However, buried in one of the articles on Morris’s capture was a little segment that made me worried.

According to the St. Pete Times,

Meanwhile, in the sprawling Kenneth Court apartment complex that Morris used to frequent, the police remained a constant presence through Friday.

“We all feel like prisoners, like we are being held hostage,” said Sherell Mitchell, 24. Seven months pregnant, she was seething about the hours she spent Wednesday afternoon with her two young children, locked out by a police barricade. “They said, ‘No one’s getting in and no one’s getting out.’ ”

Told of residents’ complaints, McElroy said, “it’s certainly not our intention to inconvenience or harass the people of this neighborhood.”

Notice there was no actual reporting there. Just claims. I’m not sure if the St. Pete Times actually did any investigation or merely put the quotes in to raise eyebrows. But the fact remains, did the cops inconvenience people as they searched for Morris? Personally, I don’t know. I don’t live in that part of town, nor was I anywhere near during the situation.

If these claims are true, it does open up the possibility of worsening public relations between the people of Morris’s community and the Tampa Police Department. There was no doubt Morris needed to be caught. He was public enemy number one. But I hope following the investigation, there was some motion to assuage relations between his community and the authorities.

Something tells me this wasn’t and isn’t the case.

The picture in this post is from an organization named the Black Peoples Advancement and Defense Organization (BPADO). According to their web site, BPADO’s mission is:

The mission of the Black Peoples Advancement & Defense Organization is to: protect and defend poor people, in Hillsborough County and the City Of Tampa, from every aggression of The State, great or small, intentional or accidental, by any means necessary, and educate, organize and mobilize people, in Hillsborough County and the City Of Tampa, in a way that will enable us to control our tax dollars, as well as the government officials responsible for those dollars, and make them work for our greater good, instead of our oppression.

I know Tampa has struggled in the issue of race. Few southern cities haven’t. In the four years I have lived in the area, I have noticed the city celebrates it’s pseudo-pirate culture and it’s legitimate Spanish culture far more than it does any other. It seems the African-American community has struggled here as much as they have in many other places in the south. The Wikipedia article on Tampa Riots, for example, is full of stories of people lashing out against authority, to include a 1987 riot after the police who arrested then-New York  Met pitcher Dwight Gooden were cleared of racist charges.

Has there been overreaction by African-American community leaders nationwide to perceived incidences of racism? I would say so. Jesse Jackson’s involvement in the LeBron James saga is a perfect example.

Have there been incidences where public movements have been essential to garner the fair treatment of people? Absolutely. That is the legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr..

Although Dontae Morris is innocent until he gets his day in court, he didn’t come from the best part of town. His neck of the woods was where drugs and crime are higher than average in Tampa. However, security through citizen manipulation is not the answer, nor can it be allowed to be the perception. My hope is that somewhere between extreme action (or the perception thereof) and extreme reaction (or the threat thereof) there are people in the different communities of Tampa who can work with each other and build bridges of cooperation.

If not, we will continue to see reactive organizations such as BPADO emerge.

Then, on the other side of this great land, we have an infestation of foreigners swarming through each and every crevice of our terribly porous border and attaching themselves to our neighborhoods, towns, cities, and public support systems. These leeches from the lower latitudes are unfairly suckling off the bosom of Lady Liberty and milking her dry.

To defend us against these two great plagues we have a bastion of public servants, many eager to pass laws that put the immediate and unrepentant stop to the floods debilitating our fair way of life.

In other words, from what I can gather, one political party is all for banning offshore drilling and the other wholeheartedly supports local rule of law on immigration.

And both are willing to go to court to ensure their way is the only way.

Yikes.

What happened to compromise, that ol’ great American tradition of giving a little to get a little? Where went the skill of bartering in public policy? When did politics become a zero-sum game?

That’s sad.

Ok, here is what I would like to see happen:

I would like to see one political party acquiesce to wholesale acceptance of their ideals. To bring back the days of  compromise seen during the 19th century. Sure, our most famous compromise,  The 3/5 Compromise, made a race of people less than whole, but as an ideal, compromise is a good thing.

I would like to see politicians create a policy that trades oil drilling privileges for states’ rights on immigration. Instead of holding tightly to their ideals for the sake of their party, policy makers could tackle two issues at one time.

