What did Martin Luther King Jr. mean, "A riot is the language of the unheard"?

Last year about this time, a whole year before the civil unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, after the killing of 18-year-old Mike Brown, CBS's 60 Minutes posted an overtime segment featuring Martin Luther King, Jr. The segment is part of last year's commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the Civil Rights March on Washington. Its headline is the King quote you may have heard repeated since the tear gas began to cloud Ferguson's night air:

"A riot is the language of the unheard."

The overtime piece features Mike Wallace's 1966 interview with King in which he asked the Civil Rights leader how he felt about a growing number of Black people rejecting non-violent methods. Here is part of what was said, but I hope you watch the full video interview yourself.

MIKE WALLACE: There's an increasingly vocal minority who disagree totally with your tactics, Dr. King.

KING: There's no doubt about that. I will agree that there is a group in the Negro community advocating violence now. I happen to feel that this group represents a numerical minority. Surveys have revealed this. The vast majority of Negroes still feel that the best way to deal with the dilemma that we face in this country is through non-violent resistance, and I don't think this vocal group will be able to make a real dent in the Negro community in terms of swaying 22 million Negroes to this particular point of view. And I contend that the cry of "black power" is, at bottom, a reaction to the reluctance of white power to make the kind of changes necessary to make justice a reality for the Negro. I think that we've got to see that a riot is the language of the unheard. And, what is it that America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the economic plight of the Negro poor has worsened over the last few years.

WALLACE: How many summers like this do you imagine that we can expect?

KING: Well, I would say this: we don't have long. The mood of the Negro community now is one of urgency, one of saying that we aren't going to wait. That we've got to have our freedom. We've waited too long. So that I would say that every summer we're going to have this kind of vigorous protest. My hope is that it will be non-violent. I would hope that we can avoid riots because riots are self-defeating and socially destructive. I would hope that we can avoid riots, but that we would be as militant and as determined next summer and through the winter as we have been this summer. And I think the answer about how long it will take will depend on the federal government, on the city halls of our various cities, and on White America to a large extent. This is where we are at this point, and I think White America will determine how long it will be and which way we go in the future.

Lagniappe: I also recommend this editorial by Rebecca Carroll at the Guardian, "Why are white people scared of black people's rage at Mike Brown's death?" Carroll addresses her complaint directly to a white audience. Here's a key passage:

You are the ones who created this godforsaken racist system by using your circumstantial power and privilege 400 years ago to institutionalize white supremacy. Now use that power and privilege you still have, 400 years later, to dismantle it.

And please don’t quibble about whether you have any direct lineage to the architects of racism. You are benefitting from it, so you have a direct responsibility to figure out how to undo it. Because maybe you’ve seen what happens when we black people try to undo it in 2014 – they call in the National Guard.

Finally, if you've been wondering where people who are more informed about what's happening in Ferguson get their news, try this Vox.com list of reporters who are tweeting news live from the ground in Ferguson.

Barman's Fund helps New Orleans Street Exchange: Come out and 'Drink with Purpose!'

This month the Barman's Fund of New Orleans will give a boost to the city's only street paper, the New Orleans Street Exchange. According to the newspaper's newsletter, "the Barman’s Fund is a motley assortment of bartenders who pledge all earnings from one shift a month for charitable organizations."

The N.O. Street Exchange is a street newspaper benefiting the city's homeless community and addressing issues of poverty. The proceeds from the Barman’s Fund this April will help the N.O. Street Exchange purchase supplies for the newspaper and aid its vendor program. 

This means that when you visit one of the fund's participating bars during the shifts identified below, you will "drink with purpose." 

• Sunday 4/7 George White @ Hoshun - 6pm-close, 1601 St. Charles Avenue, New Orleans
• Wednesday 4/10 Jeremiah Lavelle @ Backspace - 6pm-2am, 139 Chartres Street, New Orleans
• Thursday 4/11 David Catfish Naser @ The Jimani - 10pm-8am, 141 Chartres Street, New Orleans
• Saturday 4/13 Miles Holding @ Good Friends Bar - 9pm-5am, 740 Dauphine Street, New Orleans
• Tuesday 4/16 Andrew Swede Baker @ Backspace - 2am-10am, 139 Chartres Street, New Orleans
• Thursday 4/18 Austin Bres @ Seiler Bar - 5pm-close, 434 North Columbia Street, Covington LA
• Monday 4/22 Lisa Hakenjos @ Murphy’s Brewhouse - 8pm-close, 505 Gretna Boulevard, Gretna
• Wednesday 4/24 Scot Mattox @ Iris - 5pm-close, 321 North Peters Street, New Orleans

