Young Voices
Exchanging ideas from the show and blogging about topics in the news from a range of perspectives.
September 7, 2007
Guilty Laughter
by Victor Marsh
“...hard to poke fun at a medium that you...use...”
"Read a book, read a book, read a motha----- book!"
These are the lines of a mock Public Service Announcement, announced by a voice calling himself G Money, performing from "Raphael De La Ghetto" high school.
The video has been viewed over 1 million times on YouTube.
Many people seem to be taking the "get crunk for reading" commercial very seriously. Comments on the Website reflect a common divide in Black American public opinion - is it structural racism or lack of personal responsibility that causes the biggest problems in Black America?
Of course, the answer is BOTH. But that did not stop over 4,000 people from arguing the "either-or" debate on YouTube. That question is easy for me to answer, but I still cannot answer another question.
Why did I feel so guilty when I laughed out loud at this video? I think part of the reason is that I am not sure what or who is being made fun of here, and who is the audience?
You could say that this is a parody of BET's version of hip-hop, with all its message-less songs and women dancing around near-naked. The Read A Book video has a cartoon video girl in tight pants dancing with the word "BOOK" written on her bottom - clearly a parody of rap videos.
According to the creator of the cartoon video, it is not some commentary on Black peoples' personal responsibility, but is just making fun of the type of hip-hip that he believes is destructive. That type of hip-hop is often displayed on BET, a station many now call Black Embarrassment Television.
That makes me wonder why the creater D'Mite chose to launch the video on BET. It is hard to poke fun at a medium that you choose to use for publicity.
September 18, 2007
Cornel West, Kanye West, and America's Blues People
by Jeremy Freed
“West's commentary is, as usual, keen. ”
Cornel West will be featured on tonight's program, and although a man never short on words, he will have plenty to talk about. For one thing, the renowned intellectual, Princeton professor, author, and consistently best-dressed-man-in-the-room, had a new CD drop last month. In it he addresses some of the most important issues facing Americans today, particularly Americans of color. In one especially resonant track, called 911, West describes how, post-September 11th, Americans of all races can learn from the experiences of America's “blues people”. He cites the example of Emmett Till's mother, whose son was lynched in 1955, and said at his funeral, “I don't have a minute to hate… I'll pursue justice for the rest of my life.”
West's commentary is, as usual, keen, and his collaboration with the likes of Outkast's Andre 3000, and rapper Talib Kweli gives the compilation tremendous potential to transmit West's messages to a wider audience than ever before.
West will also likely discuss the recent news that no less than four candidates have declined to appear at this month's Republican presidential debate, moderated by Tavis, at the historically black Morgan State University. In a commentary posted yesterday on The Huffington Post, West took a clear stance on the candidates' absence, which has been widely interpreted as a snub. “At this moment in American history,” he wrote, “it is clear that either the Republican Party wisely embraces people of color, or it chooses to be a losing political party in the future.”
The candidates' decisions to blow off a nationally televised debate are puzzling. At best it shows foolhardiness by passing up a chance to woo an increasingly powerful demographic. At worst it is just another example of the GOP's flagrant disregard for the interests of Americans of color. Kanye West's sentiments come to mind. That these candidates have not heard Cornel West's CD can be assumed. If they had, they would surely be more inclined to listen.
September 13, 2007
Defend Liberty, Dismiss Subtle Hate
by Victor Marsh
“...the baton of hate had been passed...”
On September 11th 2001, I became a full American citizen. It was local Election Day in Detroit, Michigan. As an 18-year old political nerd, I had been waiting for my first voting day for a long time.
There were three fears I had on September 11th. I feared that the attack was only the beginning of something much bigger, and that bombs would soon be going off in major cities across the USA. I was partly wrong about that.
Secondly, I feared that Detroit would soon be under government siege and investigation, since our city is the hub of Arab-American communities. Outside of the Middle East, only Paris, France has a larger population of Arabs than metropolitan Detroit.
Finally, I feared that recent divisions in Detroit between Blacks and Arabs - sparked by incidents of mutual disrespect at Arab-owned gas stations - would grow into something more terrible.
While my second and third fears were worse than reality at the time, over time it seems that they were justified.
As far as private citizens, I noticed defamation of Muslims who appear Middle Eastern, who are all called “ay-RABS” in Detroit. Most disturbingly was the sentiment of relief expressed that the baton of hate had been passed from Blacks to Muslims.
