Earth Day is upon us, and both our own Chris Hayes on his show yesterday, and Mother Jones reporter Kate Sheppard had very interesting takes on why it might not be all that without the follow-up. I tend to agree, for at the heart of any one-day observance is a call to carry that spirit past midnight. Earth Day is not the time to pat oneself on the back for recycling your Poland Spring bottle while grooving to Marvin Gaye's ecological wake-up call above as you write that yearly check to Greenpeace. It's a call to year-long action.
With that in mind, Melissa will dig deep into the environment today, spotlighting a student farming project in Brooklyn, NY and speaking with experts like urban revitalization strategist Majora Carter, who hosts "The Promised Land" on American Morning Public Media.
Other topics we'll examine on today's "Melissa Harris-Perry" include the battle for Latino votes; a look at the overlooked problem of sexual assault in the military; and the search for the recently (not so?) invisible Tea Party movement.
Our guests include:
- Rep. Jackie Speier, Democratic Congresswoman from California and author of a recent op-ed advocating justice for military rape victims.
- Ariana Klay, a former Marine officer who was sexually assaulted while on active duty.
- Angela Maria Kelley, vice president for Immigration Policy and Advocacy at the Center of American Progress.
- Raul Reyes, attorney and NBC Latino contributor.
- Israel Ortega, editor of Libertad.org at the Heritage Foundation.
- Beth Terry, author of "Plastic Free: How I Kicked the Plastic Habit and You Can, Too."
- Amy Kremer, chairman of Tea Party Express.
As always, be sure to interact with us during the show on Facebook and on Twitter, using the hashtag #nerdland. See you all at 10am ET!
Leave a Comment:
Listened to your earlier discussion on the Latino vote in 2012. Permit me to share some thoughts with you and your panelists. First, the "Latino community" is not a monolithic community. Example: one segment may be directly affected by the immigration issue and another may not. Secondly, Marco Rubio (whose politics I do not endorse) does speak Spanish-a Cuban dialect of Spanish but nonetheless Spanish. It is absurd to say that he "does not speak Spanish.. only conversational Spanish" to paraphrase one of your panelists. Third, adding Marco Rubio to Romney's ticket would only bring in the Cuban Americans who are already, for the most part, staunch Republicans. So, no added value to Romney from the Latin American perspective. I believe that I have some degree of knowledge in this area-I am a Cuban American who immigrated to the US over 46 years ago, staunch Democrat and Obama supporter helping to deliver the ever growing Latin American demographic to the Democrats in 2012.
Not for nothing, and not to denigrate your comment, but MHP has been (literally) pounding the "not a monolithic community" point for the past several weeks. She is fully cognizant of that, as are most of her panelists.
Watch some of the previous weeks shows, and you will here that point consistently made.
Also, the comment that Senator Rubio "does not speak Spanish" is not accurate. MHP actually raised issue in the segment, and Mr. Ortega corrected the statement.
Usually like this show but the report on sexual assault in the military got me angry. First, that commanders and officers were derelict in their duty and make the military look bad.
Second,
Your ignorance of the military and the process is appalling. I always find it sickening when pundits with no military experience like to bloviate about the military what we are, and what we do. The commander has a commander who has a commander. There are consequences for what they did, if in fact they did cover it up, up to and including a charge of dereliction of duty. Why don't you ask the follow-up question of what happened to the "senior officer" that sexually assaulted the Marine? I sure as hell would like to know, as my wife and myself are both in the military.
The military won't be receptive to taking issues of good order and discipline from the hands of commanders because for centuries the commander is the one that is RESPONSIBLE for maintaining that good order and discipline. The commander holds the power and responsibility of controlling that public trust and ensuring soldiers follow rules and laws with the UCMJ. Commander's have that power because of the direct action that will need to be taken if someone offends that good order to restore it immediately before it gets out of hand. If you take that power away from the commander, it might as well not be the military we'll be more like a loosely semi-professional, organized militia. If a command or commander fails in that duty to see to the soldier, the families and the mission then they are in dereliction of duty and there needs to be repercussions. If commanders aren't following the policies set forth by the Congress and President then their needs to be repercussions.
