Last night, after losing the Pennsylvania primary, Barack Obama said some wise things. He spoke of of how easy it is, "after 14 long months... to lose sight of the fierce urgency of this moment." He spoke of how easy it is "to get caught up in the distractions and the silliness and the tit-for-tat that consumes our politics that none of us are immune to" and how that "trivializes the profound issues" which we confront at home and abroad.

Those words were quickly drowned out by the relentless stream of slicing and dicing on the cable shows. It took a front page New York Times article the morning after to refocus my attention on just what Obama was talking about--a profound issue that has failed to get attention in the campaign so far.

According to the Times, the US is Number One when it comes to the numbers of prisoners--2.3 million-- in our jails and prisons. We now surpass China, which is four times more populous than the US, and a distant second with 1.6 million in prison.Our lockup rate, according to a criminologist quoted in the article has made the US a 'rogue state, a country that has made a decision not to follow what is a normal Western approach."

In under a generation, we have gone from 200,000 inmates to 2.3 million.

"Far from serving as a model for the world," as the US did when Alexis de Tocqueville toured American penitentiaries in 1831, "contemporary America is viewed with horror," James Q. Whitman, a specialist in comparative law at Yale wrote last year.

Don't we deserve to hear more from the candidates on this issue? How about some common sense and sanity when it comes to laying out alternatives to incarceration? It is true that Barack Obama supports ending the disparity in crack and cocaine sentencing which has filled our jails and prisons with non-violent drug offenders, mainly people of color. (Hillary is still unwilling to apply the sentencing commission's ruling to apply retroactively.) But what about repeal of the mandatory sentencing laws? And reforming a criminal justice system that has made us Number One in the wrong kind of way? How about Number One in children insured? In high paying jobs? In education?

For a wise and experienced group working to reform the system --which is costly, out of control, and failing to make us truly secure, please check out The Correctional Association of New York (www.correctionalassociation.org) I am proud to have been a member of its board for more then twenty years.

Comments (60)

1. i wonder if hillary inhaled.......