For more information on the Barman’s Fund, visit: http://barmansfund.tumblr.com/nola

John Cheese is On Point with 4 Things Politicians Don't Grasp About the Poor (also Video of Marian Wright Edelman)

On Facebook, a friend of mine shared this article at Cracked.com headlined "4 Things Politicians Will Never Understand About Poor People."

In plain language (with occasional cussing) John Cheese debunks the common myths politicians perpetuate about people living in poverty, such as they don't work and that they only want handouts.

His post also reveals some of the offensive rhetoric some politicians leverage when they discuss government assistance programs. For instance, in 2010 former Lieutenant Governor of South Carolina Andre Bauer said while in office:

"My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed. You're facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don't think too much further than that. And so what you've got to do is you've got to curtail that type of behavior. They don't know any better."

The original article at CBS implies that Bauer, a Republican, made this comment in reference to Greenville's free school lunch program in which nearly half of that city's children participate. I suspect that there's a racial element to the ease with which Bauer compared poor people to animals, but I won't muddy the waters with further speculation about how he may have been manipulating the Southern Strategy here.

On the surface, it seems surprising that Bauer would bash the poor this way. News sources report that he himself benefited from a reduced cost lunch program when he was a child after his mother and father divorced. Attempting to clean up his comment later, Bauer said he was not opposed to people receiving government aid but how that aid is administered.

A reckless tongue may be part of Bauer's reckless character. Based on his driving history, he appears to be generally impulsive, and it's possible that he's got identity issues tossing him to and fro, making him forget his past and sometimes deny his present with hypocrisy.

Cheese also recalls another Republican's public statement in which the politician used an analogy likening welfare recipients to raccoons eating beetles out of dead rats. In 2011, Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning told Fox News that he regretted making the comparison. I bet he does. He was campaigning to be the Republican nominee for the Senate then. Wikipedia provides additional information about that run:

Bruning was endorsed by the Tea Party Express and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. Bruning has stated he believes life begins at conception, and has been endorsed by Nebraska Right to Life in each of his campaigns. Bruning lost the Republican primary election from Deb Fischer, who went on to win the general election.

Frankly, I have strong reservations about candidates promoted by the Tea Party Express and endorsed by Huckabee. Maybe the people in Wisconsin do as well.

In addition, according to Wikipedia, Bruning is married. He and his wife have two children. It's too bad that having children himself doesn't help him have more compassion for parents who have children and may not be able to feed them.

Perhaps Cheese is right that there are things about being poor that politicians will never understand. I would modify that claim to say "some politicians" because I know there are a few out there who are concerned about the poor and do not demonize people in poverty. The ones who do not understand, however, really don't understand because they don't want to understand, and unfortunately for those of us who want a fairer economy, the thinking of these backwards politicians is viral.

This seems like a good time to shine a light on the work of Marian Wright Edelman of the Children's Defense Fund speaking on children in poverty in America.

Report Follows Up on NYPD Officer and Homeless Man

I remember seeing on Facebook the picture of the NYPD police officer who gave the homeless man a pair of boots. The story moved me, and I learned more watching this video at CNN with story. Officer Lawrence DePrimo, who's received lots of attention for helping the man, said it was very cold; he saw Jeffrey Hillman's blistered feet and wanted to help him. He asked about buying him socks, and ended up buying him boots.

Hillman's brother said that Jeffrey's been on the streets for years, but some New York agency says he has an apartment. This story has become very complicated. I wish I had time to write more. In my own city, New Orleans, I intend to do more.  (If you're near New Orleans, consider helping the New Orleans Street Exchange, a nonprofit running a literacy training program to help individuals in the homeless community.)

CNN also ran an opinion piece by Frida Ghitis in which the writer says,

"The shoes help; the cash helps. But the more effective act of generosity, the real miracle, would come if the millions looking at the picture of the generous police officer trying to help a man in need wrote the perfect Chapter 3, pushing for better mental health services, more affordable housing, more job training. For enough attention from the government to those who need it most."

