A LUTA CONTINUA: Up Against Wall Street - Why Here, Why Now

Keith Olbermann Reads

The Statement Released By

The Wall Street Protesters

- 2011-10-05


Keith Olbermann Reads The Statement Released By The Wall Street Protesters - 2011-10-05

Transcript: http://nycga.cc/2011/09/30/declaration-of-the-occupation-of-new-york-city/

 

__________________________

 

 

 

comments_image 292 COMMENTS

This Is Only Getting Bigger:

20,000 Rally in New York

to Support Occupy Wall Street

Despite another clash with police, the Occupy Wall Street movement continues to gain support as unions and community groups march in solidarity.

October 5, 2011  |  

Photo Credit: Sarah Jaffe

LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.

 

TAKE ACTION

It's 10pm in Liberty Plaza and the jubilant 20,000-plus crowd from the day's solidarity march has dwindled, now, to the faithful, the regulars, having debated and decided by consensus against another attempt at marching. 

The police have dropped barricades around the entire plaza, but rumors that they are coming in are so far unfounded. The medical team has calmed down and are eating pizza from the boxes being carried throughout the plaza. A giant projection on the wall of a building across Trinity Street reminds the protesters "The Whole World is Watching #OccupyWallStreet." 

A large group of people are holding signs and singing "This Little Light of Mine" down at the base of the plaza, almost to Trinity Street, where Ed Schultz of MSNBC is broadcasting his show live on the other side of the police barricade. An officer tells me the barricades aren't shutting us in, I'm welcome to leave at the corners of the plaza. 

P1010181

Despite an earlier clash with police (28 arrests reported, a far cry from Saturday's 700-plus) as a breakaway march from the permitted, union-supported solidarity rally headed down Wall Street proper, the plaza is mostly quiet. 

Chris from the medical team, a firefighter from New Jersey, tells me that he treated one marcher who made it back to the plaza after having been pepper-sprayed. Videos and photographs are starting to circulate online of the clash with police, which include two Fox 5 reporters hit with batons and pepper spray

Phillip Anderson, a local blogger and activist, was on the march to Wall Street and told me this story: 

"We saw a ton of people crossing Broadway and decided to see what was happening. Easily 1000 people headed toward Wall Street; the cops made sure we didn't go straight there, so we took a circuitous route. When we got to Wall and William St., there was a barricade along the west side of William, along Cipriani, and people on the balcony above with glasses of champagne.

"It was obvious the cops weren't going to let the crowd go right so they went east down Wall, and then I don't know what happened but they came back loud and moving fast, drums banging. Instantly the cops moved the barricade to the east side, there were cops on horses, cops on scooters, they barricaded themselves in the middle and the crowd got to the edge of the barricade and then everyone just shut up. Dead quiet. I'm going to give those cops a lot of credit, they opened a corner and let the crowd walk out and the scooter cops escorted them almost all the way back." 

The chant from the crowd, he said, was "Cops are the 99 percent!" 

*******

Earlier in the day, over 20,000 people packed Foley Square near New York’s City Hall and marched to Liberty Plaza to support the occupiers, who are on day 19 of their protest. Colorful union signs dotted the crowd as well as the handmade kind, showing delegations from the United Auto Workers, Amalgamated Transit Union, Teamsters, City University of New York faculty, and many, many more. All of the protesters I spoke to knew exactly why they were there.

"When someone's looking for a job, they're not visible," Jesse LaGreca, a blogger at Daily Kos who recently became an Internet celebrity for his smackdown of Fox News in an interview leaked to the Web, told me. The occupation, and the massive march in support, made those problems visible. LaGreca's takedown of Griff Jenkins, whom he called "one of the biggest cheerleaders for the Tea Party movement," resonated with activists tired of not being taken seriously. He pointed out "The last thing they want is someone who can clearly state why we're here. It's called Occupy Wall Street, not big bake sale, for God's sake." 

P1010142

“Naturally we would join,” said Lisanne McTerran, a New York City teacher wearing her United Federation of Teachers hat. She pointed out that the unions have been in this fight for a while, noting that UFT had marched down Wall Street back in May to protest continued banker power. McTerran is an art teacher by trade, but has been working as a substitute since New York’s school budget cuts.

“Arts are the first thing they cut,” she said, handing out a flyer that points out that budget cuts have led directly to the loss of over 100,000 jobs. “Bloomberg wants to bust the teachers’ union,” she said.

The official, permitted rally began at 4pm and it seemed strange to hear the sound of a loudspeaker broadcasting speeches as we approached in a crowd from Liberty Plaza. The crowd of occupiers still communicated on the move using the “people’s mic,” repeating each other’s words back, and it did seem that the union leaders who spoke took a page from the activists in the square, keeping their words brief and powerful, stoking the crowd's excitement at the popular support they were receiving. The organizers at Occupy Wall Street have been reaching out to labor from the beginning, and their efforts were paying off. 

P1010141

Stuart Appelbaum, president of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW) New York City local RWDSU, told the crowd that he had a message for Mayor Bloomberg. “If your police department overreacts again like it did last Saturday, stifling dissent and limiting free speech, New Yorkers will not stand for it!”

Héctor Figueroa of SEIU’s 32BJ, the building service workers’ union, made the connection between the occupiers in Liberty Plaza and the international protests that have echoed around the world in recent months, declaring, “Nosotros somos los indignados del Nueva York, los indignadoes del Estados Unidos, los indignados del mundo!” 