As far as government, in Detroit, secret deportation hearings began for many Arabs who had lived here much of their lives. My own congressman was on the airwaves demanding to get access to these secret hearings, but was denied.
On local and national Christian television, I saw my own faith twisted into something that was determined to diss Muslims at every turn. Preachers pretending to reveal the truth about Islam were instead violating the command of Christ to love our neighbors as ourselves. In Detroit, our neighbors our Muslims, but some preachers decided to add a footnote to those words of the Christ.
As we mourn our losses, and defend our nation, we can only truly be patriotic if we stand up for American liberties for all Americans regardless of their religion.
Let us insist that our Congress and our president put back all the protections that were eroded through wiretapping programs and unusual deportations.
Let us ourselves take responsibility to not consume hatred from any source - be it from TV preachers or fear-mongering politicians.
September 19, 2007
Turning Yellow on the Black Vote
by Rose Capozzi
“If Republicans hope to ever win the hearts and minds of the African American community, they will have to do more than just say they are representative of black social and religious issues.”
There are few things that Cornel West and I agree on. To start, he is a socialist who overstates the role of race in American society. I am a conservative who believes that the United States is not an inherently racist nation (though there have been many instances when racists have made the rest of us look bad).
Still, West's comments on the show this week were right on the mark. Republicans, including Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Mitt Romney, are making a statement by not participating in the Morgan State debate, moderated by Tavis Smiley. Actually, they are making two statements. One is that Republicans do not think they can win the black vote. The other is that Republicans think the black vote is irrelevant to political victory.
Michael Steele, the first black man to be elected to statewide office in Maryland - and a Republican - asked these candidates to reconsider. This is a meaningful request because of Steele's own experience debating at Morgan State. Though the details of the incident have been exaggerated, eyewitnesses claim that Democratic opponents of Steele passed out Oreo cookies and tossed them on stage when he spoke. The protesters' message was that Michael Steele was "black on the outside and white on the inside" because he was a Republican.
And yet, Micheal Steele has encouraged fellow Republicans to face a possibly hostile crowd, if not to win votes, then to prove that the GOP is not ignorant or hostile toward black community issues. After all, black community issues don't just impact the black community, they impact all communities.
If Republicans hope to ever win the hearts and minds of the African American community, they will have to do more than just say they are representative of black social and religious issues. They will have to do something. And that something should start by attending debates that focus on "black" issues.
September 23, 2007
Unwelcome Guests
by Rose Capozzi
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has caused quite an uproar over his visit to the United States this week. Perhaps some of the controversy is because Iran is trying to obtain nuclear weapons. Perhaps it is because many believe that the Iranian leader supports the Iraq insurgency. Or perhaps the welcome is lukewarm because Ahmadinejad questions the truth of the Holocaust and has called for the destruction of Israel.
Given all this, It was not hard to be appalled when Ahmadinejad requested to lay a wreath at Ground Zero, and use the visit as a backdrop to a photo-op. Zalmay Khalilzad, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., responded to Ahmadinejad's request, saying, "Iran can demonstrate its seriousness about concern with regard to terrorism by taking concrete actions." This would include things like ending uranium enrichment and the funding of the terrorist acts of Hezbollah. Maybe after Ahmadinejad puts an end to his dangerous ambitions we could trust him not to desecrate one of the United States' newest monuments to the price of freedom.
One door that hasn't been closed by Ahmadinejad's brinksmanship is that of liberal leaning Columbia University, who invited him to speak at a question-and-answer forum on Monday evening. NYC officials have the good sense to avoid giving the Iranian leader publicity, but the administration at Columbia University welcomes it.
Why is it that, while Ahmadinejad spends time shaking the hands of students on American soil, other college-age kids are dying on a battlefield sponsored in part by Iran? Let's hope that someone at Columbia is smart enough to ask that question.
September 18, 2007
Politics As Usual
by Sean Nixon
In today's society, no one political party is above scrutiny, especially when the future of American lives, ideals, and culture are at stake.
With that in mind there have been some interesting items as of late to consider. For instance, isn't it interesting how out of nowhere Osama bin Laden returned on the scene and was reported to be making an address to the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2007? Isn't it more interesting how he's not seen as a threat to the U.S. by President George W. Bush, even after bin Laden admittedly was responsible for one of the greatest tragedies to occur on American soil?