According to Ghitis and the NYC authorities, Hillman is a veteran. He has benefits, but it seems he is not mentally present enough to use his benefits.

If you're aware of this story, then you may recall that it began when Jennifer Foster of Florence, Arizona, posted a photo of the officer helping Hillman on her Facebook page. Read more here.

Silk and Flour (A Video Meditation)

Written in 2005, the poem "Silk and Flour" was originally entitled "Silk and Flowers," but while creating the video, I changed the title to one I had considered nearly seven years ago. I don't remember what incident inspired the poem. It may have been nothing but a muse in my head, but I feel like I had seen something in the news that caused me to think about the dark side of ego that reveals itself when we indulge in self-pity parties.

Sometimes we get bent out of shape over the most insignificant things and whine so much about what we don't have that we think we deserve that we forget how much more we have than others in the world, sometimes others in our same cities, sometimes people in our own families.

This video is also cross-posted at The Urban Mother's Book of Prayers.

Misery Poem Addresses Rising Violence in Cities

This poem is cross-posted at the Urban Mother's Book of Prayers. I have been experimenting with a graphics software program.

Prince's 'Da, Da, Da' from 1996 Remains Relevant

Prince released "Da, Da, Da," featuring a rap by Scrap D, in 1996.

The song is on his Emancipation CD, which he recorded after his Warner Bros. contract expired. Listening to this song before Christmas 2011, I was struck by how its lyrics remain relevant today, so I created a little video. You can watch it by clicking this link or the Prince picture above. The video should start automatically. If your volume's already up on your computer or smart device, you may need to adjust it.

Weak Impulse Control Hurts More if You're Poor?

Some people will read this article at The New Republic, "Why Can’t More Poor People Escape Poverty?," and without going very far into have a knee-jerk reaction and reject its information because the article can be misread to say that all poor people lack impulse control. That's not what it's saying, but I know that's what that I thought until I realized I was wrong.

What the article is saying is that when people who are not poor lack will power, they have more wiggle room to indulge and can make more impulse purchases because they have more disposable income. If you're neither wealthy nor poor, you still have more wiggle room than someone who is poor. As the article suggests, if you have adequate income, choosing to buy an empty calories item such as a doughnut because you feel like eating a doughnut, while probably not the best choice for your health, is not going to make that big a difference in your budget. However, if you're poor and you buy the doughnut, a relatively small purchase for those with adequate income, the ripple effect in your budget will have a greater impact at the end of the month.

It's something we know already, right? If you're earning $7.15 per hour, buying one talle Starbuck's latte per week proportionally hurts your budget more than if you are someone earning $40 per hour. The person earning $40 per hour could buy a venti latte everyday at $5.50 a pop, actually have zero willpower when it comes to resisting the daily purchase, but that indulgence will probably not prevent her from paying her light bill unless she's living waaay above her means.

So, again, the article is not saying that all poor people lack will power or have impulse control issues. It's saying that if you are poor, self-indulgence does more damage. Having more money cloaks lack of will power and may also hide relatively small errors in decision making. If you have money, you can do dumber things. Poverty magnifies bad decisions.

It's sort of like being overweight due to having a medically documented slow metabolism issue such as hypothyroidism. The skinny person with the normal-to-fast metabolism may not be able to resist chocolate milk shakes and can drink two a week and it never shows up on her body, but people assume because the person is skinny she must really work out at the gym and have great willpower although neither is true. The fat person, however, may be working out at the gym daily, and only indulging in a dessert once a month. People nevertheless assume that the fat person's sitting on the couch all day and has never seen a sweet she couldn't refuse. They attribute a host of character flaws to the fat person such as laziness and lack of self discipline, and they are wrong. The skinny person's great metabolism cloaks that she lacks willpower while the fat person must work harder to battle a visible physical circumstance. As the skinny person, due to her great metabolism, is freer to make bad food choices, the person with more money is freer to make bad financial choices, and society attributes supposed better character traits to both the skinny person and the wealthy person.