It was a sentiment heard at my first visit to the occupation, when I met Spanish activist Monica Lopez, who had been part of Spain’s “Indignados” movement. Lopez has been back to Spain and is now back again at the Liberty Plaza occupation, taking photos and working the media table.

“It’s the right thing at the right time after so many mistakes,” Thomas Blewitt, told me when I asked why he was involved in this movement. Blewitt, a former member of ACT UP in a trim shirt and tie, was one of the many defying the popular image of the protesters as all young hippies. He explained that he’d cared for his mother until her death and between Medicare and the AARP, ”That system works." Everyone, he pointed out, deserves the same access to health care.

P1010101

Health care was also on the minds of the National Nurses United, which came out in force with professionally printed signs declaring support for Occupy Wall Street on one side--and calling for a financial transactions tax on the other, as the union has been for months. “It’s catching on like wildfire,” Pam Merriman, a nurse from the University of Chicago, told me.

“The hardest pill to swallow,” her colleague Talisa Hardin said, “is America is hurting, and when you look at how well corporations are doing, it doesn’t seem fair.”

The nurses’ president, Karen Higgins, spoke at the rally as well. “We’re sick of the greed!” she told the crowd. “As nurses, we can fix that.”

And Merriman reiterated: “The nurses will not be moved.”

P1010096

Lindsay Personett, a recent graduate in dance performance from Oklahoma City University, was handing out flyers that read “I Owe SallieMae,” and offering a marker to fellow grads who’ve found themselves in debt to the loan giant. “Kids are told to get this expensive degree and you’ll get a job,” she said. “You end up owing too much and owning nothing.”

As the march moved off slowly through the financial district, I ducked into a cafe and struck up a conversation with Joel Wise, a tall, burly member of Operating Engineers Local 68 from New Jersey. Wise noted that his union had yet to express an opinion on the occupation, but told me “I’m here as an American, proud to be a union member.” He told me that the sign he’d been carrying earlier, which he’d given away on the street, had read “The Tea Party is Owned By Big Business.”

Wise’s friend commented, “If they keep monetizing debt, it’s gonna be ugly,” and Wise continued “Most people are outraged that white-collar criminals weren’t prosecuted. If you steal a loaf of bread, or a kid sells some weed, they go to jail for five years, but these guys stole millions.” 

As I leave Liberty Plaza at 10:30, a lawyer hands me his card, telling me "I used to be a prosecutor here, I know what they're capable of." The man, whose card declares him to be Musa Ali, a proud supporter of the LGBT community, then joins the legal team in a small huddle. 

I am struck once again at the ease with which the organization here falls back into its duties. The medics treat the injured or sick, the food team hands out pizza, rumors are quashed with a quick "mic check" and the legal team works to keep people out of jail--or get them out quickly. 

I walk out past the barricades, a girl passes me with her dog, and police vans move down the street. An officer tells me that I'm probably better off picking up a train to the north rather than the south, and I take his advice, hearing a round of cheers erupt behind me from something going on in the plaza.

And so the uneasy truce at Liberty Plaza holds, but the protesters inside remember the feeling of elation, of support from the huge crowds earlier. It's not just rhetoric; they know that they are the 99 percent.

This is only getting bigger. 

Sarah Jaffe is an associate editor at AlterNet, a rabblerouser and frequent Twitterer. You can follow her at @seasonothebitch.

 

>via: http://www.alternet.org/story/152622/this_is_only_getting_bigger%3A_20%2C000_...

 

 

__________________________

 

 

 

MUSICIANS

 

OCCUPY WALL STREET:

 

Talib Kweli Wants Us

 

To Spread The Word


 

 

 

Talib Kweli joined the protesters at Occupy Wall Street last night, giving an impromptu speech and performance using the People’s Mic – an awesome invention to amplify sound and spread messages after PA systems and megaphones were outlawed by New York’s finest down at the protest (violators can be sent to prison for up to 30 days). To use the People’s Mic, the speaker calls out “mic check! mic check!” and the crowd responds with a “mic check!” and then grows silent, waiting  for the speaker to begin. The crowd then repeats what the speaker says, sentence-by-sentence, so that everyone in the area can hear it – rippling it back to the far reaches of the park. Check it out above.

Politicaly-engaged Kweli has been on board with the protesters from the beginning, tweeting about it several times in the past few weeks – although this was his first trip down to the park. Using the People’s Mic, Kweli said the following:

I’m at a loss for words. But even me being at a loss for words, is amplified. They want to know what the end game is? This is the endgame. You doing your job, everybody here with a camera, everybody here with a camera, everybody here with a smartphone, everybody here with a voice. Do your job, and spread the word. For the people who are sleeping here, you inspire us. If you are inspired by them, make it grow. This is the endgame. It’s about growth now. We have to grow. And that’s the point. I love y’all.

Kweli later added, “this is the most American thing I’ve seen in my lifetime. I had to come down and see it for myself, so I could tell everyone about it.”

Okayafrica encourages you to get involved. More details to come soon, but for now, we can all bite Kweli, and tweet the following: “Here with the 99% #occupywallstreet.”

>via: http://www.okayafrica.com/2011/10/07/musicians-occupy-wall-street-talib-kweli...