Recently Gen. David Petraeus announced his recommendation on the war in Iraq by beginning to pull troops out of Iraq. You'll get no argument here that for many U.S. families, this is welcomed news. However with this news comes another question: With the withdrawal of these troops, will we see less people paying attention to the 2008 election?
For many this question may seem absurd, but should this question hold any truth to it, people need to wake up and stop having the wool pulled over their eyes. We have to play a more vigilant role in the politics of our country. The 2008 presidential election is already upon us. It was one of the earliest starting campaigns to date, and for all of the exciting or historic implications a first time female or African American president may bring to the table, there are still some critical issues Americans need to consider.
What will America do about its healthcare concerns, education reform, and national security? Where do we as a nation go as we move into 2009? These are all real issues, but in order to address them, Americans must stay engaged in the political process and the issues that will affect all of us over the next four years.
Will troop withdrawal, coupled with people's short attention spans leave America in a subdued state of consciousness in 08'? Will the possible marriage of George W. Bush's daughter in the White house sometime soon give the president's ratings a boost? Will Americans look within themselves and vote their conscience on who will be the best leader of this country, or will we be swayed on the basis of a feel good moment and some well orchestrated timing? Americans are savvier than to let something like that to happen, right?
September 25, 2007
Putting the T & A in PETA
by Jeremy Freed
Please don't get me wrong, I'm not for Michael Vick-style cruelty to animals, or even in support of the way most livestock are treated in our Orwellian super-industrialized factory farms. I think animals should be allowed to live happy lives, whether they're our pets or our lunch. There's just something about PETA that bothers me.
It's not the nubile young spokeswomen, or their eagerness to show off their goods in the name of the dairy cows and pussycats and lab rats of the world. If they want to take it all off to impress upon me their devotion to fluffy creatures, I have no objection to taking a look. It's the least I can do, really. My problem, rather, is with what they have to say.
A fine example is Alicia Silverstone's sultry new PETA video, in which the actress emerges nude from a swimming pool to a voiceover on the health benefits of veganism. The actress touts meat-free living as a weight-loss solution, and suggests, on the company's website, that cows and turkeys are “just as cute and funny as your dogs and cats.” Is cutting out meat really a good way for most people to lose weight? And are turkeys really that cute? I think you see what I'm getting at here.
PETA has embraced the age-old “sex sells” principle of advertising, but has failed to back it up with any kind of solid reasoning. Is weight-loss really an ethical issue? The folks who create these campaigns seem more eager to appeal to the vanity and sentimentality of teenage girls than debate the actual ethics of eating meat.
By all means keep up the sexy models, but until they actually have something worthwhile to say, I'll continue to pass on the Tofurky.
September 30, 2007
...And Knowing's Half the Battle
by Rose Capozzi
“Arming people with knowledge helps them make better decisions about their health, decisions that can prevent them from becoming drains on the national safety net.”
With the front runners (Rudy Guiliani, John McCain, and Mitt Romney) absent, the Republican primary debate last week provided time for the less well-known, and more controversial candidates to voice their solutions for some of America's toughest problems. The answers to some of the nation's problems, such as Ron Paul's insistence on leaving Iraq or Alan Keyes' suggestion to rebuild families and entrepreneurship in order to fight African American unemployment, provided a glimpse of the breadth of ideas offered by members of the Republican Party.
My favorite response came from Mike Huckabee. When asked how he would address disparities in access to health care, Huckabee explained that the current health care system spends too much money on intervention, rather than on prevention. He said, "We wait until people are catastrophically ill, and then we spend enormous amounts of money trying to fix them." His solution is to put "the money on the preventive side. Prevention is a lot less expensive than intervention."
Small changes can make a big difference in the quality of life for many Americans. For example, if schools offered classes on nutrition, students may grow up to be adults who can discern between a healthy snack and an unhealthy snack. If restaurants included nutritional information on menus consumers would know exactly what they are eating. Arming people with knowledge helps them make better decisions about their health, decisions that can prevent them from becoming drains on the national safety net.
Knowledge is an important tool to prevent the onset of a debilitating illness. Knowledge is also an important tool to prevent the rise of unqualified or untrustworthy politicians. If anything, the debate at Morgan State gave America a little more knowledge, and some insight into the minds of the Republican candidates that are not covered by mainstream media.
