Ever wonder why people in our inner cities are angry??

As I got ready to leave the Roseland Town Homes (a housing project that has been rennovated in a very visible and accessed part of Dallas) at 7:00 on a Friday night, a fight was getting ready to happen. Thirty to forty people rounded the corner of the building and as they saw the fight materializing, many broke into a run to get there quicker.

I watched as my co-worker called 9-1-1 then got in my car and drove off.

Before I had even pulled out of the apartments, I saw the police lights. As I chose a different exit route, I nearly ran into two more police cars as they jumped the curb and sped across the open lot. I looked back to see two other police rapidly approaching from a different direction. When I pulled into the Jack in the Box parking lot, I heard a helicopter overhead. I watched it fly directly to Roseland and begin circling. The immediate and massive response for a teenage fight was unbelievable.

As I watched all of this activity, I could barely contain my anger. However, my anger is probably not what you think.

My anger is not at the teenagers who were fighting or those who were running to the fight. Nor was my anger at the police who were responding to the fight (I was actually very happy to see such a quick police response in such large numbers).

I was angry because I could recall the many times we called 9-1-1 during my eight years in Turner Courts (also a housing development, but one that is very far from the visibility of middle/upper class America)--usually with 45+ minute response times, never with a rushed response, and never any more than two cars.

But it wasn't just that. It was remembering how, in our Turner Courts community meetings, the police officers and sergeants and would condescendingly explain to us that when we called in we weren't using the right verbage when talking to the 9-1-1 dispatchers.

Nearly every meeting, we would receive condescending coaching comments that informed us, "The problem is you are saying, 'I just heard shots' instead of saying, 'Someone is shooting.'" They would then proceed to explain to us that it was our verbage that was causing the dispatch not to type in an immediate response command.

We thought we must be at fault. So much so that we even tried to circulate flyers with this "verbage" that they insisted was the problem.

Yet, despite using my coached verbage, a few months ago I drove through Turner Courts on a Friday evening around 10:30 p.m. and called 9-1-1. I frantically explained, "Three teenage boys are walking through the apartments with a gun...One boy is shooting! He is not even putting the gun away...it's still in his hand!" I had two teenage girls with me and these guys were walking right past their apartment so I wasn't going to even try to let them out.

I circled the block one more time, hoping the guys had taken off running in a different direction afraid of what might happen, but they didn't. They had no fear of anyone showing up. They continued sauntering through the apartments, still with the gun in hand, visible for all to see.

Scared that they might begin shooting again and we would end up caught in the cross fire, we made a quick decision to take the girls to a different place. We sped out of the apartments as fast as we could, never seeing a single police car (and there is only one way in and one way out of Turner Courts so I know they didn't even arrive as we were leaving).

When I later confronted the police officers who attended our community meetings, they looked into it and brought me documentation that they had shown up. I forgot to look at the response time. But it really didn't matter. They were always quick to "explain" to us the way the police system works and how they may be on another end of town or may have to wait on backup and couldn't get there quick. In other words, it wasn't their fault. The way they made it sound...and what we came to believe...the understaffed police department caused this kind of response to be the same across the city.

So someone tell me why the response was so different at Roseland!

As I talked to my friend about it today, I could still feel my blood pressure rise and the angry feelings overhwelm me all over again.

It upsets me when it takes all of five minutes for 5-7 police cars and a helicopter to arrive at Roseland for a teenage fight but we never saw that kind of response for a shooting in process at Turner Courts.

It upsets me because I feel like we were duped, lied to, and convinced that *we* were the problem because we weren't phoning things in correctly...and I'm angry because we believed them!

It upsets me because very few people who don't live in a community like Turner Courts will ever comprehend or care enough to fight for better security because, quite honestly, it just doesn't affect them.

But what is almost even more infuriating to me is that my position and my socioeconomic status allows me to move around, socialize in, and live or work in lower-income and upper-income communities. It is because I can move throughout each community that I have the opportunity to see the difference in services...an opportunity that many of my lower-income friends and neighbors don't have and, therefore, often blindly accept without question the poor services they are given.