 

 

 

__________________________

 

 

comments_image 172 COMMENTS

10 Things to Know About

Wall Street's Rapacious Attack

on America

But now Americans are fighting back and there's no telling where Occupy Wall Street can lead.

 

 

 

When you climb out of the subway at Wall Street, you might wonder why there are no protestors in the cavernous alley by the stock exchange. That’s because since 9/11, Wall Street has been barricaded shut to prevent possible attacks. But up the block at Zuccotti Park between Liberty and Cedar streets, west of Broadway, the party’s on.

There you’ll find a festive group of about 1,000 people, mostly young folks having a good time accompanied by the occasional cluster of old lefties singing songs. People make signs while sitting on the ground then prop them up wherever they can find a space. They gather at tables filled with donated food and browse boxes of donated books. You also can’t miss the swarm of media folks milling around asking questions, taping interviews and taking notes: they’re the ones in dress suits who spend most of their time interviewing each other. My favorite sign held by an occupier is painted on a skateboard: “This is what Freedom Looks Like.” My son would agree.

And my recurring thought is, “It’s about f’ing time.”

What took us so long? How much worse did it have to get before public outrage would finally focus on those who caused the problem and those who are milking us dry? Several of us have been pleading in blog after blog for more than two years to build a broad-based assault on Wall Street. Where was our answer to the Tea Party? Well, here it is.

There’s no telling where this Occupy Wall Street can lead, especially if a virtuous media feedback loop continues: The more protestors, the more coverage, the more protestors. It’s about the only good thing the mainstream media has done in years.

If unions throw into the mix full force, we may have something powerful in the making. It’s far too early to tell, although the October 5 labor march in New York that drew upwards of 25,000 people was certainly a good sign. Will labor come back and do it again each and every week? Will unions mobilize support for the satellite occupiers in city after city? Or will most of their energy go into the Obama/Democratic Party re-election campaigns as if nothing much has happened? (They should listen to protestors, who agree that corporations and the wealthy are destroying our democracy by buying candidates of both parties.)

 Already you can hear the chattering classes mumble about the lack of focus, the lack of consensus and the lack of a coherent agenda in this nascent movement. But they have this coherent call: We are the 99 percent, and we demand our fair share. The irrefutable fact is that 99 percent of us really are being screwed by the 1 percent who are looting our country (actually it’s more like the top 1/10 of one percent). So if you still harbor any doubts that Wall Street is the right target, here are 10 reasons to consider:

 

1. Wall Street caused the crash: Unless you are suffering from financial amnesia, you should remember that it was Wall Street’s reckless gambling that did us in. It was Wall Street banks and hedge funds, not home buyers, who created the enormous demand for high-risk mortgages to pool, to securitize, and to turn into Ponzi-like gambling structures with names like CDOs, CDO squared and synthetic CDOs. It was the money-grubbing rating agencies that blessed these pieces of garbage with AAA ratings. As a result, trillions of dollars of worthless toxic assets polluted our financial system. When the bubble they induced burst, our system crashed, causing 8 million working people to lose their jobs in a matter of months due to no fault of their own. Anyone who still blames low-income home buyers, or regulations or Greece -- or anyone other than Wall Street -- should be checked for dementia.

2. The Wall Street crash directly caused the gravest unemployment crisis since the Great Depression: We’re three years into the worst jobs crisis since 1937. Upwards of 29 million people are out of work or have been forced into part-time jobs. The number of people who have been jobless for more than 26 weeks is at post-WWII record levels. And there’s no end in sight to this misery. Meanwhile, Wall Street’s representatives in Washington want us to focus on cutting public employment and public services to address the debt that Wall Street itself precipitated. WE wouldn’t have a debt crisis were it not for the bailouts, the crash, the lost jobs and the soaring cost of jobless benefits that can be laid at Wall Street’s door. (The debt was also caused by tax cuts for the rich, and the bankers certainly don’t want to talk about that.) For those diversionary debt tactics alone, Wall Street should be occupied until it pays to replace the jobs it destroyed.

3. Wall Street profited from the bailouts and remains unaccountable:Taxpayers provided trillions of dollars in cash and asset guarantees to the wealthiest bankers and hedge fund managers in the world. But nothing was extracted from them in return. Here’s one egregious example: Goldman Sachs paid $550 million in SEC fines for selling mortgage-related securities that were designed to fail so that a large hedge fund could bet against them. The securities failed as planned and the hedge fund pocketed $1 billion in profits. But after we bailed out AIG, Goldman Sachs picked up nearly $12 billion for similar bets that AIG had insured. Goldman Sachs collected 100 cents on the dollar and those dollars were ours.

4. The super-rich are getting richer: When the economy was crashing during 2008, high frequency traders in hedge funds and banks made upwards of $20 billion from the turmoil. This trading scam provided no redeeming value to our economy. Rather, it was a hidden tax on our sorrows -- a transfer of funds from the many to the few. In 2010 the top hedge fund managers “earned” over $2 million an HOUR! The top 25 hedge fund managers took in as much as 650,000 teachers. Young people have the right to question these lopsided values. All of us have the duty to do something about it.

5. The super-rich are paying lower and lower taxes: While the government pleads poverty when asked to create a massive jobs program, our financial elites use every loophole available to avoid taxes. In 1995, the 400 wealthiest families paid about 30 percent of their income in taxes (after all deductions). Today their effective rate is less than 16 percent. And for what? What did society gain from their retained wealth? Not jobs, not debt reduction, only more Wall Street gambling.