Having a great metabolism as the result of genetics is a benefit you did not earn. In context of discussing poverty, being born with a great metabolism is analogous to being born with more social and cultural capital. Better social and cultural capital, other than the obvious one of being born to wealthy parents, can be benefits we otherwise don't consider such as being born to a mother or father who spent time with us and taught us how to live on a tight budget or who stayed on top of us about school work and went to PTA meetings. Better social and culture capital can also accumulate later in life hrough having the advantage of going to a school where we encountered better role models and didn't have to worry about gang violence or being born to a family in which no one, including us, has a mental disorder or a substance abuse issue or we may even have social and cultural capital because we were born with some kind of higher intelligence--emotional or academic--or natural self-discipline or some special talent or personality trait that helps us cope better with hardship and drives ambition.

In other words, some people are born with more benefits or through good fortune after birth encounter someone or something in their lives that gives them an extra edge that makes it easier to escape poverty through avenues not totally dependent on their individual hard work. Consequently, if they are not born into poverty but fall into it later, they may have an easier time escaping it, and if they are born into poverty but have one or more of these social and cultural assets, the deck is stacked in their favor to escape poverty. What can we say? Life is not fair.

I'm making this point about differences in our natures and circumstances to counter arguments from people who seem to measure everyone as though we're all exactly the same and have had the same experiences. Usually these people make statements such as, "I pulled myself up by my own bootstraps, and so can everyone else" like everyone is born with boots like them or the same level of social and cultural capital. (When such people do not reference themselves, then they speak of some ancestor who started with what they claim was nothing.)

Once past my first wrong conclusion that the article suggested poor people have less will power than the financially sound, I looked at potential solutions presented. One mentioned a project in a rural area that helped poor people set limits on their bank accounts that helped them to not make impulsive purchases. I know some of us do this for ourselves to keep us from buying that hot pair of heels we just saw at the mall. And isn't this the same idea behind why some of us opt for part of our paychecks to go straight to a savings account? If we don't see the money in our checking account, we're less tempted to use it for something idiotic.

The article also mentions the following:

Third, money itself can go a long way toward altering the dynamic that leads to willpower depletion among the poor. Government transfers of money have proven successful in Mexico and Brazil, for instance. In particular, attaching conditions to these transfers—such as requiring school attendance, regular clinic visits, and savings behavior—may allow for an end-run around the kind of willpower-based poverty traps that too frequently seem to end with the poor making unwise decisions.

I think a lot of people struggling with poverty would like this kind of help, but I also think it would be hard, if not impossible, for the government to implement any program like this in the United States. On the conservative side such a proposal would face opposition from people like those mentioned above who perpetuate misconceptions about everyone having boots as well as small government ideologies that only allow for dog-eat-dog economics. On the progressive side, opposition would come from the mindset that government assistance should come with no strings other than proof of poverty--the handout model. Some of my progressive friends feel that in a democracy the government should not be able to tell you what to do with your own resources. I agree and disagree. If the money in your hand came from the government, then it is not your personal resource but a collective resource.

I agree with objections to some welfare-to-work programs that have been proposed to force poor people to work full time in government service to receive housing and food stamps because that's a sneaky way to force someone to work for less than a living wage in a job that keeps them from finding a better job elsewhere. But if the person receiving the assistance elects to do this, then who am I to argue?

I disagree, however, with the idea that any expectation of accountability is insulting or akin to violating civil liberties. I think that if you are receiving money from the collective fund, you owe something to the collective. How we arrive at what that should be is open for debate, but that you don't get something from the collective without giving something back is not, even if what you give back is something that benefits you more than it obviously benefits the collective such as you seeing your children grow up to at least finish high school and stay away from criminal activity, a feat that's not as easy for some poor parents as it is for some middle-class parents. Nevertheless, unfortunately our birth circumstance, such as being born into poverty, may saddle us with hurdles others don't have to jump. We get nowhere by complaining that we should not have to jump them. Life is what it is until we overcome.

Money sent as a gift has no strings attached, but money provided by the government is not a gift; there's a rarely-articulated string attached. The premise under which the government provides money for poor families is not simple compassion. Charities function on the simple compassion premise, not governments. American government should function on compassion plus improving the commonwealth. Helping poor parents feed, clothe, and house their families is an investment in human resources that contributes to domestic stability and tranquility. If the result of how we implement the programs only establishes a system of generational poverty for some families, then we're doing it wrong.

(I feel the same way about corporations that get subsidies but do not produce jobs that pay a living wage and continue to harm the environment. If we don't hold them accountable, then those subsidies are a gift and we're idiots because unlike the poor, "successful" companies shouldn't need government assistance.)