Bailouts? Think about the children

We're busy scrambling to bail out people who have tragically failed our system. What about bailing out the people who haven't even had the chance or opportunity to make a bad decision yet? Listen to Karim's take on it...

Hootin' and Hollarin' 2008

What happens the third weekend in the small rural town of Gainesville, Missouri (population 595) every year?

Hootin' and Hollarin'!

What, you may ask, is Hootin' and Hollarin'?

Hootin'-and-Hollarin'--an annual festival, started in 1960, that celebrates the Irish heritage of many of the residents in Gainesville, Missouri. The hill country arts and craft festival features float and costume parades, square dancing, old time music, outhouse and bed races, hog-calling contests and more.

Growing up in this rural community, I learned to value blue grass music and good community and family celebrations. Hootin' and Hollarin' provides an annual homecoming for those of us who graduated and moved away. Each year we can go back and be assured we will see many former classmates, family, and friends.

Each evening, Thursday through Saturday, from 9:00 p.m.-12:00 a.m. large groups of people assemble...some to watch, some to dance, and some just to enjoy the music. I love watching the older men as they pull up a piece of plywood and clog, their feet shuffling in quick movements unexpected for men their age. Young and old gather on large square wooden skids so that the pounding feet of the square dancers can be heard. It's neat to watch each age group of dancers add in a younger one or two so that they can learn from the older generation.

Check out the video (above) and some pictures (below) so you can enjoy it, too.(if you look close, you can see the "Hillbilly Funnel Cakes" stand and the float that has an outhouse with a person sitting inside. We have a sense of humor about our cultural heritage. :)

Yes, we Can: Voices of a Grassroots Movement

I just heard about this CD and had to buy it:

http://www.barackobama.com/music/

I can't quite describe the feeling I have as I listen to it. It takes me back to Denver. I had planned to look up each of the songs we heard at Invesco and purchase them. This makes it so much easier...and provides a more extensive selection.

What other campaign have you ever known of that has this much unsolicited participation? This campaign and what they have inspired in such a variety of races, ethnicities, socioeconomic levels, and geographic areas helps me remember that the United States of America belongs to ALL of us.

Despite all of that, all in all, this is just good music.

1. Eternity - Lionel Richie
2. Signed Sealed Delivered - Stevie Wonder
3. Waiting On The World To Change - John Mayer
4. American Prayer - Dave Stewart
5. Battle Cry - Shontelle
6. Make It Better - Los Lonely Boys
7. Pride In The Name Of Love - John Legend
8. I Have A Dream - BeBe Winans
9. Am I All Alone - Suai
10. One Is The Magic # - Jill Scott
11. Love & Hope - Ozomatli
12. Looking East - Jackson Browne
13. Out of Our heads - Sheryl Crow
14. Promised Land - Malik Yusef with Kanye West and Adam Levine of Maroon 5
15. Hold On - Yolanda Adams
16. America The Beautiful - Keb' Mo'
17. America - Ken Stacey
18. Wide River - Buddy Miller


Through their musical contributions, the artists seek to mobilize voters in the final stretch before the November election. Many of the artists involved will also be volunteering their time to promote voter registration. For more information on registering to vote or requesting an absentee ballot, go to: www.VoteforChange.com

Federal funding available for tutoring

Did you know there is tutoring funding available for low-income children in low-performing schools?

It's been available for a while. It's through the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)...but 90% of the funds go un-used each year!

In the last week, two different tutoring providers have approached our organization. I am always suspicious when someone approaches me so that they can make money. Both providers work through the Dallas Independent School District (DISD) to provide services for the kids who qualify.

Here are the facts they've given us about the NCLB funding:

• program is open to middle and high school students
• kids must be from a school on the "under-performing list"
• federal funding provides up to $1575 funding per child per year
• children must qualify for free or reduced lunch

I am a curious as to why it isn't open to elementary-aged kids as well. It seems that getting kids back on track while they are young would be the thing to do.