For example, what would be wrong with banning 80% of offshore drilling in exchange for a state being responsible for 80% of categories of immigrants trying to get into the nation through that state’s borders?

I know that is an awkward comparison, but by going to the table and being willing to give on the issues, policy makers have a better of chance of getting something and avoiding their law going to court, where issues are seen as yes or no, guilty or innocent, black or white, or life or death. There is no compromise in the judicial system, and that is a good thing.

The problem is that politicians are scared to bend on issues because they fear doing so would alienate them from their core voters and their financial contributions. Politicians fear they will voted out or even worse, lose party funding. But compromise is what America is founded on. Without it, we have a flurry of continuous fringe-funded uncompromising jostling, law flip-flopping, and a general loss of an overarching American vision.

Perhaps one way to consider an “offshore drilling ban for states’ rights on immigration law” compromise would be to consider the affect on regional economies. To turn people to dollars. How many economic dollars/jobs would be lost with continued oil spills? How many jobs would be lost with a continued flow of illegal immigrants? How many dollars would continued to be spent on public services for there illegal residents?

Comparing dollars to dollars and bringing back the Art of Compromise. It sounds so simple.

Of course, such a scenario would mean policy makers would have to agree on the economic numbers. Which is a whole other bag of worms.

On June 19, Pittsburgh Pirates employee Andrew Kurtz was fired after his management read disparaging remarks he wrote about the organization on his Facebook page. Even though Kurtz claimed it was “just an opinion”, management made him turn in his field entertainment (aka his Pierogi racing) uniform and seek employment elsewhere.

A few days later, on June 22, Rolling Stone Magazine posted a lengthy article about General Stanley McChrystal, head of operations in Afghanistan. In the article, McChrystal and his staff had some not-so-nice things to say about the President of the United States and his staff. The next day, McChrystal was fired and reports are that members of his staff may also be given their walking papers.

Proves that you shouldn’t talk about the boss in earshot, right?

Not so fast.

The same day McChrystal was fired, Andrew Kurtz was re-hired by the Pittsburgh Pirates and reinstated as a pierogi racer. According to ESPN.com, officials with the Pirates claimed Kurtz “shouldn’t have been terminated in the first place”.

In linking the two incidents, Chicago Tribune reporter Rob Manker asked “Why is the top U.S. general in Afghanistan more replaceable than a running pierogi?”

I think Manker missed the point completely. The point is not that Kurtz was more valuable than McChrystal or that McChrystal was more valuable than Kurtz. The point is that the Pittsburgh Pirates organization set a poor example in allowing a low ranking employee to get away with bad mouthing leadership. Politics aside, President Obama put a line in the sand by cutting ties with McChrystal. Agree or disagree, the President made it clear: disorderly conduct and embarrassing leadership will not be tolerated, especially by those in public positions. That line does not exist for public representatives of the Pittsburgh Pirates.

The Pirates would have been better off ignoring Kurtz’s comments in the first place and letting him go about his job. Instead, they opened up the door to criticism by any employee, completely undermining the leadership structure.  Now any one employed by the Pirates can say what they want about the Pirates senior leadership and not fear the repercussions. If questioned and threatened with a possible firing, they only have to point to Kurtz and his continued employment.

That’s bad leadership. Not that every employee has to agree, but a successful business can not have crusaders undermining their efforts. Everyone should at least notionally be on the same page.

No wonder the Pirates haven’t had a winning season since 1992.

By the way, pierogis are freakin’ awesome. Especially the cheese and potato kinds. Just writing this post made me hungry.

After the September 11^th tragedy, anything depicting the recently destroyed World Trade Centers quickly came to hold deep sentimental meaning.  They became instant symbols of liberty and freedom for all Americans.  So it is easy to imagine the public shock upon the discovery of a CD that was to have been released in late September 2001 with an image of the Trade Centers exploding ¾ ways up.  Even more eerie and outrageous was that the CD’s cover design predated September 11^th.