I'm not suggesting that in order to get food stamps you should have to go scrub the White House steps or that work will somehow magically form better character. Being in a work program is good for some people. For others, such as a mother with a one-year-old at home or a young man who could earn more in the private sector if he were taught a skill first, not so much. I'm thinking more in terms of giving people additional assistance that they can choose to accept or reject, but if they accept it, then it comes with strings such as requirements to take a class in money management or letting someone else help you learn what your mama and daddy may not have taught you about planning for the future or determining needs versus wants. We need to stop assuming people have knowledge when their lives indicate otherwise and least provide a way for them to get that knowledge.

Our schools apparently are so burdened with teaching children how to pass standardized test that other important lessons never get taught. If I didn't run into people who have never learned some life skills that go hand-in-hand with life achievements, I wouldn't be saying this.

Many people who struggle with poverty don't need any kind of paternalistic help. They are doing everything they can, including not buying doughnuts and Big Macs, to work their way out of poverty. They may need only seed money, the kind of financial boost up that some of us get from parents. But there are some who need more hands-on guidance toward intangible but practical knowledge because no one in their families ever provided them with such guidance. (The same can be said of some who grew up in middle-class to wealthy families but they've got other resources through family to help them. In cases of generational poverty, no one in the family may know how to dig out. And local community resources have dwindled.)

So, I think this notion that it's an insult to provide a system that requires some kind of accountability is irrational. If people with money can lack self control, then so can people without money. If people with money feel they need help with becoming better parents, then so do people without money. If people with money need lessons about how to plan for the future, then so do people without money, and if some people who have money in our consumer-driven culture need to learn the difference between needs and wants, then some poor people may also need to learn the difference. Therefore, let's stop acting like below the poverty line there exists some special class of Magical Poor People who are more emotionally stable, super-effective at coping with life challenges, and better spiritually adjusted than all the financially stable humans on the planet.

And yes, I have had to apply for public assistance before and been part of what the government and media call "the low-income class." It's a humiliating process, but if someone had told me, "You're entitled to the minimum amount of food stamps, but you can get $10 more if you sit through a few classes on childcare," my answer would not have been "Don't insult me." It would have been, "I'll do it because I love my child, and maybe I'll learn something I don't know. I need help and know that there's no such thing as a free lunch." At the same time, I was born with the kind of social and cultural capital that someone trapped in generational poverty does not have.

Yes, nobody, poor or otherwise should be forced to participate in a program against his/her will, but what about people in poverty who want to participate? Living in poverty limits freedom in ways far more isolating and insidious than a requirement to finish school or manage a meager savings account would. I know poverty is a far more complex issue, and it must be addressed through a variety of measures. I guess I'm just tired of programs that might help being shot down on the basis of abstract and impractical notions of what it means to be free.

Freedom is not free. Freedom comes through a balance of power and accountability. Name any freedom, such as gun ownership, freedom of speech, or the right to pursue happiness, and you will find there's a cost somewhere. There's always a price for freedom.

But this discussion is moot because I sense in this country little desire to help poor families and a stubborn insistence that being poor is always the result of laziness or some kind of genetic deficiency. We're trapped in dual cycles of blaming the victim and indulging victim mentalities that shun accountability. Where's the balance? As a collective, we're stuck on stupid. America, we're in trouble.

Photo: I used that iconic photo from Hurricane Katrina survivors in New Orleans because I think that while it's true the government--local, state, and federal--made excessive mistakes following that catastrophe and race was obviously a factor, too, the suffering we witnessed was also the result of the persistence generational poverty in New Orleans.

Chicago youth violence memorial, CNN story

Please watch the CNN video below about youth dying in Chicago, and see the stone memorial Diane Latiker started in a vacant lot using 30 stones that's now up to 153 stones, one for each child. Anchor David Mattingly says Latiker's surprised by the growing number and they discuss that the city is failing its children.

More youth have died by violence in Chicago this year than the year before. The video shows one little boy who was partially paralyzed after a bullet hit him while he lay sleeping in his mother's car.

Mattingly says the faces of the dead are also posted in the Chicago Tribune. I think the paper should be commended for that. It's a call to action instead of always throwing up the perpetrators photos or a whole sheet of wanted people while victims are forgotten.