From what I can understand, parents were notified (though I'm not sure how) on August 25 and had an enrollment deadline of September 25. A few more schools will be put on the list by the beginning of October and those students will have a deadline of October 25 to enroll. When we asked the man why couldn't students enroll year-round, we were told that DISD doesn't have the personnel to handle all of the paperwork associated with the funding. (Fort Worth...or was it Houston??...*does* allow year-round enrollment)

After these two meetings, I talked to another lady who said that she knew a provider that was being paid $3000 per kid to implement their program.

I haven't quite figured it out. Are the two programs that approached us gimmicks...or do they really help kids? Though $1575 is a start, I wonder how many kids get started on their "road to recovery and success" only to be cut off because there is no more funding.

If it's true, I'mt also wondering why one program gets $3000 per kid. Is it a better program that produces better results? If so, why is DISD still contracting with the other ones?

I understand that the administration needed to do the paperwork and measurements may be overwhelming, especially considering DISD's lastest blunder with their $64 million shortfall. However, I would think that getting kids tutored and up to grade level (if the funding's available) would/should be their greatest priority.

Does anyone else know anything about this and could offer any insight??

Tim Wise's response to his original White Privilege article

http://www.afro-netizen.com/2008/09/explaining-whit.html

By Tim Wise

Sigh.

I guess I should have expected it, seeing as how it's nothing new. I write a piece on racism and white privilege (namely, the recently viral, "This is Your Nation on White Privilege"), lots of folks read it, many of them like it, and others e-mail me in fits of apoplexy, or post scathing critiques on message boards in which they invite me to die, to perform various sexual acts upon myself that I feel confident are impossible, or, best of all, to "go live in the ghetto," whereupon I will come to "truly appreciate the animals" for whom I have so much affection (the phrase they use for me and that affection, of course, sounds a bit different, and I'll leave it to your imagination to conjure the quip yourself).

Though I have no desire to debate the points made in the original piece, I would like to address some of the more glaring, and yet reasonable, misunderstandings that many seem to have about the subject of white privilege. That many white folks don't take well to the term is an understatement, and quite understandable. For those of us in the dominant group, the notion that we may receive certain advantages generally not received by others is a jarring, sometimes maddening concept. And if we don't understand what the term means, and what those who use it mean as they deploy it, our misunderstandings can generate anger and heat, where really, none is called for. So let me take this opportunity to explain what I mean by white privilege.

Of course, the original piece only mentioned examples of white privilege that were directly implicated in the current presidential campaign. It made no claims beyond that. Yet many who wrote to me took issue with the notion that there was such a thing, arguing, for instance that there are lots of poor white people who have no privilege, and many folks of color who are wealthy, who do. But what this argument misses is that race and class privilege are not the same thing.

Though we are used to thinking of privilege as a mere monetary issue, it is more than that. Yes, there are rich black and brown folks, but even they are subject to racial profiling and stereotyping (especially because those who encounter them often don't know they're rich and so view them as decidedly not), as well as bias in mortgage lending, and unequal treatment in schools. So, for instance, even the children of well-off black families are more likely to be suspended or expelled from school than the children of poor whites, and this is true despite the fact that there is no statistically significant difference in the rates of serious school rule infractions between white kids or black kids that could justify the disparity (according to fourteen different studies examined by Russ Skiba at Indiana University).

As for poor whites, though they certainly are suffering economically, this doesn't mean they lack racial privilege. I grew up in a very modest apartment, and economically was far from privileged. Yet I received better treatment in school (placement in advanced track classes even when I wasn't a good student), better treatment by law enforcement officers, and indeed more job opportunities because of connections I was able to take advantage of, that were pretty much unavailable to the folks of color I knew growing up. Likewise, low income whites everywhere are able to clean up, go to a job interview and be seen as just another white person, whereas a person of color, even who isn't low-income, has to wonder whether or not they might trip some negative stereotype about their group when they go for an interview or sit in the classroom answering questions from the teacher. Oh, and not to put too fine a point on it, but even low-income whites are more likely to own their own home than middle income black families, thanks to past advantages in housing and asset accumulation, which has allowed those whites to receive a small piece of property from their families.

The point is, privilege is as much a psychological matter as a material one. Whites have the luxury of not having to worry that our race is going to mark us negatively when looking for work, going to school, shopping, looking for a place to live, or driving for that matter: things that folks of color can't take for granted.

