed? Is it bad to be associated with psychics? Why? Could psychics be legitimate (as a form of religion or science perhaps)? Or do only crazy people need and heed the advice of psychics?

You’d be surprised who uses psychics. In 2002 the British Ministry of Defense spent approximately $35,000 on testing potential usage of psychics. That pales in comparison to the $20 million United States government agencies (Department of Defense, CIA, and NSA) spent over two decades trying to harness psychic powers to find hostages, terrorists and criminal activity.

So what do you think about using psychics? Waste of time and (tax-payer) money? Or innovative tool?

Should the use of psychics be considered a quasi-religion, semi-science or complete nonsense?

And what happened to Vivica A. Fox’s career? Shouldn’t her psychic friends warned her and helped her make better career choices!?!

Prince Harry: National Treasure or Royal Pain?

Apparently Prince Harry did not heed Mariah Carey’s sage advice - “If it’s a camera up in here, then I best not catch this flick on YouTube, YouTube.”

Prince Harry has set off a storm with his usage of racist language in the video made three years ago while he was serving in Afghanistan with the British army. Since St James’s Place issued a statement that Prince Harry has acknowledged and apologized for his racist remarks, we don’t have to debate about whether they were or weren’t (unless you want to). However, this does raise the question: Should there be a royal family?

This isn’t the first time Prince Harry has brought shame to his family. At 17, he admitted he used marijuana and entered into a drug treatment program. He also reportedly snorted vodka, which is dangerous. In 2004, Prince Harry was also accused of cheating his high school exit exams and was also in a scuffle with the paparazzi. 2005 saw the Prince dress up as a German Afrika Korps uniform with a swastika. He apologized for his costume. This video is his and his family’s latest embarrassment.

His ignorance and mistakes are not necessarily uncommon for a young man growing up. The difference is he is third-in-line to the throne and in the scrutiny of the limelight. Should the public expect more from him given the perks of his royal upbringing (like having a private education)? Or do Prince Harry’s mistakes humanize him and generate more interest in him and the royal family, making them relevant (even if only in a celebrity sense)?

I guess what I’m really asking is what is the royal family’s role when its power is primarily ceremonial? Does that role justify having royals? Obviously British tradition and culture play a role in why the monarchy has survived. Plus, the British royal family generates millions of dollars in tourism ($200 million in 2006-2007) and does charity work worldwide. But, does that all justify its existence and all the taxpayer money and respect it receives? You tell me.

And if you support having a constitutional monarchy, what expectations should the pubic have? How do you keep member of the royal family accountable? More to the point: how do the people punish them, if they can?

Coldplay Plagiarizes!?!

Sing it ain’t so. Earlier this week Coldplay was accused of plagiarizing from the small unknown band Creaky Boards. Coldplay’s “Viva la Vida” surprisingly sounds similar to Creaky Board’s ironically titled song “The Songs I Didn’t Write,” which was written a year before the release of the Coldplay’s hit. Here is the evidence:

Now Coldplay’s official stance is that it produced “Viva la Vida” before Creaky Board’s song and that Coldplay lead singer Chris Martin was not at Creaky Board’s 2007 New York performance as Creaky Board alleges.

According to E! Online, Coldplay’s manager called Creaky Board and explained to the timeline of events. Creaky Board then retracted their accusation and apologized.

Even though we got a nice resolution – Coldplay gets vindicated and Creaky Board gets worldwide publicity – the issue of plagiarism still plagues me. It irks me. But it happens all the time. It happens in school. And it happens at work or so I’ve heard… I’ve heard cut-and-paste stories for companies’ public documents and even government papers. How do people get away with it?

So how do we stop or curb plagiarism? Does a no-tolerance/penalty policy work? An automatic F for the paper? An F for the class itself? Academic probation? How about at work? Should an employee be immediately fired for plagiarizing? Tell us your ideas.

And on the pop side of things, did your view of Coldplay change when the suspicion of plagiarism arose? Admittedly, I bought the new Coldplay CD yesterday (I’m a fan) but now I regret wasting the $9.99...

Thinkin' Laguna Beach about Government Aid

We can learn a lot from Lauren Conrad’s reality TV life. In the second season episode “I Saw You Kiss Her” of Laguna Beach, we learned a noble lesson. No, not: kissing your ex-girlfriend in front of your current girlfriend is bad. Although it is. Nor: dating bad boy Jason Wahler only leads to heartbreak. Even though, that’s probably true. What did we learn? We learned about donating money to those less fortunate.

The backdrop of the ex-girlfriend kiss drama was a charity fashion show that raised money for the victims of the 2005 Laguna Beach landslide. The landslide damaged more than twenty houses and left thirty families homeless. No one was at fault; nature, more specifically heavy rain, caused the landslide. Lauren and the LB teens raised… err… a lot of money… I think. Ok, so MTV didn’t really focus on the charity storyline, but that doesn’t mean we can’t!

Regardless of how much was raised by their fashion show, Lauren and friends were not alone in their charity relief efforts. California Senator Dianne Feinstein announced that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) gave Laguna Beach $10.4 million in federal grants to clean, rebuild and reconstruct the landslide area. Some were pleased with the government assistance and some… not as much.

When I attended college nearby Laguna, my political-philosophy professor professed to me that she did not think taxpayer money should be given to those who lost their homes in the landslide. She reasoned that they knowingly bought their expensive homes on land known for having landslides. They took the risk and enjoyed the benefits – living near the beach. Thus, my professor asked rhetorically, “Why should I have to pay for their gamble?”

My professor was far more sympathetic to those who were less affluent and also suffered tragedies. She favored giving government aid to those hit by Hurricane Katrina and the Indian Ocean Tsunami of 2004. She explained that most of those residents were already victims of being poor and thus were forced to live in unsafe areas. Unlike Laguna residents, they did not have a choice. Therefore, she thought it was appropriate for the government to help and protect them.

(Note: According to the Laguna Beach city website, not all those who lost their homes in the 2005 landslide were wealthy like Lauren’s family per se. However, relative to many New Orleans residents, most of the Laguna Beach victims had far better finances and resources at their disposal.)

Simply put, I guess my professor felt more compassion for the poor than the rich in times of natural disaster – at least when it comes to government aid. What are your thoughts?

Should the federal government pay for the reconstruction efforts of areas prone to natural disasters – known risky areas? Is there a difference between Laguna Beach and New Orleans? Should it matter? Should the government give monetary relief proportional to one’s loss/wealth? Or should all victims receive the same compensation regardless of income?