New Orleans may need a memorial of stones. I remember a few months ago going the cemetery with my father and walking into the mausoleum to look at see how the plaque turned out on my mother's crypt. Some of the crypts have photos of the dead. I was drawn to one, the picture of a young man, because his baby face. Reading his birth to death dates, I felt a chill go through me. He was only 20, and mourners had stuck notes in the cracks, messages to him such as "Uncle Bobby misses you."

The level of stress on people here as we watch our own city, New Orleans, buckle under violence that often involves people under 25 is sometimes unbearable, which is why I address it in poetry and poem-prayers. Some days the bad news is so overwhelming I feel like we're drowning in blood, and I wonder how do they get their hands on so many guns. Why is it so many young people seem consumed with the need for revenge? And I wonder about the mothers. So, the poetry is not about writing the perfect poem, but expressing sorrow and rage.

Michael Pfleger, the Catholic activist priest who you may recall being in the news during last year's election, speaks in the video. After being shaken by the death of a teen who was beaten, shot in the head and burned, the priest is flying the American flag upside down to signal the city is in trouble, an S.O.S. According to the Tribune, the teen's death is being blamed on gang violence.

Mattingly and Pfleger make the point that if Chicago had had that many young people dead from Swine Flu, tons of money would have been dumped on the city for research, but not so for violent deaths. So far this year 30 school-age children have been killed in Chicago. Like the people of New Orleans, no one in Chicago seems to have a solution.

Video is also at this link. Also read Anderson Cooper's 360 Blog on this topic. CNN now has a full story posted at this link.

Related topics at The Urban Mother's Book of Prayers.

Telephone Pole Prophecy (Poem)

Telephone Pole Prophecy
By Nordette Adams

Yesterday, traveling through broken New Orleans,
I saw a sign on Washington and Broad:
Cash for Gold Teeth.

Cash for Gold Teeth!
Forsake idiotic decisions.
Dismantle the self, but how?

Shroud and sickle come nailing signs on chests,
foreclosures on flesh,
heralding soul's recession.

How we hunger for resurrection.

(c) 2009 Nordette Adams

NOLA' s St. Bernard Project: 3-3-3 Split Riles Housing Activists

The buzz down here in New Orleans on public housing today is that Mayor Ray Nagin and HUD officials broke ground on a housing development that was formerly the St. Bernard federal housing project. Instead of blocks of large, low-income apartment buildings, the type I saw growing up a block over from the St. Bernard, the new project offers mixed housing.

WDSU reports that it will be one-third low-income housing, one-third affordable or moderate-income housing, and one-third market-rate housing. Video's here.

Housing advocates have frequently complained that the new housing developments will offer fewer homes for the city's poorest residents than available before Hurricane Katrina, possibly displacing thousands of black families with NOLA roots.

... questions remain over whether the historic remaking of New Orleans' four largest developments, combined with other HUD efforts, will provide enough affordable housing.

What's clear is that the politically polarizing redevelopments of the Big Four complexes -- the St. Bernard, B.W. Cooper, C.J. Peete and Lafitte -- will include far fewer public housing units than the massive complexes they are replacing.

That's by design; the developments will morph into mixed-income communities, which by definition disperse the poor to make room for similar percentages of moderate- and middle-income families. The new mix will occupy three tiers of housing, ranging from market rate to highly subsidized.

The strategy aims to end the concentrated poverty that isolated residents and bred crime, joblessness, failing schools and ill health. But housing advocates continue to accuse HUD of running the poor out of the complexes without offering enough replacement subsidized housing, either within the redevelopments or elsewhere, to supply a city in the grips of an affordable housing shortage. Furthermore, in previous redevelopments, the agency has a shoddy record of fulfilling promises of adequate replacement housing for the poor, opponents of the redevelopment say.

"HUD doesn't want poor residents to return, " said Bill Quigley, the Loyola University law professor who represented public housing tenants after Hurricane Katrina in an unsuccessful anti-demolition lawsuit against HUD. (Read full story here at NOLA.com)

The Times Picayune/NOLA.com also provides a map of HUD's planned housing for New Orleans at this link.

The old housing looked like this. See picture below found at the Preservation Nation blog showing St. Bernard mid-demolition.