Let me share an analogy to make the point.

Taking things out of the racial context for a minute: imagine persons who are able bodied, as opposed to those with disabilities. If I were to say that able-bodied persons have certain advantages, certain privileges if you will, which disabled persons do not, who would argue the point? I imagine that no one would. It's too obvious, right? To be disabled is to face numerous obstacles. And although many persons with disabilities overcome those obstacles, this fact doesn't take away from the fact that they exist. Likewise, that persons with disabilities can and do overcome obstacles every day, doesn't deny that those of us who are able-bodied have an edge. We have one less thing to think and worry about as we enter a building, go to a workplace, or just try and navigate the contours of daily life. The fact that there are lots of able-bodied people who are poor, and some disabled folks who are rich, doesn't alter the general rule: on balance, it pays to be able-bodied.

That's all I'm saying about white privilege: on balance, it pays to be a member of the dominant racial group. It doesn't mean that a white person will get everything they want in life, or win every competition, but it does mean that there are general advantages that we receive.

So, for instance, studies have found that job applicants with white sounding names are 50% more likely to receive a call-back for a job interview than applicants with black-sounding names, even when all job-related qualifications and credentials are the same.

Other studies have found that white men with a criminal record are more likely to get a call-back for an interview than black male job applicants who don't have one, even when all requisite qualifications, demeanor and communication styles are the same.

Others have found that white women are far more likely than black women to be hired for work through temporary agencies, even when the black women have more experience and are more qualified.

Evidence from housing markets has found that there are about two million cases of race-based discrimination against people of color every year in the United States. That's not just bad for folks of color; the flipside is that there are, as a result, millions more places I can live as a white person.

Or consider criminal justice. Although data from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration indicates that whites are equally or more likely than blacks or Latinos to use drugs, it is people of color (blacks and Latinos mostly) who comprise about 90 percent of the persons incarcerated for a drug possession offense. Despite the fact that white men are more likely to be caught with drugs in our car (on those occasions when we are searched), black men remain about four times more likely than white men to be searched in the first place, according to Justice Department findings. That's privilege for the dominant group.

That's the point: privilege is the flipside of discrimination. If people of color face discrimination, in housing, employment and elsewhere, then the rest of us are receiving a de facto subsidy, a privilege, an advantage in those realms of daily life. There can be no down without an up, in other words.

None of this means that white folks don't face challenges. Of course we do, and some of them (based on class, gender, sexual orientation, disability status, or other factors) are systemic and institutionalized. But on balance, we can take for granted that we will receive a leg-up on those persons of color with whom we share a nation.

And no, affirmative action doesn't change any of this.

Despite white fears to the contrary, even with affirmative action in place (which, contrary to popular belief does not allow quotas or formal set-asides except in those rare cases where blatant discrimination has been proven) whites hold about ninety percent of all the management level jobs in this country, receive about ninety-four percent of government contract dollars, and hold ninety percent of tenured faculty positions on college campuses. And in spite of affirmative action programs, whites are more likely than members of any other racial group to be admitted to their college of first choice.* And according to a study released last year, for every student of color who received even the slightest consideration from an affirmative action program in college, there are two whites who failed to meet normal qualification requirements at the same school, but who got in anyway because of parental influence, alumni status or because other favors were done.

Furthermore, although white students often think that so-called minority scholarships are a substantial drain on financial aid resources that would otherwise be available to them, nothing could be further from the truth.

According to a national study by the General Accounting Office, less than four percent of scholarship money in the U.S. is represented by awards that consider race as a factor at all, while only 0.25 percent (that's one quarter of one percent for the math challenged) of all undergrad scholarship dollars come from awards that are restricted to persons of color alone. What's more, the idea that large numbers of students of color receive the benefits of race-based scholarships is lunacy of the highest order. In truth, only 3.5 percent of college students of color receive any scholarship even partly based on race, suggesting that such programs remain a pathetically small piece of the financial aid picture in this country, irrespective of what a gaggle of reactionary white folks might believe.**

In other words, despite the notion that somehow we have attained an equal opportunity, or color-blind society, the fact is, we are far from an equitable nation. People of color continue to face obstacles based solely on color, and whites continue to reap benefits from the same. None of this makes whites bad people, and none of it means we should feel guilty or beat ourselves up. But it does mean we need to figure out how we're going to be accountable for our unearned advantages. One way is by fighting for a society in which those privileges will no longer exist, and in which we will be able to stand on our own two feet, without the artificial crutch of racial advantage to prop us up. We need to commit to fighting for racial equity and challenging injustice at every turn, not only because it harms others, but because it diminishes us as well (even as it pays dividends), and because it squanders the promise of fairness and equity to which we claim to adhere as Americans.