6. Financial elites pay lower taxes than their secretaries: Venture capitalists and private equity fund managers, as well as some hedge fund elites, get a fantastic tax break called “carried interest” that allows them to pay a top rate of 15 percent on their income (rather than the 35 percent top rate regular people pay). This tax break, originally designed for small business partnerships, has made the mega-rich even richer. You might be wondering why this outrageous tax break continues for billionaires. The answer is simple: these elites are pouring money into Washington to make sure that Republicans and Democrats alike keep the loophole in place. Even some liberal Democrats are parroting the line that this tax break for billionaires is good for America. So when the occupiers say they are disenfranchised, they’re right.

7. None of those who caused the crash have been prosecuted: Raj Rajaratnam, the hedge fund billionaire, is going to the hoosegow for insider trading. Bernie Madoff is in prison for life for his Ponzi scheme. And about 40 others have pleaded guilty to insider trading crimes. Yet none of these scoundrels, as immoral as they may be, had much to do with the financial crash. They didn’t peddle toxic mortgage-related securities. They didn’t push predatory loans. They didn’t rate garbage securities as if they were gold. None of these perps pumped up the housing bubble. Those who did are still roaming free, financially armed and dangerous.

8. Wall Street is much too big and its salaries are much too high: The financial sector is supposed to be an intermediary that turns our savings into productive investments. It’s not supposed to be a casino and it’s not supposed to dwarf the rest of the productive economy. But after years of deregulatory foolishness, it has metastasized to destructive levels. From the 1930s until the mid-1970s, financial sector employees earned the same as those in other sectors, relative to their skills and experience. That’s the way it should be. But since we embarked on the long march of financial deregulation and tax breaks for the super-rich, people working in the financial sector have seen their incomes skyrocket compared to everyone else. The bigger that gap, the more danger we face. And unless we build a massive populist uprising, it won’t change.

9. Wall Street still owns the regulators: When you put too much money in the hands of the few and when you deregulate finance, you get a financial casino. That’s what happened in the years leading up to the 1929 crash, and it happened again in 2008. During the New Deal we regulated the tar out of finance, ending their reign of speculative terror. And it worked for nearly a quarter of a century as financial crises virtually disappeared. Since financial deregulation reappeared over the last 30 years, there have been over 180 financial crises around the world. So you would think after 2008, we’d be back to reining in the bankers. But, no…our leaders are afraid to stifle “financial innovation” (See next point.) The Dodd-Frank bill is weak and getting weaker, thanks to intensive Wall Street lobbying. High government officials still believe that Wall Street can lead the nation forward. The kids are telling us that we should shut down the casinos now. Right again.

10. Financial innovation is a joke: Washington genuflects before the gods of financial innovation: the adjustable no-money down mortgages with resetting teaser rates, the synthetic collateralized debt obligations that turn garbage mortgages into AAA securities, the credit default swaps that are financial insurance policies without regulation, the nanosecond trading programs that flip millions of stocks per second while milking slower investors, and the myriad of ways to make enormous financial bets using little or none of your own money. They tremble at the thought of whispering anything that might stifle these highly profitable Wall Street inventions. They are wowed by trading measured in nanoseconds, by the alphabet soup of securities, by the dark pools of financial trading and most of all by financial billionaires and their lobbyists. But to paraphrase former fed chair Paul Volcker, the only real financial innovation in the last 25 years is the ATM machine. The rest are simply gambling games designed to enrich Wall Street's elites who pocket the winnings and pawn off the losses on us. The protesters sense the game is rigged. It is.

Does Wall Street pay or do we? In the end, it comes down to a clear-cut struggle between the few and the many. (There’s that 99 percent again.) Who is going to pay for the jobs we need? Who is going to pay for the debt that was created to bail out Wall Street and prevent another Great Depression? Wall Street wants us to pay in the form of cuts in Social Security and medical coverage, reduced wages and higher taxes (for everyone but them). In fact, they want the kids to pay by working longer before they retire (if they can ever find a job), paying higher medical costs as they grow older, and turning their Social Security accounts into Wall Street playthings no one can rely on. At the same time financial elites are arguing for fewer regulations and lower taxes on themselves and their fellow millionaires and billionaires. Financial interests are hoping we’ll simply forget who caused what and instead focus on debt, more debt and still more debt. They’re hoping we’ll blame government, regulations and taxes, while they laugh all the way to the bank – their banks. Some of us may be old and tired and fatalistic about all this looting, and sour about the chances for change. Thank god the kids still have their wits about them—and a fighting spirit.

Get out there and join them. And if you’re too old to stay overnight (like me), visit often and urge your unions, churches and community groups to join the fray. A progressive populist uprising only works when it’s large, vocal and full of spunk.

Go occupiers, go!

 

Les Leopold is the executive director of the Labor Institute and Public Health Institute in New York, and author of The Looting of America: How Wall Street's Game of Fantasy Finance Destroyed Our Jobs, Pensions, and Prosperity—and What We Can Do About It (Chelsea Green, 2009).