The band responsible for the CD and its cover was called The Coup and its members, “Boots” Riley and Pam the Funkstress became infamous celebrities.  “Boots” appeared on television shows such as Politically Incorrect and Fox News’s Hannity and Colmes.  It was with this backdrop that I went to Tallahassee’s dance club, the Moon, to see the Coup live on Tuesday, April 9^th, 2002.

Doors opened to the Moon at 7:30pm and the opening act, “The Human Beatbox” Kenny Muhammed, was supposed to be on stage at 8:30.  Because the show was sponsored by Florida State University, admission was free.  I arrived about 8, expecting at least a small crowd.  To my surprise, I was one of the first eight people in the club.

8:30 came and went and still there were fewer than 30 people in the club.  I think the lack of attendance made the club’s manager a little nervous, the powers that be pushed Kenny Muhammed’s performance back an hour.

Although at first I was bothered by the delay, I used the time to my advantage.  I started a conversation with a very attractive brunette dressed in nothing but a skimpy rubber mini skirt.  She was from Philadelphia and part of a traveling Sobe energy drink marketing squad.  Her and her team had a booth in the rear of the club and gave out trinkets, sample CDs, and taste tests of Sobe.

I also talked to someone of a little more importance during my wait.  I ran into The Coup’s lead singer, “Boots” Riley, by the t-shirt stand.  “Boots” was a short guy, about 5’6 or so, with a big Afro.  He was dressed in an athletic jump suit, and looked like he was ready to play basketball.  He seemed to be in his mid-20s as well, not much older than me.

While talking to “Boots,” I mentioned that I had seen the Fox News broadcast he appeared on and I thought it was unfair how the hosts had treated him (throughout the broadcast they interrupted him and spoke over him, not allowing him to get in a word).  He agreed, telling me he didn’t expect that behavior from the show.  Then I told him I was at the show to hear his message, to get his side of the issues.  Something Fox News never allowed me to do.  So much for Fair and Balanced.

After I drank a couple more Heinekens and flirted some more with the Sobe girl, Kenny Muhammed finally came on.  “The Human Beatbox” was pretty good, making an array of boom-bap-boom-ta-boom-bap beats without a DJ.  His show got old though, after about 20 minutes I was boom-bapped out.

There was, as expected, a brief intermission before The Coup took the stage.  During this time, the Moon played a skateboarding, extreme sport video on movie screens that came down from the roof below the stage.  This video was complete with heavy metal music, and was totally out of place during a hip-hop show.

The Coup, a hip-hop band as well, finally took the stage.  Tonight they were led by “Boots” and featured a live back up band.  Unfortunately, Pam the Funkstress wasn’t “in the house.”  “Boots” had another rapper on the stage with him but never took the time to identify him.

The main theme of The Coup in both their logo and their lyrics is that they are socialists.  They are very much against “The Man,” who they define as all rich white males.  This includes both the government and high-ranking businessmen, the latter of which are targeted in the song “5 Million Ways to Kill a CEO.”

Overall, the Coup put on a very enjoyable show.  They reminded me of old Parliament-Funkadelic George Clinton funk updated with socio-political rap lyrics.  They put to shame any of the materialistic, girls, cars, and jewelry songs dominating mainstream radio and MTV.  Quite possibly the best part of the show wasn’t The Coup, however.  It was watching a group of white drunken fraternity brothers with absolutely no rhythm attempt to dance to The Coup’s pro-black, damn-the-rich-white-man songs.

After The Coup’s show was over, I again had a chance to talk to “Boots” Riley.  I told him I enjoyed the show, although I didn’t agree with his entire message.  I also told him I had bought the group’s CD, which of course now features an album cover unrelated to the World Trade Centers.  “Boots” thanked me, shook my hand, and went on his way, probably seeing humor in the fact that his socialist, pro-black message was purchased by a college-educated white kid who has lived in the suburbs his whole life.

Author and Yale Law Professor Amy Chua goes beyond all of these usual comparisons in her book “Day of Empire: How Hyperpowers Rise to Global Dominance – and Why They Fall“. Chua sets her sights on all human civilization and compares and contrasts what she calls “hyperpowers” – “those few societies that amassed such extraordinary military and economic might that they essentially dominated the world”.

