LazlosBasement.com
THE POLITICS OF POP CULTURESolving Unemployment With Sexism, Racism
Posted September 29th, 2008 in Activism, All, Healthcare, Legal, News You Cannot Use and PoliticsIt’s not the first time such an outstandingly bassackwards resolution has been proposed in a state senate meeting, and I strongly suspect it will not be the last. But there is a little extra sting to Representative John LaBruzzo’s most recent brainchild, which could be generously described as dumbfuckery gone south. LaBruzzo, who represents a Metairie district in the Louisiana state legislature, has officially proposed that the state spend its residents’ hard-earned tax dollars by “voluntarily” sterilizing women who don’t meet his financial standards - while simultaneously “encouraging” wealthy women to have more children - as a means to improve the state’s economy. Seriously.
Now, the asininity (it’s a word, I looked it up) of this proposal should be shockingly obvious to our fair readers, but I’ve got insomnia so just for shits and giggles I’m gonna go ahead and point it all out anyway. Let’s start with the fact that LaBruzzo touts this proposal as a way of “addressing the problem of intergenerational welfare,” which one can only assume means that he thinks “welfare” is the economic quandary at fault for low wages and joblessness in Louisiana (those pesky hurricanes and Wall Street aside). First, there’s no such thing as “welfare” any more, so one can only hope LaBruzzo is using the inadequate term to refer to the replacement program TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families), which provides - read my lips here - TEMPORARY financial assistance to some families (children are a requirement, adults without children do not qualify ) whose income falls below the poverty level. In other words, the majority of people who benefit from the TANF system are children whose parents DO work (another requirement) but whose wages are too low to raise the family above poverty. And they can only receive benefits for a maximum of five (that’s 5, or V if you’re an ancient Roman) years total. They can thank Bill Clinton, who I firmly support as our best Republican president ever, for that time limit. So that pretty much shatters the myth of “intergenerational welfare,” because this country will be goddamned if more than one percent (that’s 1%) of the entire federal budget is spent on assistance to these families. Truth.
But why stop there? Last we heard it takes two to tango, so you might ask why LaBruzzo only wants to offer the $1000 bribe to sterilize women? Ah HAH! He has you right where he wants you now! LaBruzzo would be happy to cauterize a few low-class vas deference tubes. Why, he’ll even offer you broke blokes $500 for the pleasure. Apparently your tubes are only worth half as much as fallopian tubes. See? He’s not sexist at all. Why, women’s reproductive rights are twice as expensive as men’s!
Of course, LaBruzzo’s ingenious eugenic plan would only be fair if he offered some form of incentive to upper class, college-educated (read White) families to have more children. After all, parity is an American value, right? So how ’bout some more tax breaks? Because if we’ve learned one thing from the gigantic clusterfuck that has become Wall Street, it’s that the winners of the Birthright Of Family Wealth lottery need more tax breaks. Knock a few more dollars off their itemized lists, that’s sure to get the bedroom rockin.’
In short, Rep. John LaBruzzo thinks he can magically succeed at what smarter and better men (and women) cannot; he can cure the financial disparities of an entire society’s classism by applying the simple tenets of sexism and racism to the whole lot of ‘em. By the way, LaBruzzo is a White upper-class post-grad with a kid, which clarifies where he would personally fall in the mix, though of course that’s beside his point, which I’m thinking resides on the top of his head.
On the other hand, this is from the same district that sent KKK leader David Duke to the legislation in 1989. So maybe LaBruzzo’s making progress after all.
The Eye Of The Beholder - McCain and the Greenberg Photos
Posted September 16th, 2008 in Activism, All, Arts, Celebrities, Commentary, Entertainment, Entertainment News, Expanding the concept of "Art", Legal, Politics and Take a look...
The field of politics has been referred to as “the art of the possible,” but what place does art truly hold in politics (or vice versa)? While many artists would say that art should transcend - or at least be divorced from - politics, photographer Jill Greenberg seems to think otherwise. Greenberg, who exhibits her work on her webpage manipulator.com, made a very strong and very public statement about her latest subject, Republican presidential nominee John McCain, through her photography. Greenberg’s work has come under fire since one of her photos served as the cover for the latest issue of The Atlantic magazine. Greenberg was contracted to photograph McCain for the publication, but her website displays further photographs of McCain which are edited to literally look like something out of a horror movie. Perhaps even more provocative than the visual editing are the photograph captions, which read, consecutively:
Darkness is only driven out with light, not more darkness.” - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.*
*mccain voted against mlk day
It was really fun to cheat on my car-injury-disabled first wife.
and
I called my wife a cunt in front of reporters.