 

>via: http://www.alternet.org/story/152629/10_things_to_know_about_wall_street's_rapacious_attack_on_america?page=entire

 

ECONOMICS: 5 Facts You Should Know About the Wealthiest One Percent of Americans > AlterNet

comments_image329 COMMENTS

5 Facts You Should Know

About the Wealthiest

One Percent of Americans

It may shock you to learn exactly how wealthy this top 1 percent of Americans is.

 

October 4, 2011  |  

 

 

As the ongoing occupation of Wall Street by hundreds of protesters enters its third week — and as protests spread to other cities such as Boston and Los Angeles — demonstrators have endorsed a new slogan: “We are the 99 percent.” This slogan refers to an economic struggle between 99 percent of Americans and the richest 1 percent of Americans, who are increasingly accumulating a greater share of the national wealth to the detriment of the middle class.

It may shock you to learn exactly how wealthy this top 1 percent of Americans is. ThinkProgress has assembled five facts about this class of super-rich Americans:

 

1. The Top 1 Percent of Americans Owns 40 Percent of the Nation’s Wealth

 As Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz points out, the richest 1 percent of Americans now own 40 percent of the nation’s wealth. Sociologist William Domhoff illustrates this wealth disparity using 2007 figures where the top 1 percent owned 42 percent of the country’s financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one’s home). How much does the bottom 80 percent own? Only 7 percent.

As Stiglitz notes, this disparity is much worse than it was in the past, as just 25 years ago the top 1 percent owned 33 percent of national wealth.

2. The Top 1 Percent of Americans Take Home 24 Percent of National Income

While the richest 1 percent of Americans take home almost a quarter of national income today, in 1976 they took home just 9 percent — meaning their share of the national income pool has nearly tripled in roughly three decades.

3. The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Own Half of the Country’s Stocks, Bonds and Mutual Funds

 The Institute for Policy Studies illustrates this massive disparity in financial investment ownership, noting that the bottom 50 percent of Americans own only .5 percent of these investments.

4. The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Have Only 5 Percent of the Nation’s Personal Debt

Using 2007 figures, sociologist William Domhoff points out that the top 1 percent have 5 percent of the nation’s personal debt while the bottom 90 percent have 73 percent of total debt:

5. The Top 1 Percent are Taking In More of the Nation’s Income Than at Any Other Time Since the 1920s

Not only are the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans taking home a tremendous portion of the national income, but their share of this income is greater than at any other time since the Great Depression, as the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities illustrates in this chart using 2007 data:

As Professor Elizabeth Warren has explained, “There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody…Part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.”

More and more often, that is not occurring, giving the protesters ample reason to take to the streets.

 

VIDEO: Black Star (Talib Kweli x Yasiin Bey) - Back Together Again > Fix Up

Black Star

(Talib Kweli x Yasiin Bey)

– Fix Up

Well, the rumors are true! The duo is back and I’m definitely excited. I wonder if J.Rocc will be the official DJ, but most importantly I can’t wait until the album is released. Hopefully, its sooner than later. Anyway, for those who missed the Colbert Report last night, Here ya go 

 

 

VIDEO: Afro-Blue Is Our Favorite Color On 'The Sing-Off' » SOULBOUNCE.COM

SoulTube, Video SoulBounce

Afro-Blue Is Our Favorite Color

On 'The Sing-Off'


With the Real Basketball Housewives of Newlosatlantamiamijersey Shore and what not regularly on my television screen, I'm a little "reality" showed out right now, but I do love a good singing competition. No, I'm not talking about The X-Factor (I said good, not over-hyped), but SoulBounce favorite The Sing-Off, the a cappella group competition series that premiered last night on NBC. Viewers of the season three premiere were treated to the first batch of 16 groups, and the stand out performance for me was delivered by 10-person co-ed troupe Afro-Blue. Much like last year, when I fell head-over-heels in love with eventual winners Committed the first time I heard them sing, I'm all over Afro-Blue. Originating from Washington, DC, the vocal jazz ensemble is comprised of Howard University students and their sound is like a soulful Manhattan Transfer with way more sugar and spice. They performed an exciting rendition of Corinne Bailey Rae's "Put Your Records On" to rave reviews from the celebrity judging panel who sailed them through to the next round. After watching this clip of them and their unique take on this song, you'll see why and will probably get sucked in by their sound as well. They'll be back on The Sing-Off in two weeks, so be sure to tune in for more of their vocal magic.

 

__________________________

 

 

 

SOULTUBEVIDEO SOULBOUNCE

Afro-Blue Are Two For Two

On 'The Sing-Off'

 

Vocal troupe Afro-Blue solidified their place as our favorite contestants on this season of NBC's The Sing-Off earlier this week with two more stellar, just-crown-them-the-winners-already performances. The jazz group had to switch gears and come out of their comfort zone a tad when asked to perform a current radio hit for their first selection. After stating that "Afro-Blue does not perform pop songs at all" in their pre-performance video, I was on the edge of my seat when they started singing Estelle's "American Boy." Any fears were instantly quelled, however, when different members of the expertly color-coordinated ensemble started scatting, beat-boxing, and harmonizing. They were in a zone, taking Estelle's song to unheard of heights with their original arrangement. Once again, the judges agreed that they were the cat's meow, but some criticism came later in the show after Afro-Blue performed Marvin Gaye's "I Heard It Through the Grapevine" for their '60s classic selection. Admittedly not as strong as their first song, it seemed to me that the judges were a little nit-picky in their critiques. Nonetheless, the judges did get it right when they advanced Afro-Blue on to the next round at the end of the episode. If you missed them on Monday night, watch them in action below and after the bounce, and see why they are the ones to beat -- which will be very, very hard. 

