But the thrust of what I had to say still stands. Arianna Huffington has consistently touted replacing government programs with charity. If Cooper, had known more (which he admits he does not, then he could have asked her why was it then that her own attempt in Santa Barbara to provide charity to needy children failed. It did not outlive her husbands campaign. This is the fallacy of right wing politicos like Huffington's. They think they can do better than government and when they have millions of dollars which she had to be "effective" they don't come through. That is a lousy substation for an entitlement which guarantees a qualified individual assistance.
I am going to respond directly to text:
> Marc: Further, as you, Doug, know very well, whatever one thinks
> of my hosting Arianna on my show it is a riduclous, I would say paranoid,
> notion to construe that as having anything to do with the editorial line of
> The Nation.
I would not say that at all.The comment I made was in the context of Joel Coeval's piece in Z Magazine saying that he could not get any press out of the Nation - which has become a strange hybrid of politics with a heavy liberal bent. But certainly, the Nation has decided that you can host its radio show by making some judgment about you politically.
> Marc: But I have stood
> solidy to the left within the internal and external Nation debates; I have
> published a minority viewpoint column in The Nation objecting to its
> defense of Clinton and calling for his resignation.
Yes, and I think for the right reasons. Though you have received much criticism from KPFK listeners as well about your position.
> Marc: The telephones were opened and Pacifica
> callers had a 1/2 hour of open time to ask anything their little hearts
> desired and -- aha! ALL of the calls were polite, courteous and curious.
I never suggested that you or anyone else should not be polite. You are over-reacting, why I wonder??
> Marc: Arianna was asked why she is still a Republican and she said it is
> because
> she doesn't like big government programs. Ok So let's shoot her. She did
> say, however, that this objection was no longer one of principle. It was
> merely because she doesn;t think they are very efficient. I did make a joke
> after that.. but perhaps Ms Russell's ears were too inflamed to have heard
> what I said: "So, Arianna," I said with a laugh. "Does that mean that w e
> on the left can still win you over to a very expensive, very
> government-intensive program as long as it works?" So? Let's shoot me, I
> suppose.
Here is where Cooper could have asked her about her own charity that failed as she accuses government programs of failing. But Cooper did not know about her attack on SSI, or her charity in Santa Barbara that failed. It was a perfect opportunity to bust right wing people who arrogantly assume that they can do more for the "poor" than government can. I am sick of conservatives thinking that they have all the answers to how to "help" because they have a fat bank account. A charity is a euphemism for economic oppression. It keeps those at the bottom on the bottom. To get "help" from a charity is one of the most groveling, dehumanizing experiences one can be put through. And when a charity sets itself up to do something charitable and then goes out of business because it cannot do the job, what happens to all those people it was supposedly helping?
> Marc: What Ms. Russell might be interested to know is that after I announced my
>
> email address 3 times soliciting open listener reaction to the show, I
> received (at last count) 57 emails including one from Ms Russell.
>
I wrote to Marc twice about his having Arianna on the show TWICE. Once to inform him about her entitlement bashing and second to tell him that I did not agree with him when he claimed that she might change her tune. She has had ample opportunity. And I mentioned her attack on SSI. She is very much of the conservative bunch with a lot of money who do enjoy tax shields that their charities provide for them. Her proposed "Center for Effective Compassion," was one such enterprise.
> Marc: Most listeners said they found
> this stimulating and provocative and wanted to hear a whole lot more of
> this rather than the whining wholly predicatble agit-prop so often poured
> out over Pacifica (did anyone hear Amy Goodman the other day suggest that
> Republican Senators might secretly be discomforted when they have to walk
> into the Chamber past a painting of Lincoln signing the Emancipation
> Proclamation??? --puh-leeze!).
Well I think there is a greater division of opinion about the direction Pacifica has taken over the past couple of years than the response to Coopers show indicates.
> Marc: What I don't understand here is.. what is the fear?
I think it is interesting how Cooper first wants to label me as paranoid and now wants to reduce this to some emotion, like fear. These are typical responses meant to discredit me (and typically used against disabled people) on a psychological or ad hominem level. Attack the person, call them crazy. You know nothing about me, to be making such remarks are really way out there. This is not about psychology it is about politics.
I have to also say, that in the past I have found Marc Coopers writings to be highly stereotypical about disability. For instance, he wrote a critical piece about Bob Dole in the Nation during the presidential campaign, and while I am no fan of Bob Dole, I did resent the mockery that Marc made about Dole's disability. If anyone is interested I can dig up the details, but I believe he referenced Dole to Captain Hook. It is my position that it is not OK to attack someone's' missing hand as worthy of political commentary. There is enough to say about Bob Dole without having to resort to freak jokes.
Marc: I can say this: I myself find it much more
> interesting to talk to the opposition nowadays than talking to many of my
> allies (especially when they go into contorsions to defend Bill Clinton).
> I have not researched Arianna's position on SSI -- I have no idea to what
> degree she is or is not in favor of that program. She is certianly on
> record criticizing entitlement programs. On the other hand, she is a social
> liberal on most issues and I find it hard to believe that she favors
> putting the disbaled into the streets. I know my position on it, and I know
> it's not going to be changed by talking to Arianna or any other conservative.
No they never "want to put disabled people on the streets" but they are quite good at coming up with cuts to government programs that do this. For example, Huffington's tirade about "scrapping"SSI coincided with the mainstream media (Sam Donelson etc. attack on SSI (documented by both Alex Cockburn and myself) which resulted changes to the children's SSI program that severed about 300,000 disabled kids from the rolls.
> Marc: I
> react very poorly to a sort of PC-police who believe it is my duty to
> batter and trash every guest who doesn't pass a political litmus test or
> that, worse, I am some sort of turncoat traitor if I am not stridently on a
> PC message every minute of my show
Again no one asks Cooper batter anyone, I do expect cooper to not act like Larry King and refuse to ask the hard questions. The fact that he knew nothing about the SSI situation is telling.
Resorting to labeling people like me who have valid criticisms as the PC police is also a cover up for lack of a better response. After this exchange, I have to say, I expect even less of Cooper, but I will hope for the best.
Marta Russell