September 4, 2007
Chertoff Watch: Checkered Political History, Possibly a Vampire
by Jeremy Freed
As the clock ticks down towards the formal departure of the embattled amnesiac Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, rumors of who will fill his muddied loafers are in full swirl. Topping most lists is Homeland Security chief and former Assistant AG Michael Chertoff. By all accounts whoever takes over the Justice Department will have a heck of a task ahead of them, rebuilding an institution both discredited and demoralized by the ineptitude of its outgoing figurehead. Chertoff, a bilaterally unpopular Bush loyalist, seems like a poor choice for a number of reasons.
For one thing, his congressional confirmation hearings would be extremely difficult. Chertoff would likely face scrutiny about his department's shameful foot-dragging in response to Hurricane Katrina, as well as serious questions about his stand on torture. Then there's the question of a sketchy-looking lawsuit against a Clinton fundraiser, which appears at best overzealous, and at worst an outright political attack. Further complicating matters, Chertoff has walked a fine line with the Republican base, offending many recently with his comments on amnesty legislation for illegal immigrants. Finally, on a more personal note, the guy bears a striking resemblance to Count Orlok, the villain of 1922's classic Nosferatu. Apparently, I'm not the only one who thinks so. And if that's not suspect, you tell me what is.
As my blogging teammate Rose suggested recently, 'shadiness' is not a desirable quality in an Attorney General. While he's probably better suited to the job than Alberto Gonzales, with his political history in mind (not to mention his possible thirst for human blood), Chertoff is about as shady as they come. At least Gonzo had that cute-and-cuddly thing going for him. Next?
September 24, 2007
See Some Evil, Hear Some Evil
by Jeremy Freed
The protests surrounding today's visit to New York of Iranian President Ahmadinejad are exactly the right response to his presence in our country. Just as appropriate, however, is Columbia University's decision to allow the infamous leader to answer questions in a moderated forum this evening.
Mr. Ahmadinejad's reputation, obviously, precedes him. His denial of the Holocaust, his threats against Israel, and his country's nuclear ambitions are well known. Iran's numerous human rights abuses, too, reveal a dangerously fundamentalist country, and a rapidly developing threat to the secular democratic world.
We all pretty much agree that Ahmadinejad is bad news, and we need not look for reasons to respect him or his regime. But as nice as it feels to be united as a nation, for a couple of days, anyway, shutting our ears and eyes against something we fear is no way to defeat it. We ought to embrace the opportunity to hear what this man has to say. To get a sense of what kind of person he is, how his mind works, why people across the Islamic world are so drawn to him, is to begin to deal with the problems posed by him, and leaders like him, wherever they are.
Failing to let Iran's President speak would be just as bad as ignoring him, and as most of us will agree, ignoring a problem is no way to fix it.
September 19, 2007
In the Valley of Elah
by Jeremy Freed
Tonight's guest is director and Hollywood screenwriting guru Paul Haggis. His latest offering, In the Valley of Elah, deals with the many questions that arise when a young Iraq war veteran is found dead under mysterious circumstances. The film promises to address the hefty psychological implications of sending young men and women to fight in Iraq, much as films like The Deer Hunter and Coming Home dealt with the struggles faced by soldiers returning from Vietnam.
His Oscar-winning film, Crash, despite its attempt to draw attention to the often-subtle ways of racism, was criticized by many (myself included) for its predictable plot turns and paint-by-numbers morality. Haggis' new film, at least according to one review, seems to hold more promise.
As one of the first of what is sure to be many Hollywood films specifically on the subject of the Iraq war, it holds the burden of attempting to make sense of one of the biggest national issues America has faced in decades. The film's title, a reference to the biblical battle of David and Goliath, presents a parallel to this hugely uneven task, and just as Crash did little to change the persistence of racism in our cities, it is unfair to expect the new film to resolve any of the emotional issues brought by the war. In all likelihood, however, it will get people talking, and dialogue is always a good thing.
September 16, 2007
Farewell
by Victor Marsh
“Thank you...!”
For nearly seven months, I have lived a dream. I have not only shared my thoughts on politics, but also had the chance to interact with people who post comments, sharing their passion and knowledge.
Tonight, I am a bit anxious because tomorrow is a big day. My dream since middle school has been to work on international issues. Tomorrow, as I stop work at this Web page, I begin working as a diplomat, or Foreign Service Officer at the U.S. Department of State.