The military is conducting "acts of domestic terrorism?" Hyperbole much?
Handing control and execution of military good order and discipline over to a nebulous civilian entity of some sort would be the equivalent of handing over editing of your TV show to Fox News because I don't like a few of the reports you've done and I'm sure I can find 100 other people that agree with me, anecdotally, that your editing and fact-checking system is broken. How much power will you have to affect your show when someone else outside of your organization gets final cut? How will you maintain your standards and get your job done?
The problem you seem to be upset about is caused by corruption within the chain of command. Keep i mind that the military needs to maintain a certain image, and then look at the chain of scandals that rocked the Catholic Church a few years back when their victims became emboldened to tell their stories. Now imagine that same thing happening but on an even greater scale for the US Military. The chain of command would be compromised, perhaps all the way up to the Pentagon.
We don't care if those in charge will be receptive to losing control over this matter. We care about the victims. They are what matters, and as long as the military commanders are set on protecting their own butts, then the military justice system will not be capable if delivering justice in these cases. The problem is simply too pervasive. It touches everyone, and the responsibility for these incidents is shared by too many powerful people.
A civilian justice system may not be as efficient and they may not understand what military life is like, but this issue transcends military life. This issue is about human rights on a scale that affects all of us, not just those in the military. A civilian court is needed here. The military option can't be trusted under these circumstances, and if those in charge of the military justice system were smart about it, they would recuse their system for adjudicating these cases, for the good of all.
"Handing control and execution of military good order and discipline over to a nebulous civilian entity ..." Excuse you. Congresswoman Speier is sitting next to a former officer of the United States military who was raped! The only nebulous entity that exists in this situation, that has been going on for decades, after 17 some Congressional hearings, is the U.S. military's false promises to stop the victim blaming, retaliation, errant mental health diagnosis, and revictimization, of their own members. You obviously haven't read the provisions of the STOP Act. This organization is composed of military AND civilian experts. If the UCMJ was sufficient enough to handle rape investigations in an effective manner, there wouldn't be some 16,000 unreported sexual assault events. The military has been given scores of chances to fix this problem and blew it. So do you just expect American's to give the military another blank check? Thousands of our own last on the battlefied is not confidence enough of our support for our military? If you haven't been in the military AND been raped you have no idea what is happening to these individual who report. If you don't know anyone whose been through these atrocities, its because they were pegged trouble, slapped with a mental health diagnosis, and thrown out of service! You wrote them off the day after they were raped, reported it and the retaliation machine washed them out! If you knew the truth, you wouldn't be on here opposing this like a brain washed robot. Have you no decency? In true form to the problems exist ... here you are touting a system of justice that hasn't worked for some 500 thousand military rape victims. If that doesn't wake you up, nothing will. The military is not a utopia -- hear that? Its not the land of order and discipline that your foggy mind envisions. The military is a branch of government, which, like all others, answers to its citizens. And we are fed up. This is unAmerican.
mdbyrne,
I'm sorry, but, isn't "civilian authority" or "civilian control" of the Military, one of the fundamental, bedrock premises OF our Military?
Isn't the "Civilian Authority" provided by our Military structure one of the most fundamental differences between the U.S. Military and those of other Countries?
I agree that I wouldn't be in favor of simply turning over a Commander's responsibility (or authority) to a Civilian Court, but when the DoD acknowledges the level of FAILURE that is highlighted in this report, it is fairly inarguable that the current system IS NOT working.
In my experience, one of the most glaring flaws with the current UCMJ and EO implementations, is that Commanders are (in large part) allowed to keep investigations and proceedings "in house". There is a significant impetus to "not shine the light too brightly" when you know that the reflection is likely to land squarely on your own "Career ambitions". IT IS ALSO THE CASE that Military Commanders today, live in a far more "political world" than they did 100 years ago. MacArthur, Ike, Westmoreland, and Patraeus (to name but a few) have changed the politics surrounding Military Officers careers in profound and somewhat odious ways. We (as a Nation) need to implement policies for our Military that remove (or at a minimum, reduce) the incentive for Commanders to "keep it below the level of documented action", while insuring that the "documentation" is fair and accurate.