According to Chua, there have been seven such hyperpowers:

• the Persian Empire of the 6th Century BC to the 3rd Century BC
• the Roman Empire of the 1st and 2nd Century
• the Tang Dynasty of the 7th to 9th Century
• the Mongols of the 12th Century
• the Dutch of the 17th Century
• the British Empire of the 18th and 19th Century
• Present-day United States

Chua states that not only were these nations stronger militarily or economically than other nations of their time, but they also took steps to ensure and expand their dominance. Chua’s most prevalent argument is that relative tolerance played a big part in the elevation of these nations, and that when that tolerance ended, the demise of the hyperpower was quick to follow.

As a fan of geopolitics, political science, international affairs, and human culture, I really liked this book. It was easy to read and definitely informative. Chua does a great job getting into some of the details on how hyperpowers welcomed foreign peoples into their arms and used their manpower, brainpower, or economic clout (sometimes all three) to the betterment of the nation. For example, did you know the US government sent job recruiters to Europe during the 18th Century to find able bodied workers willing to move across the ocean and join the American labor force?

Despite my recommendation however, there are a few things I want to point out about the book:

It almost seems like Chua cherry-picked her results. It’s easy to set a standard such as “tolerance” and wiggle and fit a few worthy candidates into the qualification. Were the Romans really “tolerant” because they wanted to be, or because it was the easiest way to control land? There is no doubt much of the tolerance Chua discusses is driven by military or economic needs. If you have a fixed labor pool, where else would you get bodies to fight or create things than from other countries?

I also think Day of Empire could have been written as a book on the growing importance of global tolerance and the need for multi-cultural acceptance. Instead of chronologically, the book could have been organized topically and in grades of interaction and tolerance.

Overall, like I said, I liked Day of Empire. And with recent immigration happenings and current events in Arizona and throughout Europe, having a historical outlook on the issues is always a good thing.

Anyway, without getting all political, let me know if my analogy makes sense.

I’m so out of the box, I’m waiting for The Man to give me one box to put my office items in, and another to live in.

Unfortunately, I have zero interest in living in DC, the hub of American international happenings. Absolutely none. It is way too crowded and there is no beach. And everything there is so political. No thanks.

So with that in mind, and being that no one here in Tampa is paying me for my opinions, I hope you don’t mind me dropping a few international analyses here. I’ll try and keep them readable and somewhat linked to something happening here in the states, in Florida, or local to Tampa.

For example, I’m sure you heard of the recent subway bombings in Moscow. Once again, like in London in 2004, terrorists struck at public transportation systems, this time killing over 30 and injuring dozens more.

Meanwhile, here in Florida, plans are well on their way for a statewide rail system that would reduce traffic and help connect Miami, Orlando, and Tampa. There are also efforts and information campaigns to reduce the urban sprawl that is destroying the natural habitats of the state.

According to a 2006 article in the Orlando Sentinel,

There are some people, however, who think growth can be smarter and more compact with a stronger separation among urban, suburban and rural terrain. Smart growth means better planning and more land preserved. It looks like condos and town houses mixed with single-family homes. Those homes are closer together, linked by walking paths that lead to stores, movie theaters and offices. There may be mass transit. Smart growth in Central Florida is Baldwin Park in Orlando and Celebration by Disney. Across the nation, it’s Boston and New York City.

The end state of both efforts is to have more people living amongst each other and traveling en masse.  Nearly everyone agrees this is a good thing – biologists, environmentalists, planners, and even politicians.

I bet you can include terrorists on that list.

Although we haven’t had many, if any serious attacks on public transportation systems here in the U.S. (yet), the odds of mass casualties will go up dramatically when we all migrate to urban areas and do a majority of our travel on monorails and people movers. We will drastically increase our chances of being a target and make it easier for terrorists to make a large impact with minimal effort.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not discouraging efforts to reduce urban sprawl. To be honest, I hate seeing Best Buys, malls, and housing developments built for no reason in the middle of natural Florida environments. It’s sickening.

I’m just saying I hope we prepare for the increased chances of possible terrorist attacks, either from international organizations or nutjob domestic groups. Keep in mind, this may require increased physical security and surveillance.

Is reducing urban sprawl and highway traffic worth the trade-off?