Diplomats represent our country at Embassies throughout the world. We swear to uphold the Constitution, and to advocate the policy of the U.S. government in whatever country we are posted. We also provide crucial information to Washington DC about political changes and cultural issues in a foreign country.
Through this blog, I have had the chance to express praise sometimes and criticism often of my own government's policies. As a diplomat, while I lose the ability to publish critiques of the U.S. government, I gain an exciting career and a chance to actually become a peacemaker internationally.
The exciting thing about entering public service is that I will now have the chance to actually be a part of the solution to some of issues we have discussed on this page.
We all have our own way that we can contribute - be it in our day jobs or by simply being an active idealist and citizen.
Thank you for logging on to the Youth Voices Web page!
Thank you Tavis Smiley, everyone at KCET TV and my blogging teammates Jeremy and Rose for creating a wonderful Web community.
September 12, 2007
Kinda Making Progress
by Rose Capozzi
Six years after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and the loss of nearly 3,000 Americans, is our nation safer? Answers to this question are pretty subjective, but the overall consensus is a decisive maybe.
According to the Los Angeles Times, the director of the National Counter-Terrorism Center, John Scott Redd, testified to the Senate that, "We are safer today than we were on September the 11th, 2001....But we are not safe, and nor are we likely to be for a generation or more. We're in a long war; we face an enemy that is adaptable, dangerous and persistent." This long view approach to the War on Terror seems both reasonable and optimistic, but this is not the same government message that the American people heard when President Bush uttered the now-infamous phrase "Mission Accomplished." It is a much more nuanced and honest appraisal of the current state of affairs.
Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, two writers for The Washington Post, are also describing the War in more equivocal terms. They write that "Progress at home -- in our ability to detect, prevent and respond to terrorist attacks -- has been difficult, incomplete and slow, but it has been real. Outside our borders, however, the threat of failure looms." Just like Director Redd is backing off from an extremely optimistic view, the media is backing off from an extremely pessimistic view. Kean and Hamilton's language is not as catchy as "No Blood for Oil" or "Bush lied, Thousands died," but it is much more candid.
Politics on both the left and the right have dominated our understanding of this war. The rhetoric always seems to be black or white, yes or no, win or lose. Winning the War on Terror is a work in progress, and, on this anniversary, let's put aside the tired rhetoric, and come to terms with the new consensus, however ambiguous it may be.
September 11, 2007
Them and Us
by Jeremy Freed
Today, on the sixth anniversary of 9/11, as we take stock of our War on Terror at home and abroad, we continue to ask ourselves what more needs to be done to make our world a safer, more peaceful place.
On tonight's show, Akbar Ahmed, a leading Islamic scholar and politician, provides an answer. He describes a trip he took through the Middle East with a group of American college students, and the lessons he learned as a result. Among these was the realization that it is not just a good idea for Americans to learn about Islam, it is imperative. Ahmed's field trip was an educational mission, and likewise an opportunity to show the Muslims they encountered that Americans share many of the same values and ideals. In an atmosphere of dialogue and mutual interest, he discovered, Americans and Arabs can get along just fine.
As convincing as Mr. Ahmed is, his story still seems pretty far from anything any of us can do in our everyday lives. For those of us who don't see a trip to Pakistan in their near future, this week's podcast of PRI's This American Life has another suggestion. It tells the story of an Iraq war veteran who, in an attempt to overcome his post-traumatic stress, joins the Muslim students association at his university. The results are inspiring, particularly on this sad anniversary, and provide some light at the end of an otherwise depressingly dark tunnel.
September 10, 2007
Mo' Biofuel, Mo' Problems
by Jeremy Freed
“The oil pressed from jatropha's seeds can power generators, and can also be turned into biodiesel.”
Jatropha sounds like a rare tropical disease, or maybe the latest fitness craze, but it is neither. It's a plant whose seeds could supply the world's poorest regions with cheap, renewable energy. An article in yesterday's New York Times reported on the growing popularity of jatropha in Mali, where it promises to provide subsistence farmers with added income, and electricity to remote villages. The oil pressed from jatropha's seeds can power generators, and can also be turned into biodiesel. Unlike corn and sugarcane, two other popular sources of biofuel, jatropha can grow in poor soil, with little water, no pesticides, and minimal fertilizer. Judging by the evidence presented in the Times article, as well as several jatropha-touting organizations on the Web, it seems too good to be true. That may well be the case.