If you're in the Military, I know YOU know EXACTLY what I'm talking about.
The statement that contraception is available to all women is one of those lies that make me very angry. It would have to be affordable to every woman to be available to every woman. I think the Tea Party deserves to be going away. I was offended right from their start, by their allowing ugly racism at their rallies I guess to gain more members. Or whoever wanted to sponsor them wanted them to gain more members. The Tea Party never took a stand against birthers and racism, whether they believed these things or just didn't want to offend other members, the result is the same. All power to the Occupy Wall Streeters who just had something to say and never got bought out, they said something worthwhile and made their point.
I'm not a supporter of the TP either, and, like you, the comments from Amy Kremer certainly didn't incline me to be any less opposed to their agenda, but I think, for me, the most insulting statement was her claim that the TP is not interested in "Social Issues", and their only focus is "Fiscal Conservatism".
I'm so tired of this argument that this Nation is engaged in, that I'm truly "bone weary".
It seems that whenever someone on the Right, someone who "self identifies" as a Conservative, or someone who is a TP supporter, GETS CAUGHT promoting something that they know is not popular with the larger populace, the DEFAULT position is "I'm only motivated by FISCAL concerns".
The premise is POINTLESS in any real sense, YET they have been allowed to hold up that shield for the past 30 years.
The examples are simply too numerous to list here, but it always comes down to the same basic argument;
"I'm not against (X), I just don't think the American Taxpayer should have to pay for it."
That, in and of itself, is a reasonable position, BUT, IF we accept that Government is created to provide service to the Governed, we MUST ACCEPT that there will be COSTS associated with those services. IF we agree that those costs are a "shared responsibility" then we MUST ACCEPT that there needs to be a fair and equitable means of collecting whatever we are going to use as payment for those costs, WITHOUT creating a system that would significantly INCREASE the cost by being overly complex or restrictive.
Imagine if we attempted to create a system where each of us were only required to pay for those Governmental functions we "agreed" with. It would be chaos!
Whenever I hear the term "Fiscal Conservative" I immediately translate that as "I don't like (X), therefore I should not have to pay for (X)." For all their insistence that "we do not live in a "true democracy"" (usually fomented as a denigration of the claim that we are a democratic Nation) what they seem to want is a "True Democracy" (particularly when it comes to "paying" for Government), albeit, without the responsibility to necessarily "support" those actions that gain the support of the majority if you, as an individual, do not agree.
IOW: Anarchy
Thanks. I also despise the term "job creators," I'm not a kindergartener for them to talk down to.
If this tea party women that is on today's show was a true fiscal conservative then she would back single-payer healthcare because its MUCH cheaper than what we are doing now. She's no fiscal conservative.
And quit allowing people to perpetuate the lie that providing healthcare at a Catholic Charity hospital is about religion. These facilities take PUBLIC money and employ people that do not subscribe to their faith, They should provide healthcare to their employees that includes birth control and abortion services or stop taking MY tax money and/or employing people not of their faith. That would show how faithful they are to their religious beliefs.
I note that the Right is continuing to attempt to cast this contraception issue as one of religious freedom, but the truth is exactly the opposite. To the point here, if the right wants to preserve religious freedom for individuals, then they need to reverse their position in this matter. How can any person act according to their faith if legislatures controlled by the right are actively limiting the choices available to them?
Even religious institutions are entirely on the wrong side of this issue. When a person has no choice but to act in accordance with a religious dictum, then how are they able to demonstrate their faith? The fact is that they can't.
If we allow religious institutions to influence policy here, then they will set precedent to push that policy even further. Right now, they want to limit how their employees can use their health insurance benefits, and if they are successful in this endeavor, what is to stop them from telling their employees how to spend the rest of the wages they earn?