According to the T. Rowe Price Winter 2010 newsletter,

At the same time, he (Hugh McGuirk, head of T. Rowe Price’s municipal bond group) expects concerns about the health of state and local budgets to increase over the next year, so he has been tilting T. Rowe Price’s municipal bond portfolios away from direct government bonds in favor of essential service revenue bonds issued by water and sewer authorities and utilities—entities with stable revenue streams.

So perhaps what we are seeing is investors shying away from putting their (or your) money into established municipalities. Entities that probably won’t go away anytime soon. But they could go bankrupt. They could overspend and not have enough income. Then, what we could see is them cutting back services. Either that or selling established services to private companies. Companies that will be so ingrained in our social fabric, they might as well be government. And democracy will only be in the hands of the shareholders.

But I’ll make a few bucks on the dividends.

* Yes, I do some investing. Don’t laugh. I have mad cash invested in Disney.

In Novemeber 2009, the United Nations hosted the first ever Global Ministerial Conference on Road Safety. Because road safety and traffic accidents are a growing concern throughout the world, “as many as 1500 participants including ministers; representatives of UN agencies, civil society organizations and private companies” met in Russia for the conference. This group sought to stem the worldwide problem of road safety.

(According to some of the UN’s published numbers,

• More than a million people are killed in road accidents in the developing world each year
• Every day a thousand under 25 year-olds are killed in road accidents
• Road accidents are the world’s number one killer of 15 -19 year olds.)

As a result of the Conference’s “Moscow Declaration“, the years 2011 to 2020 have been declared the “Decade of Action for Road Safety”. As a follow-up to the November meeting, the UN General Assembly is scheduled to discuss their initiatives during the road safety decade this March. The initiatives will include a focus on the following danger areas:

• the non-use of seat-belts and child restraints
  
• drinking and driving
  
• the non-use of helmets
  
• excessive speed
  
• the lack of appropriate road infrastructure

Since the UN started looking at road safety nearly five years ago, they have teamed up with several racing organizations and personalities. In 2007, Formula 1 supported the first UN Global Road Safety Week by pushing their racers to contribute to the effort through speeches and photo ops. Drivers Michael Schumaker and Lewis Hamilton also spoke out and individually supported the UN Global Road Safety week initiative.

Also in 2007, the UN named Formula Three driver Basil Shaaban “UN World Youth Ambassador for Road Safety”. With this appointment, Shaaban, a Lebanese driver, took up “an effective social role in spreading awareness about the causes of fatal traffic accidents in the Arab world, most of which is result to over-speeding and recklessness on public roads.” Being that many Middle East nations are on the top of the list of accidents, Shaaban’s role, which he still holds, is especially relevant.

Despite worldwide participation and cooperation, one racing organization is conspicuously absent. A quick Google search reveals no evidence of cooperation between NASCAR and the UN in road safety initiatives. This even though NASCAR broadcasts races in over 150 countries.

Rather than attempting to figure why this hasn’t happened yet, here are two big reasons why working together on road safety would be beneficial for both NASCAR and the UN.

1) Global Reach for NASCAR -Although it’s American expansion is somewhat new compared to other sports, NASCAR has just about permeated the entire US market. Now that theyhave effectively courted the female American market with the arrival of Danica Patrick, the next step, of course, is looking to market and spread internationally. NASCAR would be wise to use the United Nations to promote NASCAR’s legitimacy to international fans. And it would also introduce NASCAR’s best personalities to people unfamiliar with the sport.

2) Exposure to Americans for the UN – A partnering with NASCAR would help improve the UN’s image in America. Although they do a lot of work throughout the world in various fields, the bottom line is that many Americans have a negative opinion of the UN and quite a few even support American withdrawal from the organization. Being seen with Jimmie Johnson, Dale Earnhart, Jr, and other racers could show the NASCAR demographic another side of the UN, possibly swaying opinion from”poor” to “good” or even “meh” – especially if the UN can effectively convey its message of road safety to the American audience.

Pairing NASCAR with the UN during the Decade of Action for Road Safety would not only be good business, it could also help reduce auto fatalities and accidents across the globe. And that would be worth a victory lap.

If the sound was better, you could hear the lady at the end say something to the effect of “Why do they need such a big escort for one man?”

I thought that was pretty funny.