Back in April, the U.N. released a report on jatropha and other biofuels, praising their potential as sources of renewable energy, but also offering a long list of possible negative environmental and economic consequences of turning them into cash crops. For a more concrete example of what not to do, one need look no further than the U.S. Our most popular biofuel, Cornbelt ethanol, much praised as a step towards a foreign oil-free future, requires almost as much energy to make, in the form of oil-based fertilizers, harvesting, and refining, as it as it ultimately produces. And that doesn't take into account the billions of dollars in subsidies our government pays farmers to grow the corn in the first place. Such are the dangers where politics and agriculture meet.
It is clear that efficient plant fuels, like those from jatropha, have much to offer our oil-guzzling world. Whether they will actually help us, however, rather than creating more problems than they solve, remains to be seen.
September 5, 2007
Pay a Man to Fish
by Rose Capozzi
Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of New York City, knows a thing or two about money. After all, he is one of the world's wealthiest men, with an estimated net worth of nearly $5 billion. Born to middle-class parents, Bloomberg climbed the corporate ladder in a stock trading company, and then used the proceeds to start his own media conglomerate of news, radio, television and publishing. In 2001, he succeeded Rudy Giuliani as mayor of NYC by funding much of his own campaign.
It suffices to say that Bloomberg knows very little about being poor. What he does know is that the government has failed the poor by promoting soup kitchens, sock drives and welfare, which provides only a temporary fix. Solving the problem, rather than patching it up, takes an economic, not a compassionate, approach. Using his own money and donations from the Rockefeller Foundation, the City will give cash incentives to families who do small things to make their quality of life better. For example, $50 will be awarded for getting a library card and $100 will be awarded for taking a child to the dentist.
The program is called Opportunity New York City, and it is the first conditional cash transfer program in the nation. According to Newsweek, it is modeled after a successful Mexican program that has proven to work so well that 20 nations around the globe adopted similar programs.
Hopefully the federal government will take a lesson from Bloomberg's innovative move. It is important for political leaders to be humble enough to recognize when programs are failing, and even more important for them to then try something new. As the title of this article suggests, “Give a man a fish, you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, you have fed him for a lifetime.” New York's addition: Pay a man to fish, he will actually fish.
September 5, 2007
Louisiana to Raise Sagging Values, Pants
by Jeremy Freed
“We're not telling [people] how to dress, just how to wear their clothes.”
I have often wished, when riding the subway, or standing in line at the bank, that there was some sort of law against dressing badly. Daily, I am assaulted by visions of people whose fashion choices are egregious to the point of criminality. Is there nothing that might be done about this, I wondered?
My question, it seems has been answered by the good folks of Lafourche Parish, Louisiana. There, your choice of pants could get you in trouble not just with the fashion police, but with the regular police, too. A new law bans sagging pants that reveal underwear, as well as exposed bra straps on women, punishable by up to a $100 dollar fine, plus community service.
"We're not telling [people] how to dress, just how to wear their clothes," said Councilman Lindel Toups, who masterminded the legislation, to a reporter recently. According to Toups, it's a matter of teaching common decency and respectability. “I think our kids kind of got away from us,” the councilman said yesterday on NPR's Talk of The Nation. “They're trying to tell us what to do instead of us telling them. I think it's time we turned it around and took control of our kids." Questions of the constitutionality of this plan, its discriminatory overtones, and the fact that this fashion, like all others, will eventually fade, are as far from the point as your average rapper's pants are from his waistline; which is to say indecently far.
The councilman is certainly onto something here; his only failing in my mind is that he doesn't go quite far enough. Can't we tell people how to wear their clothes and how to dress? If we're talking decency and respectability here, in addition to baggy clothes, I have a few bans of my own to suggest: Those horrible rubber ‘sport' sandals, pants that zip into shorts, mesh shirts. These are only the beginnings of what could surely become a much longer list.
History has shown that the best way to get people to stop doing something against the public good is to make it illegal, and for young people this is especially true. We all remember how prohibition got us all back on track, and how that FBI warning before the Ghostbusters video scared straight anyone who had even considered making a copy of that tape. Similarly, Mr. Toups' law should, in very little time, force teenagers to respect themselves and their elders, and discount any messages, fashion-related or otherwise, that they get from pop culture.
Subscribe to RSS Feed
E-mail a friend