While the shock value of the photos is obvious, their place in contemporary American politics, not to mention the art world, is unclear. While politically motivated blue-state activists might consider the photographs to be visionary, one cannot help but wonder what Greenberg hopes to accomplish by displaying them. At the same time, although media-minded red-state activists have decried the photographs as “sarcastic” at best, Greenberg certainly cannot be accused of dishonesty when it comes to her political assessments. The Canadian born artist makes no bones about her liberal political tendencies, nor is this the first time her professionalism has been questioned. Slate notes that her series of photographs entitled “End Times,” which showed toddlers in the midst of tantrums, gained international notoriety as her methods were questioned and labeled abusive by some critics. Greenberg did not hesitate to answer the criticism with contextual remarks which, in retrospect, may have provided a preview of the current controversy:
They’re not meant to be read as mere baby pictures; they’re meant to be a statement. As Greenberg herself explains in the gallery’s press release, “The first little boy I shot, Liam, suddenly became hysterically upset. It reminded me of helplessness and anger I feel about our current political and social situation.” “As a parent,” she continues, “I have to reckon with the knowledge that our children will suffer for the mistakes our government is making. Their pain is a precursor of what is to come.”
The controversy over the McCain photographs will likely spin further out of control before it settles; Greenberg has already been dropped by her agent in retribution for the series, and re-signed with a previous agency. This is despite the fact that her photographs have graced the covers of national periodicals such as Time Magazine, Newsweek, and TV Guide. And since controversy is hardly a detractor when it comes to media coverage, it seems likely that her career will not suffer from the series in the long run. But it remains to be seen whether Greenberg’s honesty is really her best policy; the Atlantic has stated publicly that it may file charges against her despite using one of the photographs from the series on its cover. Her journalistic integrity, if she had any, is likely now permanently kaput. On the other hand enthusiasts note that art is not journalism, and as super-activist and singer Bono says, “It is the artist’s job to define the problem.” Clearly Greenberg feels that right-wing politics are the problem; but her work may ultimately backfire on her. It engenders a certain amount of sympathy for McCain and illustrates nothing so well as the divisiveness and single-mindedness of the blue state/red state controversy… and in the end we may decide that’s the real enemy.
Notes on a New Orleans from a Gustav Evacuee
Posted August 29th, 2008 in Activism, All, Books, Inside New Orleans, News You Cannot Use, Politics, Sports and Take a look...Nothing says NEW ORLEANS like the crossroads of adversity and humor;
A house in the Uptown District of New Orleans posts a “No Wake” sign on the second story to prepare for hurricane flooding.
For Gustav, we have The Cone. The 5-day cone, the 3-day cone, the cone of anxiety!
I know the storm is imminent when the house up the street posts the sign. So here we go.
I’d say here we go again, but I wasn’t actually around for Hurricane Katrina. We moved to New Orleans almost exactly a year after that fateful storm passed through. A lot of people asked us: “Why would you want to go there?” It is a reasonable question. After all, the entire country watched as this city struggled and drowned. As the government later opined, “mistakes were made.” But New Orleans is in our family’s history, which means it is also in our blood. We wanted to come here for the simple reason of solidarity; we couldn’t bear to watch from afar, we had to come back. You see, the national news covered the storm, and it covered the devastation that followed. What it didn’t cover was the Rebirth. Unless you’re a New Orleanian or a serious Saints fan, you probably weren’t a part of the overwhelming spirit of a community that simply could not call any place else “home.”
We flatter ourselves that we have been a part of the Rebirth efforts here, which is what makes this new storm Gustav sting so badly. We want to stay. If you’ve never seen an entire city in the throws of post-traumatic stress disorder, maybe you don’t understand. Maybe all you see is an industrial center or a port. Maybe all you see is a city which has one of the highest poverty rates in the nation. Maybe all you see is boarded up windows and low-lying streets, just waiting to be flooded. But if so, New Orleans is more than what you see. Today I saw families boarding up windows. Today I saw people buying canned fish and batteries. But today, I also saw a young man pasting the only bumper sticker on his new car - a sticker that simply said “New Orleans.”