 

 

>via: http://soulbounce.com/soul/2011/10/afro-blue_is_two_for_two_on_the_sing-off.p...

 

 

 

PUB: Magazine Contest - Georgetown Review

Magazine Contest

$1,000 and publication to the winning short story, poem, or essay on any theme or subject. All genres welcome.

The guidelines for paper submissions are below.

For electronic submissions, please visit our online submission manager.

Submissions must be postmarked by or before October 15, 2011.

Entry fee is $10 for the first entry, $5 for each entry thereafter. One poem, story, or essay counts as one entry. Please make out checks or money orders to “Georgetown Review.”

If you want your work returned or want to receive a notice about the winner and runners-up, you must send us a stamped, self-addressed envelope. However, we will post a list of the work we choose on our website after the contest is judged, and we will do our best to have this list up by February 2012.

The magazine’s editors will judge.

Simultaneous and multiple submissions are okay. Your name can appear on your work as well, and in fact, we prefer that your name, address and email address appear on your entries. We have a small editorial staff and would not award the prize to any colleagues, students, or friends. You do not need a cover sheet.

All entries are considered for publication. In the 2011 contest, 8 runner-up works were selected for publication. If your work is published, Georgetown Review acquires first North American rights, which means that after we publish the piece the rights to it revert back to you.

Send entries to:

2012 Contest
Georgetown Review
400 East College Street
Box 227
Georgetown, KY 40324

 

PUB: Grub Street, Inc. > National Book Prize

Prize Information - General


The Grub Street Book Prize is awarded once annually to an American writer outside New England publishing his or her second, third, fourth (or beyond...) book. First books are not eligible. Writers whose primary residence is Massachusetts, Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut or Rhode Island are also not eligible.

Each winner receives a cash award of $5,000.

The winner will read from his/her work at a reception in downtown Boston on a mutually agreeable date and time. All travel and accommodation expenses will be paid by Grub Street. The reading and party are co-sponsored by a local independent bookstore, which will sell books at the event. Fiction and Non-Fiction writers are also invited to present as guest authors at the "Muse and the Marketplace" literary conference.

During the winner’s stay, s/he will also lead a 2-hour craft class on a topic of his or her choice for a small group of Grub Street members.

Though Grub Street's top criterion is the overall literary merit of the work submitted, the award committee especially encourages writers publishing with small presses, writers of short story collections, and writers of color to apply. We also want the award to benefit writers for whom a trip to Boston will likely expand their readership in a meaningful way.

 

Submission Guidelines – Fiction Prize 2012

 

Postmark Deadline: November 1, 2011

Application requirements:

(1) Two copies of the author's most recent or upcoming book, in bound galleys or final form, published between January 1, 2011 and May 1, 2012. (Important: the hardcover or paperback original must be available to booksellers by May 1, 2012. Books available only in electronic form are not eligible. Self-published books are not eligible. Paperbacks are not eligible if hardcover was published before 2011.)

(2) Curriculum vitae

(3) 500-word synopsis of the proposed craft class

(4) $30 tax-deductible donation/reading fee** made out to Grub Street, Inc.

     **If the book is published by a press with annual sales under $5 million, the submission fee is waived.

(5) Send all materials to Grub Street Book Prize in Fiction; 160 Boylston Street #4, Boston, MA 02116

 

Other Important Information about the 2012 Fiction Prize

 

(1) The winner will be asked to be in Boston for the following schedule. Inability to attend these events may result in forfeiture of the prize.

     Thursday, May 3rd, 2012 6:30PM – 8:30PM: Craft class for Grub Street members, held at Grub Street.

     Friday, May 4th, 2012 7:00PM – 9:00PM: Reading and Reception at the Boston Park Plaza Hotel. Winner will be asked to read for 20-30 minutes and take a few questions. A reception will follow. This reading and reception will be the kick-off event for the 2012 Muse and the Marketplace Literary Conference.

     Saturday, May 5th, 2012: Winner will be asked to reprise the craft class at the Muse and the Marketplace conference. Exact time TBA.

(2) Publishers may submit books on behalf of authors, but applications must include all materials above in order to be eligible.

(3) The terms of this prize -- specifically, the entry fee of $10-- changed in September 2011, but if you submitted under the previous terms, you will still be eligible to win. If we received your submission with the $10 fee before September 20th, 2011, your submission will still be eligible.

For more information about Grub Street and this year's Book Award, call 617.695.0075 or send an email to info@grubstreet.org. Please send all postal mail applications and inquiries to 160 Boylston Street, Boston, MA 02116.

 

PUB: Benu Press Submission Manager

Social Justice and Equity Award

in Creative Non-Fiction - $5.00

(pdf, doc, docx, txt, rtf, jpg, gif, tiff)

Size limit: 100,000

The winner of the Benu Prize for Creative Nonfiction receives $1000. The winner also receives 10% of the royalties from book sales. The initial run will be 1,000 copies.  The winner will also receive 20 copies of the book. Benu Press sells books to authors at a 35% discount, and these copies may be sold directly to customers at readings and events.  Benu Press will not sell books to authors on a sale or return basis. Books that have been previously published are not eligible. All work must be original work by the author.  