It's about responsibility, not guilt. And if one can't see the difference between those two things, there is little that this or any other article can probably do. Perhaps starting with a dictionary would be better.

Opening our eyes to White privilege

I have heard several of these types of analyses floating around. I thought I'd share this one as food for thought. Think about it...

This is your nation on White privilege

By Tim Wise

For those who still can’t grasp the concept of white privilege, or who are constantly looking for some easy-to-understand examples of it, perhaps this list will help.

White privilege is when you can get pregnant at seventeen like Bristol Palin and everyone is quick to insist that your life and that of your family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you or your parents, because “every family has challenges,” even as black and Latino families with similar “challenges” are regularly typified as irresponsible, pathological and arbiters of social decay.

White privilege is when you can call yourself a “fuckin’ redneck,” like Bristol Palin’s boyfriend does, and talk about how if anyone messes with you, you'll “kick their fuckin' ass,” and talk about how you like to “shoot shit” for fun, and still be viewed as a responsible, all-American boy (and a great son-in-law to be) rather than a thug.

White privilege is when you can attend four different colleges in six years like Sarah Palin did (one of which you basically failed out of, then returned to after making up some coursework at a community college), and no one questions your intelligence or commitment to achievement, whereas a person of color who did this would be viewed as unfit for college, and probably someone who only got in in the first place because of affirmative action.

White privilege is when you can claim that being mayor of a town smaller than most medium-sized colleges, and then Governor of a state with about the same number of people as the lower fifth of the island of Manhattan, makes you ready to potentially be president, and people don’t all piss on themselves with laughter, while being a black U.S. Senator, two-term state Senator, and constitutional law scholar, means you’re “untested.”


White privilege is being able to say that you support the words “under God” in the pledge of allegiance because “if it was good enough for the founding fathers, it’s good enough for me,” and not be immediately disqualified from holding office--since, after all, the pledge was written in the late 1800s and the “under God” part wasn’t added until the 1950s--while believing that reading accused criminals and terrorists their rights (because, ya know, the Constitution, which you used to teach at a prestigious law school requires it), is a dangerous and silly idea only supported by mushy liberals.


White privilege is being able to be a gun enthusiast and not make people immediately scared of you.


White privilege is being able to have a husband who was a member of an extremist political party that wants your state to secede from the Union, and whose motto was “Alaska first,” and no one questions your patriotism or that of your family, while if you're black and your spouse merely fails to come to a 9/11 memorial so she can be home with her kids on the first day of school, people immediately think she’s being disrespectful.


White privilege is being able to make fun of community organizers and the work they do--like, among other things, fight for the right of women to vote, or for civil rights, or the 8-hour workday, or an end to child labor--and people think you’re being pithy and tough, but if you merely question the experience of a small town mayor and 18-month governor with no foreign policy expertise beyond a class she took in college--you’re somehow being mean, or even sexist.


White privilege is being able to convince white women who don’t even agree with you on any substantive issue to vote for you and your running mate anyway, because all of a sudden your presence on the ticket has inspired confidence in these same white women, and made them give your party a “second look.”


White privilege is being able to fire people who didn’t support your political campaigns and not be accused of abusing your power or being a typical politician who engages in favoritism, while being black and merely knowing some folks from the old-line political machines in Chicago means you must be corrupt.