More than any place I have ever experienced, New Orleans is a community. It is a city where the words “friend” and “neighbor” mean something more than their dictionary definitions. It is a city where the word “porch” is a verb. It is the kind of city that could birth an entire musical genre (we’re talkin’ ’bout Jazz) out of sheer tenacity and strength of spirit, and probably no small amount of red wine. It is a city that gets into your soul, makes a nest, and settles down for the long haul. To us, it is home in every sense of the word.
Tomorrow, I will have to leave my home (Chris Rose leaves when Nash leaves*, I leave when the Saints leave). I will pack my family and my pets in a car, and drive to Kentucky where our nearest family members wait to literally shelter us from the storm (the nearest vacant hotels are in northern Arkansas anyway). We will drive all night, and we will arrive alive and safe. We will leave our home behind, and if Gustav does its worst, our home will flood, and struggle, and maybe drown once again. But there will be no dead in our attic, no need for the National Guard to paint an ugly number on our wall. We’ll head out, so that we can come back all the sooner.
Being a New Orleanian is kind of like being a pet person - either you get it or you don’t. If you do, I - we - want to say “Thank You.” Thank you to all the people in all the states who are preparing to help out our worst case scenario. Thank you to everyone who isn’t leaving it up to President Bush or FEMA to pull us through. Thank you for your care, your consideration, your generosity, and your help. But most of all, Thank You for understanding. We love our home, and no matter what Gustav or any other storm brings, we’re prepared to return. So tonight, as we’re clearing out our freezers and filling up our gas tank, we will eat our perishable foods, and we will drink our non-perishable wines, because this is New Orleans. We live it. We love it. And no matter what happens, we can’t wait to come home.
*Chris Rose never leaves.
Oprah Momentarily Joins Human Race; Focuses On Poverty In The U.S.
Posted August 15th, 2008 in Activism, All, Celebrities, Commentary, Entertainment, Entertainment News, Healthcare, Inside New Orleans, Politics and TV Moment of the WeakOprah whispers, “I see poor people.”
We’ve been known to call out talk shows for their total lack of social relevance, so it seems only fair to offer a rare shout out to the Oprah show for today’s special feature on poverty in America. Oprah (who shouldn’t be so shocked seeing as she grew up in an impoverished Mississippi community) invites Anderson Cooper, who has been at the forefront of reporting on the poverty exposed by Hurricane Katrina, to discuss his experiences reporting on the devastation and poverty since the storm, and sends him into impoverished communities around the nation to expose the extent of poverty in the U. S. The episode is a refreshing use of a national platform to discuss a very real, very serious issue. Finally, a talk show with something to talk about.
Facts about poverty in the United States:
- Medical bills are the leading cause of bankruptcy in the U.S.
- In 2006, 46 million Americans have no health insurance.
- Over a third (36%) of families living below the poverty line are uninsured.
- More than 9 million children lack health insurance in America.
- Eighteen Thousand people die each year in the United States because they are uninsured.
- The United States has higher child poverty than seven other major industrialized western countries (UNICEF, State of the World’s Children Report 1993, 1992). The U.S. child poverty rate is dramatically higher than those of Canada, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.
Louisiana Voters Threaten Recall Over Legislative Pay Raise
Posted June 30th, 2008 in Activism, All, Inside New Orleans, Legal, Politics and Take a look...Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal vetoes legislature’s self-approved pay raise.
Less than a week after assuring the Louisiana state legislature that he would stay out of their affairs, Governor Bobby Jindal announced that he will veto a bill which would have doubled the legislature’s salary. The legislation, which was passed only two weeks ago, has for some reason lit the spark under voters in a way that massive national scandal previously failed to do. At least two recall petitions have been filed against the governor, as well as several notable legislators including the state’s Speaker of House. Rallies and protests targeting the controversial bill been called off in response to today’s announcement.
Although I personally agree that the legislature’s base salary of $16,000 is too low, I’m also aware that every single one of those legislators asked for the job. Louisiana voters who - let’s face it - will take a lot of crap from their elected officials, apparently draw the line at voting to double one’s own salary at taxpayers’ expense. Too greedy to even allow the salary change to take effect after the next election, it seems legislators have finally found ground upon which even their flocks will not be fleeced. Naturally the voters feel that, while there are plenty of worthy causes since the storm which deserve to have the legislatiors’ full attention, their own salary is not one of them. Why these people couldn’t just take bribes like any other local politician is entirely beyond us.
LazlosBasement.com is proudly powered by
WordPress
Entries (RSS)
and Comments (RSS).

