Manuscripts must be written in English, and must not contain excessive adult language or exploitive themes. Manuscript must be 144 to 450 pages. The contest readers will perform a blind review of each entry.

There is an early bird discount: $5.00 before Oct. 11th, and it will be $15 after. 4) The post-mark deadline is Nov. 11, 2011.


SUBMIT

 

 

 

VIDEO: “Sonia Sanchez: Shake Loose Memories” > Shadow and Act

Watch Trailer For Poetic Documentary

“Sonia Sanchez:

Shake Loose Memories”

Here’s an insightful documentary that screened last month at the Urbanworld Film Festival.  It’s called Sonia Sanchez: Shake Loose Memories and is described as…”a musical and poetic journey through the life, art and activism of black arts movement icon, Sonia Sanchez.”

The film is directed by former Black Panther Party member Jamal Joseph.  Joseph, who’s an Associate Professor at Columbia University School of The Arts, was apart of the New York “Panther 21” who were charged and eventually acquitted of conspiracy charges.

Later, he was convicted of being an accessory, hiding Panther fugitives from the FBI along with weapons possession and use.  He served six years at Leavenworth.

After watching her perform, Joseph decided to do the film because he felt “her work is a study in life, sound and motion” and that it would be a powerful film.

Below are clips of the trailer and a brief interview with Ms. Sanchez and Joseph. 

 

 

 

EDUCATION + VIDEO: MisEducation Nation: Corporate Media and Corporate Education Reform > FAIR


MisEducation Nation:
Corporate Media and
Corporate Education Reform
During the last week of September, NBC was staging its second annual "Education Nation" summit--a series of events and broadcasts bankrolled by the corporate interests and foundations aligned with the so-called "education reform" movement.

Corporate media coverage of education policy tends to hew closely to the "reform" agenda: promoting charter schools and vouchers, embracing relentless testing and other "accountability" measures, and attacking teachers' unions for standing in the way of progress.

On September 27, FAIR brought together four of the most dynamic and thoughtful education experts and activists in the country for a discussion about how the media mangle the debate over public schools.

The lively and thought-provoking discussion, led by journalist Laura Flanders, featured education historian Diane Ravitch, NYU professor Pedro Noguera, Leonie Haimson of Class Size Matters and teacher-activist Brian Jones.

Was NBC's approach more inclusive than last year's presentation? Are issues like poverty even on the table? And how is is that Wall Street investors and billionaires have become media experts on schools?


Watch the video:

 

 

 

 

OP-ED + VIDEO: On Racism, Theater, and Trouble In Mind [Culturelicious] > Racialicious

 

I’ve been to a great many plays on race. Some, like August Wilson’s Jitney, manage to survive through the ages and provide a stunningly timeless view on the problems of the colorline.

Others, like David Mamet’s Race or Neil Labute’s This Is How It Goes, make me realize how much of an abstract concept racism’s pervasiveness can be for white people. Unfortunately, much of the mainstream art world is controlled by white people, and therefore what is considered worthy of production is shaped by white perceptions.

Trouble in Mind has been resurrected, but there are always complications. Over at the Arena Stage website, Irene Lewis speaks to the cause of the persistent racial gap in evaluation of material:

For years, the play Trouble in Mind, by African-American playwright Alice Childress, was recommended to me as a show that, as artistic director of CENTERSTAGE, I should produce. I had read the play several times over the years and found it to be “old-fashioned/old hat,” especially concerning the depiction of the character of the white director. Finally, I decided to ask the opinion of an African-American actress whose judgment I have always valued. She read the play and told me that she liked it. When I asked if she found the role of the white director dated and unbelievable, she said, “No.” So I came around to the opinion that this was another case of – what should I call it – whites (me) being “out of touch” with the experiences of African-Americans. I decided to produce and direct the play at CENTERSTAGE in Baltimore. It subsequently transferred to Yale Repertory Theater. I am delighted that Molly is bringing this groundbreaking piece to Arena Stage.

“Out of touch” is the last term I would use to describe Childress’ noted work, considering it was originally performed in 1955. Considering the play was created more than five decades ago, it should not be so fresh and contemporary. And yet, we live in an era in which a white woman’s tale about a white woman and the black maids she liberated swept the bestseller’s list and the box office – clearly, things haven’t changed that much. So why the disconnect between black and white theater aficionados? As Childress herself has stated:

“There aren’t any black critics who can close a white play. But in black theater, black experience has been fought against by white critics. The white critic feels no obligation to prepare himself to judge a black play.”

And so, here we are.

 

 

Trouble in Mind is a play within a play, designed to explore racism in the theater industry by allowing the audience to peek at the inner workings of a troubled production. Wiletta Mayer (E. Faye Butler) is an aging starlet, who has spent her life toiling in mammy and sidekick roles, desperate for a big break. She is cast in Chaos in Belleville, along with five other actors – three black and two white. John (Brandon J. Dirden) is a young, black upstart, determined to make it in the business despite the cost. Sheldon Forrester (Thomas Jefferson Byrd) is an older black actor who refuses to rock the boat, for any reason. Mille Davis (Starla Benford) is a friendly rival who boasts about her husband’s desire that she give up acting in favor of homemaking. Of the white cast, young Judy (Gretchen Hall) is the classic ingenue type and Bill (Daren Kelly) is a set in his ways older white man. They are all drawn together by director Al Manners (Marty Lodge), who is mounting a large production against the odds and hopes to make a play “that says something.”