White privilege is being able to attend churches over the years whose pastors say that people who voted for John Kerry or merely criticize George W. Bush are going to hell, and that the U.S. is an explicitly Christian nation and the job of Christians is to bring Christian theological principles into government, and who bring in speakers who say the conflict in the Middle East is God’s punishment on Jews for rejecting Jesus, and everyone can still think you’re just a good church-going Christian, but if you’re black and friends with a black pastor who has noted (as have Colin Powell and the U.S. Department of Defense) that terrorist attacks are often the result of U.S. foreign policy and who talks about the history of racism and its effect on black people, you’re an extremist who probably hates America.


White privilege is not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is when asked by a reporter, and then people get angry at the reporter for asking you such a “trick question,” while being black and merely refusing to give one-word answers to the queries of Bill O’Reilly means you’re dodging the question, or trying to seem overly intellectual and nuanced.


White privilege is being able to claim your experience as a POW has anything at all to do with your fitness for president, while being black and experiencing racism is, as Sarah Palin has referred to it a “light” burden.


And finally, white privilege is the only thing that could possibly allow someone to become president when he has voted with George W. Bush 90 percent of the time, even as unemployment is skyrocketing, people are losing their homes, inflation is rising, and the U.S. is increasingly isolated from world opinion, just because white voters aren’t sure about that whole “change” thing. Ya know, it’s just too vague and ill-defined, unlike, say, four more years of the same, which is very concrete and certain…


White privilege is, in short, the problem.

A different view of education

Because of the inevitable demolition of Turner Courts, we have transitioned all of our After-School Academy efforts to the Roseland TownHomes.

We had such quality volunteers and partnerships in Turner Courts. I must admit, I was concerned that it would take us a while to get to that point in Roseland. But it's all coming together.

For the last 10+ years, I have created my own philosophy (based on a lot of research, of course) that kids learn through educational (not necessarily academic) experiences. I have also found that kids will get excited about whatever excites those around them.

So, I look for people who are excited and passionate about what they do...or about a particular hobby they have. Those are the types of people I seek...and, therefore, those are the people I find.

For our Kinder-5th program at Roseland, we have financial literacy, technology (if you are passionate about teaching all of the new and exciting aspects of technology--blogging, twittering, PhotoStory, etc.--please let me know...I'm still looking for this person), hip hop dance, chess, history, art, and nature (by a naturalist...which I am SO excited about!).

I am constantly asked to quantify and "prove" that what we are doing is working. I have such a hard time doing that. I often can't explain it...not until years later when they have gone off to college...and are determined (no matter what grades they are making) to keep doing better, to graduate, and many of them have already discussed their plans with me to complete grad school as well. But by then, the monthly reports have already been submitted and we are on a completely different generation of Kinder-5th graders.

Today the Sudbury Valley School was brought to my attention. Though I have often questioned Montessori education...mainly because I grew up with traditional school as my norm, because I hear that their students often do better than traditional school students...the Sudbury Valley School seems to be even less structured than Montessori. But, as I read more, it reminded me of our After-School Academy. Their philosophy is that life is learning!...and if you are interested in and excited about something, you will work to understand all aspects of it. This type of exploratory learning often translates into reading, writing, math, etc. at much higher levels than anticipated by traditional teachers and traditional schools who would usually "instruct" a child.


Here's an interview with Mimsy Sadofsky, a lady who helped develop the school:

Mimsy: What is meaningful to you is easier to learn than what is not meaningful to you. It's as simple as that. So if you're excited about something or interested in it, you tend to learn it much more quickly which is one of the reasons we don't worry about the fact that many kids spend very little time doing what looks like academic work here; we know they're perfectly capable of doing any of that stuff whenever they want to.

Daria: If children don't choose the basics to learn, do they waste their time year after year after year? What happens if they choose to go fishing, an example you have in one of your books?

Mimsy: The child who chose to go fishing wasn't exactly missing the basics. He was reading about fishing and doing research on fish and doing all sorts of things that had to do with fishing. ... Many people gain knowledge more through reading and others more through conversation or visual stimulation, so we're not worried about the basics. We think if they're basic everybody will figure that out for themselves, and they do. Also, it's not as if they're here in isolation, because they're here six, seven hours a day and then they go back into the rest of the world and they have a very clear idea from the rest of the world, and from their friends who are students here, what people think of as important and as basic.