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 12:22am

2. Crime Statistics > Prisoners > Per capita (most recent) by country

   #1 United States: 715 per 100,000 people #2 Russia: 584 per 100,000 people #3 Belarus: 554 per 100,000 people #4 Palau: 523 per 100,000 people #5 Belize: 459 per 100,000 people #6 Suriname: 437 per 100,000 people #7 Dominica: 420 per 100,000 people #8 Ukraine: 416 per 100,000 people #9 Bahamas, The: 410 per 100,000 people #10 South Africa: 402 per 100,000 people #11 Kyrgyzstan: 390 per 100,000 people #12 Singapore: 388 per 100,000 people #13 Kazakhstan: 386 per 100,000 people #14 Barbados: 367 per 100,000 people #15 Panama: 354 per 100,000 people #16 Trinidad and Tobago: 351 per 100,000 people #17 Thailand: 340 per 100,000 people #18 Latvia: 339 per 100,000 people #19 Estonia: 339 per 100,000 people #20 Saint Kitts and Nevis: 338 per 100,000 people #21 Grenada: 333 per 100,000 people #22 Botswana: 327 per 100,000 people #23 Swaziland: 324 per 100,000 people #24 Mongolia: 303 per 100,000 people #25 Antigua and Barbuda: 278 per 100,000 people #26 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines: 270 per 100,000 people #27 Namibia: 267 per 100,000 people #28 Tunisia: 253 per 100,000 people #29 Taiwan: 250 per 100,000 people #30 Saint Lucia: 243 per 100,000 people #31 Lithuania: 234 per 100,000 people #32 Costa Rica: 229 per 100,000 people #33 Iran: 226 per 100,000 people #34 Mauritius: 214 per 100,000 people #35 Poland: 210 per 100,000 people #36 Uruguay: 209 per 100,000 people #37 Seychelles: 207 per 100,000 people #38 Chile: 204 per 100,000 people #39 Azerbaijan: 198 per 100,000 people #40 Romania: 193 per 100,000 people #41 Uzbekistan: 184 per 100,000 people #42 Czech Republic: 178 per 100,000 people #43 Jamaica: 176 per 100,000 people #44 Morocco: 176 per 100,000 people #45 Guyana: 175 per 100,000 people #46 Israel: 174 per 100,000 people #47 Libya: 173 per 100,000 people #48 Honduras: 172 per 100,000 people #49 Mexico: 169 per 100,000 people #50 Brazil: 169 per 100,000 people #51 Slovakia: 165 per 100,000 people #52 Hungary: 165 per 100,000 people #53 Malaysia: 161 per 100,000 people #54 Tajikistan: 161 per 100,000 people #55 New Zealand: 160 per 100,000 people #56 El Salvador: 158 per 100,000 people #57 Dominican Republic: 157 per 100,000 people #58 Bahrain: 155 per 100,000 people #59 Georgia: 148 per 100,000 people #60 Lebanon: 146 per 100,000 people #61 Spain: 144 per 100,000 people #62 Nicaragua: 143 per 100,000 people #63 Lesotho: 143 per 100,000 people #64 Madagascar: 130 per 100,000 people #65 Portugal: 130 per 100,000 people #66 Cameroon: 129 per 100,000 people #67 Burundi: 129 per 100,000 people #68 Bulgaria: 127 per 100,000 people #69 Colombia: 126 per 100,000 people #70 Zambia: 121 per 100,000 people #71 China: 119 per 100,000 people #72 Fiji: 117 per 100,000 people #73 Australia: 116 per 100,000 people #74 Tanzania: 116 per 100,000 people #75 Canada: 116 per 100,000 people #76 Netherlands: 112 per 100,000 people #77 Luxembourg: 111 per 100,000 people #78 Kenya: 111 per 100,000 people #79 Algeria: 110 per 100,000 people #80 Central African Republic: 110 per 100,000 people #81 Saudi Arabia: 110 per 100,000 people #82 Rwanda: 109 per 100,000 people #83 Argentina: 107 per 100,000 people #84 Jordan: 106 per 100,000 people #85 Tonga: 106 per 100,000 people #86 Albania: 105 per 100,000 people #87 Sri Lanka: 105 per 100,000 people #88 Peru: 104 per 100,000 people #89 Bolivia: 102 per 100,000 people #90 Kuwait: 102 per 100,000 people #91 Italy: 100 per 100,000 people #92 Austria: 100 per 100,000 people #93 Germany: 96 per 100,000 people #94 Qatar: 95 per 100,000 people #95 France: 95 per 100,000 people #96 Philippines: 94 per 100,000 people #97 Syria: 93 per 100,000 people #98 Turkey: 92 per 100,000 people #99 Armenia: 92 per 100,000 people #100 Andorra: 90 per 100,000 people #101 Belgium: 88 per 100,000 people #102 Yemen: 83 per 100,000 people #103 Greece: 83 per 100,000 people #104 Oman: 81 per 100,000 people #105 Benin: 81 per 100,000 people #106 Sao Tome and Principe: 79 per 100,000 people #107 Venezuela: 76 per 100,000 people #108 Sweden: 75 per 100,000 people #109 Paraguay: 75 per 100,000 people #110 Switzerland: 72 per 100,000 people #111 Denmark: 72 per 100,000 people #112 Malta: 72 per 100,000 people #113 Finland: 71 per 100,000 people #114 Vietnam: 71 per 100,000 people #115 Malawi: 70 per 100,000 people #116 Guatemala: 68 per 100,000 people #117 Papua New Guinea: 66 per 100,000 people #118 Croatia: 64 per 100,000 people #119 Norway: 64 per 100,000 people #120 Djibouti: 61 per 100,000 people #121 Slovenia: 59 per 100,000 people #122 Pakistan: 59 per 100,000 people #123 Ecuador: 59 per 100,000 people #124 Kiribati: 56 per 100,000 people #125 Tuvalu: 56 per 100,000 people #126 Japan: 54 per 100,000 people #127 Senegal: 54 per 100,000 people #128 Liechtenstein: 53 per 100,000 people #129 Haiti: 53 per 100,000 people #130 Ghana: 52 per 100,000 people #131 Bangladesh: 50 per 100,000 people #132 Cyprus: 50 per 100,000 people #133 Mozambique: 50 per 100,000 people #134 Nauru: 48 per 100,000 people #135 Mauritania: 48 per 100,000 people #136 Chad: 46 per 100,000 people #137 Togo: 46 per 100,000 people #138 Cambodia: 45 per 100,000 people #139 Angola: 44 per 100,000 people #140 Marshall Islands: 44 per 100,000 people #141 Vanuatu: 44 per 100,000 people #142 Iceland: 40 per 100,000 people #143 Monaco: 39 per 100,000 people #144 Congo, Democratic Republic of the: 38 per 100,000 people #145 Indonesia: 38 per 100,000 people #146 Guinea: 37 per 100,000 people #147 Mali: 34 per 100,000 people #148 Micronesia, Federated States of: 34 per 100,000 people #149 Nigeria: 33 per 100,000 people #150 Gambia, The: 32 per 100,000 people #151 Solomon Islands: 31 per 100,000 people #152 India: 29 per 100,000 people #153 Nepal: 29 per 100,000 people #154 Burkina Faso: 23 per 100,000 people

   DEFINITION: Data for 2003. Number of prisoners held per 100,000 population.

   SOURCE: International Centre for Prison Studies - World Prison Brief

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 12:29am

3. Oh, Oh, Katrina,

   A funny thing about your posting, the facts don't support you.

   By N.C. Aizenman Washington Post Staff Writer

   Thursday, September 27, 2007;

   After two decades of massive growth, the U.S. prison population began to level off in the first six years of this century, according to 2006 census statistics released today.