Unfortunately, the play was written for to appease white audiences, causing a key conundrum for the black actors in the performance. Wiletta struggles with the play most of all, coming to the conclusion throughout the play that there is something terribly amiss with the script – and having trouble finding an ear for her concerns.

Reviews of the play frustrated me, almost as if I was playing bingo. I heard about the “sassy” back and forth between Millie and Wiletta, and the “stirring gospel renditions,” which made me wonder if the reviewers had read Black Culture for Dummies before scribbling together their responses. These things are in the play, but they are also the examples that appear in review after review – ignored are the more subtle discussions of black cultural frameworks, or the broader idea of the ongoing plight of black actors choosing between regular work and acting on principles of racial justice. And there wasn’t a single reference to Robert Townsend’s “Black Acting School” sketch from Hollywood Shuffle, a more modern update to Childress’ core concepts.

 

 

There are other moments gone unnoticed by critics. Of particular interest to me was the relationship between Henry (played by Laurence O’Dwyer) and Wiletta. Initially, Wiletta is unable to voice her dissatisfaction with the director’s commands, and Henry attempts to provide some comfort and support. Henry, a former crew member turned doorman, speaks with a heavy Irish brogue. But Henry is also one of the only whites in the play that does not bother with pity, condescension, and naivety – he just commiserates, person to person. One would be tempted to think that this is a reference to the complicated history that Irish Americans have with whiteness – however, a major part of the acceptance of the Irish into the white majority was abuse and separation from black Americans. Unfortunately, answers are not forthcoming – I couldn’t find any critical analysis of Henry in this context. Taking the play at face value, though, Henry embodies human connection and friendship transcending traditional racial boundaries – even if the two leads had to wait until the stage was dark and their coworkers had gone before they could speak freely.

But the most electrifying part of the play comes from the exchanges between Wiletta and Al Manners, each pushing the other farther and farther outside of the bounds of polite racial conversation, where the ugly truth often lies buried under the veneer of polite society.

Most telling is this monologue, delivered from the beleaguered white director of the production after being accused of prejudice:

Get wise, there’s damned few of us interested in putting on a colored show at all, much less one that’s going to say anything. It’s rough out here, it’s a hard world! Do you think I can stick my neck out by telling the truth about you? ‘

There are billions of things that can’t be said… do you follow me, billions! Where the hell do you think I can raise a hundred thousand dollars to tell the unvarnished truth?

(Picks up the script and waves it) So, maybe it’s a lie…but it’s one of the finest lies you’ll come across for a damned long time! Here’s bitter news, since you’re livin’ off truth… The American public is not ready to see you the way you want to be seen because, one.. .they don’t believe it, two.. .they don’t want to believe it…and three… they’re convinced they’re superior.. .and that, my friend, is why Carrie and Renard have to carry the ball! Get it? Now you wise up and aim for the soft spot in that American heart, let ‘em pity you, make ‘em weep buckets, be helpless, make ‘em feel so damned sorry for you that they’ll lend a hand in easing up the pressure.

In Plays by American Women, Judith E. Barlow notes:

Manners is surely right that few directors in the period would be willing to work on a show about racial themes with a predominantly Black cast, and that White audiences “don’t want to believe” or see people of color as they really are and “want to be seen.” (The failure of Broadway producers to risk showing Trouble in Mind is ironic proof of his claim.) Yet he cannot understand that a White liberal “version” of African American life is no substitute for Black people defining who they are and what they have experienced.

The fraudulence of “Chaos in Belleville” is most obvious when the elderly actor Sheldon offers a moving account of the lynching that he witnessed as a child, a description at sharp odds with the sanitized melodrama of “Belleville.” The ring of authenticity in Sheldon’s account points up the shabby cliches of the interior drama. “Chaos in Belleville” is not only a bad reflection of reality, it is an example of how drama by White authors differs from, and usurps the place of, drama by playwrights of color. “Chaos in Belleville” purports to contain “an anti-lynch theme,” yet it bears little resemblance to the anti-lynch dramas written by African Americans, particularly women. In Angelina Weld Grimke’s Rachel (1916), Rachel’s mother is helpless against the mob that brutally murders her husband and son. The mother in Georgia Douglas Johnson’s Blue-Eyed Black Boy (ca. 1930) appeals to the governor of the state (who raped her long ago) to save their child, while the grandmother in Johnson’s A Sunday Morning in the South (ca. 1925) desperately tries to rescue her unjustly accused grandson. In none of these plays does a mother blame her son for White bigotry and turn him over to an angry mob, and none offers as hero a White man like Renard, who preaches tolerance and pity after Job has been killed. “Chaos in Belleville” is a distorted mirror not only of actual events but of the way those events have been interpreted for the stage by African Americans themselves.

The metatheatrical structure of Trouble thus allows Childress to write a critique of the history of the American stage, where plays by (usually male) White writers purporting to show the Black experience have been embraced while dramas by African American writers are ignored.

Trouble in Mind is currently playing at the Arena Stage in Washington, DC through October 23, 2011. Tickets are $70-85 per show; however, there are student and senior matinee priced tickets, as well as Pay Your Age tickets, military discounts, and Hottix, which are half-priced and first come, first serve thirty minutes before showtime.