Though we don't do everything like Sudbury, our philosophy is much in line with her comments here. Children who learn chess, connect with nature, and experiment with technology may not seem to be getting the traditional academics needed to pass the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS), but creating an environment where people are passionate about what they know rubs off on the kids. And though it may not immediately increase TAKS scores, I have found that it creates the motivation and determination to succeed.

College hasn't been easy for the majority of our kids; most weren't adequately prepared in high school. But that hasn't stopped them. I choose to believe that their determination and desire comes from what they experienced when they were in our University of Values summer program or our After-School Academies. I think many of them would say the same.

McCain campaign wants what Obama has

Has anyone thought to point out that everything the McCain campaign disparages Obama for, they end up doing themselves?

If I recall correctly, Obama's original message was about "Hope" and "Change." I don't believe that has ever wavered. But now, when I listen to McCain's speeches, I constantly hear about "Change" and how McCain-Palin will be the ones to create that change.

Right before the conventions, I recall McCain's camp being very vocal about Obama's lack of experience and being ready on Day 1. Yet they then went off and chose the very epitome of "not ready on day 1." So now the argument has become..."but he's running for president!" To which I guess I have to ask the same question Sarah Palin did, "What is it exactly that the V.P. does every day?" I was under the impression that the vice-president had to be prepared to move into the presidency if something goes wrong.

I also vaguely recall an ad by the McCain campaign disparaging Barack Obama for creating a "celebrity" status and following...something about Paris Hilton and Brittney Spears...anyone else remember that?? Yet, all indications seem to demonstrate that the McCain campaign has now found their own celebrity...and doesn't mind exploiting that to it's fullest. (Are those Paris Hilton ads still out there?)

It seems to be a double standard.

But it also tells me that Obama is doing something very right.

I'm waiting, Sarah Palin

I believe John McCain's pick was more brilliant than he even he realized it would be. I know the response has completely taken me by surprise. So many conservatives weren't thrilled about their McCain as their Republican pick...but now they have a hard-line conservative...and a woman at that! So they also demonstrate their ability to go outside of their white, male box.

I also have to hand it to McCain for stepping aside and allowing a woman to completely take the spotlight. I have found that is often hard for men to do. I find it a little strange in this situation since McCain *is* the one running for President, but I do think it's cool that men are taking the backseat for a change because women are the ones people want to hear.

I think for conservative women who have worked hard alongside their husbands...as stay-at-home moms...or as corporate business leaders who still managed to take care of their family, Sarah Palin now puts a spotlight on their ability to do it all. The conservative men recognize Sarah Palin as someone familiar and are also falling in lock step behind her.

But, for the last week and a half, I have been listening to find out what Sarah Palin is all about.

I vetted her myself last Monday during Labor Day. I saw the gossip and speculated on its truth. I looked at the fact that she was 44 and inexperienced in national government affairs and wondered what would happen if something happened to John McCain on day one (instead of after year two, as everyone seems to suggest is when she would've gotten the hands-on experience she needs from being in the White House). Her quick wit has surprised me (some good, some bad), but so far quick wit is all I've seen. Is quick wit the primary characteristic we want in a potential president?

I keep waiting for that moment when we will hear her debate or talk off the cuff, but it hasn't come. Today a piece of her stump speech as she and McCain travel around. I was sorely disappointed. The segment I heard was absolutely word for word what her nomination speech was...only shorter. It told me nothing.

I understand what they're doing. The campaign knows she doesn't have experience. So they're prepping her. I heard one commentary that said they wouldn't let her talk until the media was ready to respect her. If I were running a campaign, I would do the same--make up as many reasons to keep her hidden while prepping her behind the scenes. But two things here:

1) Do we really want a presidential team where the man running for president isn't really the one people want and the one running for VP is someone who has to be coached by the campaign so much that they keep her in hiding?

2) There are less than two months left of this campaign! One poll has John McCain up by 10
points. People are struck by her. Do we really want to elect someone who we have heard one speech from?

Our country needs to know what Sarah Palin knows. Our country deserves to hear how she thinks.

It's time to get in the game, Sarah Palin. In order to form an educated opinion, we need to hear from you!