Thanks for having Majora Carter on your show today. I am follwing her on Twitter. Interested in her take on the new Growth Busters film since she uses real estate development as a vehicle for environmental justice.
Great show Melissa but I must call you out on your praises to the tea party for being a grassroots organization. They may have started out as grassroots but were quickly taken over by fox news and other major right wing organizations. The tp candidates that won seats in the house have made this congress the worst on record. They have not passed any bills to help get people back to work. Yet after getting in her ridiculous lie about the government take over of healthcare,the representative you had on sits there with a straight face and says limiting a woman's right to contraception and reproductive freedom is about religious liberty.
"limiting a woman's right to contraception and reproductive freedom is about religious liberty."
Which she stated less than a minute after stating that "The Tea Party is not concerned with "social issues", only Fiscal ones.
This "grass-roots" organization was founded by the Sacramento-based GOP political consulting firm Russo Marsh and Rogers through their PAC "Our Country Deserves Better. There is evidence that the Tea Party Express was nothing more than a means to an end for the firm, given that 75% of the PAC money has been paid to the firm for their "consultancy" work on behalf of TPE.
I was disappointed with Melissa on the show. When Amy Kremer was on from the tea party she made several comments that werent true and she was not challenged. The way she was allowed to miss speak I thought I was watching a right wing show. If we as Dems dont speak up for President Obama and correct people when they state their untruths then romney will be elected. President Obama has his hands full with the republicans he doesnt need the democrats to not speak up for him. I am a big fan of Melissa but I was disappointed in this interview.
Hi Melissa!
PLEASE COVER THIS: Bee Petition to Bayer Stockholders to demand cessation of production of bee-killing pesticides - 850,000 signatures in two days!
I enjoy your show, and your focus, and the way you filter news stories through your own particular lens. Thanks for speaking for those who can't speak for themselves. It is much needed in today's media.
I'm writing to you today to ask you to PLEASE give a minute of on air time to mentioning the plight of the Bees...in my opinion, this is SUCH an important issue!
There are estimates that we have already lost 1/3 of the world's bees! Losing all of the bees completely would totally change the delicate balance of the Food Chain on planet earth.
The Bees cannot speak for themselves, Melissa!
I've been writing to every pundit, talk show host and radio personality I know of, hoping to get SOMEONE to realize how crucial and important this issue is, and begging them to give a bit of air time to it.
There is a petition now on Avaaz.org's site that is going viral. They exceeded their original goal of 500,000 signatures, and then they raised it to 750,000 which they ALSO surpassed. You can sign the petition as well as watch the constant scroll of new signatures on their web site
Here's the info from the Avaaz.org's petition to Bayer Stockholders, asking them to please demand that Bayer stops making Bee-Killing Pesticides.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Posted: 24 April 2012
Quietly, globally, billions of bees are dying, threatening our crops and food. But if Bayer stops selling one group of pesticides, we could save bees from extinction.
Four European countries have begun banning these poisons, and some bee populations are already recovering. But Bayer, the largest producer of neonicotinoids, has lobbied hard to keep them on the market. Now, massive global pressure from Avaaz and others has forced them to consider the facts, and in 24 hours, Bayer shareholders will vote on a motion that could stop these toxic chemicals. Let’s all act now and shame the shareholders to stop killing bees.
The pressure is working, and this is our best chance to save the bees. Sign the urgent petition and send this to everyone -- let's reach half a million signers and deliver it directly to shareholders tomorrow in Germany!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
NOTE* The meeting was yesterday, but people are STILL signing this petition in astounding numbers. Sadly, all the signers are from the Western Hemisphere. They all come from Europe, Canada, Mexico, USA, Central and South America. I have seen one signer from New Zealand, but I have not seen a single signer from India, Japan, China, Russia, Africa, Hawaii or the Middle East.
Melissa, this is so important. If you like Peaches, Apples, Cherries, Melons, Tomatoes and produce in general, please help. We need to act before it's too late.
Thank you,
Tara Thralls
leftish.tumblr.com