The protests against demolition of the big four housing projects has been violent and dramatic, as you can see in this video below taken last year when police tasered and pepper-sprayed protesters and kept them from attending a city council meeting about the demolition. The video's intense.



I noticed that many of the protesters seemed to be young white activists who didn't grow up in the federal housing project squalor and recall black people who did telling me that they didn't care about the demolition and questioned why people who didn't even live in New Orleans would scream against it .

The new vision of housing looks like the next picture:



I don't have faith that the housing will be as wonderful as the vision. Also, I have friends who grew up in the St. Bernard, but so far none of them have mourned its demolition or criticized the rebuild. They moved out and onward long ago. You probably don't miss the big four unless you still need a place to live and can't afford rent in the city you love.

Certainly I get the concern about having more housing for the poorest among us, but I've got to tell you, the big four needed to come down. In addition, I don't like the spin some activists put on the demolitions because the big four were scheduled for demolition prior to Hurricane Katrina. Nevertheless, we should question the new housing plans that appear to limit how many in poverty can find safe housing. Zealous gentrification of New Orleans will change the very culture that made the city famous.

Day 9 NaBloPloMo.

Walmart Shoppers Angered that Store Closed After Man's Death

If you need more details on the Walmart shoppers trampling a worker to death in Valley Stream, NY, yesterday, during Black Friday sales, then check this link. The post has links to video also. However, I had to write about the Walmart stampede again after reading the following paragraph:

Other workers were trampled as they tried to rescue the man, and customers stepped over him and became irate when officials said the store was closing because of the death, police and witnesses said. ... "This crowd was out of control," Fleming said. He described the scene as "utter chaos," and said the store didn't have enough security.

Dozens of store employees trying to fight their way out to help Damour were also getting trampled by the crowd, Fleming said. Shoppers stepped over the man on the ground and streamed into the store. (HuffPo)

What the hell is wrong with people, more concerned about saving $300 on a TV than a dying man on the floor?

Updated, CNN video. The police say Walmart shoppers even pushed police officers who came to give the dying man assistance.



I've also added video about the shootings at Toys "R" Us in Palm Desert, Ca., which reportedly had nothing to do with a Black Friday squabble or an argument about bargains. It was an "incident between two individuals," reports The Los Angeles Times.

The dead men were identified by Riverside County sheriff's officials as Alejandro Moreno, 39, of Desert Hot Springs and Juan Meza, 28, of Cathedral City. Two handguns were recovered at the scene.

Calls to both mens' apparent homes were not returned.

The shooting occurred about 11:30 a.m. Friday after two women got into a fight. After the women began arguing, witnesses said, Meza pulled out a gun. Moreno also pulled out a gun and started chasing and shooting at Meza, witnesses said. Frantic shoppers either dropped to the floor or stormed out of the store. (LAT)

Home Lost Before Holidays: Sheriff Destroys Mobile House Stuck in Road

Another heartbreaking story of a home lost before the holidays, but the home in this story is not a casualty of the foreclosure crisis, freak fire, or tornado. This loss is the result of a poor Kentucky woman hiring a fly-by-night company to move her mobile home and a Kentucky sheriff's frustration.

The company did not move the home properly, and so the house was stuck in the middle of a highway. After nine hours of rescue attempts, the local sheriff felt his only recourse was to destroy the home.

CARLISLE, KY (WAVE) - A Kentucky family is in disbelief after their home was destroyed because of an order given by a county sheriff. It is something so unbelievable that WAVE 3's Scott Harvey and photographer Nick Goldring made the two-hour drive to see if it was true.

Frances Barton thought things were getting better.

"I bought some land, beautiful land, to give my children a better life," said Barton.

Friday, she was having her mobile home moved when the trailer broke. That left it stranded in the mud, partially blocking U.S. 68 in Carlisle.

"They paid somebody $200 and that is what you get for $200," said Nicholas County Sheriff Dick Garrett. (WAVE 3 Louisville, KY. Read more)

Now the family has no place to go for the holidays, and the mother faces hefty fines if she can't remove the mobile home debris in compliance with the sheriff's time line. Prior to destruction, the mobile home included all the family's possessions. Tragic.

Per WTVQ, "Anyone who would like to make a donation to help the family start over, or to help in the clean-up, they can do so at the Farmers National Bank in Paris." Possibly this one.