   At nearly 2.1 million, the number of adults in correctional institutions remains at an all-time high. Still, that figure represents a 4 percent rise since 2000 -- nowhere near the 77 percent spike in the prison population from 1990 to 2000.

   http://tinyurl.com/4r56rb

   While the rate of incarcaration has slowed, the increase is due primarily to an increase of sentencing of violent offenders.

   Percent of sentenced State inmates

   1995 2004

   Total 100 % 100 %

   Violent 47 52

   Property 23 21

   Drug 22 20

   Public-order 9 7

   http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm

   Compared to non-sex offenders released from State prisons, released sex offenders were 4 times more likely to be rearrested for a sex crime.

   http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/rsorp94.htm

   The true nature of our prison populations is the percentage of recidivism.

   Rearrest within 3 years

   67.5% of prisoners released in 1994 were rearrested within 3 years, an increase over the 62.5% found for those released in 1983

   The rearrest rate for property offenders, drug offenders, and public-order offenders increased significantly from 1983 to 1994.

   During that time, the rearrest rate increased:

   - from 68.1% to 73.8% for property offenders

   - from 50.4% to 66.7% for drug offenders

   - from 54.6% to 62.2% for public-order offenders

   The rearrest rate for violent offenders remained relatively stable (59.6% in 1983 compared to 61.7% in 1994).

   Reconviction within 3 years

   Overall, reconviction rates did not change significantly from 1983 to 1994. Among, prisoners released in 1983, 46.8% were reconvicted within 3 years compared to 46.9% among those released in 1994.

   From 1983 to 1994, reconviction rates remained stable for released:

   - violent offenders (41.9% and 39.9%, respectively)

   - property offenders (53.0% and 53.4%)

   - public-order offenders (41.5% and 42.0%)

   Among drug offenders, the rate of reconviction increased significantly, going from 35.3% in 1983 to 47.0% in 1994. To the top

   Returned to prison within 3 years

   The 1994 recidivism study estimated that within 3 years, 51.8% of prisoners released during the year were back in prison either because of a new crime for which they received another prison sentence, or because of a technical violation of their parole.

   This rate was not calculated in the 1983 study.

   http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/reentry/recidivism.htm

   Posted by lvliberty1 at 04/24/2008 @ 01:03am

4. The true nature of our prison populations is the percentage of recidivism.

   Posted by LVLIBERTY1 04/24/2008 @ 01:03am

   the true nature is that something is seriously messed up.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 01:09am

5. The current rate of incarceration in the United States is higher than the Soviet Union's in 1979, which had an incarceration rate of 660 per 100,000 people

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 01:11am

6. Furthermore, only 6% of prisoners in England and Wales convicted of drug offenses, compared with 27% in the United States, serve sentences of 10 years or more (including life sentences)

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 01:11am

7. While 123 nations allow the death penalty, only the U.S. and Iran currently sentence juvenile offenders to death. Even nations such as China and Pakistan, countries that previously executed juveniles, have amended their laws to exclude death as a penalty for youth. In the U.S. since 1973, 226 juvenile offenders have been sentenced to death, and 22 have been executed.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 01:12am

8. Did anyone notice that Frank gave something like a compliment to Obama? Am I taking crazy pills? Is this evidence of a slow realization that he is going to face the Obama vs. McCain choice and the beginnings of the process of talking himself into voting against McCain? Is this magnanimity instead of gloating as a response to Clinton's win in Penn.?

   I hope Mask saves this one. A very important day.

   As for the prison thing, I would be interested to see whether there is a correlation between crime and relative poverty in urban areas. I know lots of countries that do better than us have more poor people, but I am wondering whether having lots of poor people penned in and constantly confronted with the evidence that there is money sufficient to solve the poverty problem has something to do with it. I imagine that if I were living in a four square block area of destitution which was 10 blocks away from women walking around with little dogs that cost 10 grand in their purse I would be angry all the damned time. And angry people can do stupid stuff. I have no idea whether the correlation is there. I have done exactly zero research on this issue.

   DP

   Posted by Poppolphil at 04/24/2008 @ 01:40am

9. Prisons are big business in the US. The business of America is business. Prisons R Us. To be opposed to successful US business is to be unAmerican, unpatriotic, perhaps even unwittingly treasonous. Certainly intellectually elitist, condescending & patronzing.

   Posted by sloper at 04/24/2008 @ 02:31am

10. Posted by SLOPER 04/24/2008 @ 02:31am

    Yes! The Corporation is the State.

    Posted by mikecope at 04/24/2008 @ 02:38am

11. In under a generation, we have gone from 200,000 inmates to 2.3 million.

    I think of how frogs in slowly heated water don't react because they can't detect the difference. How did it come about?

    America, Land of the Brave and the, er, Incarcerated!

    If this isn't a Police State, then what is?

    Posted by mikecope at 04/24/2008 @ 02:46am

12. Criticism of the article that compares U.S. to China, USSR, or Cuba etc..is not valid. They are not western countries.

    Posted by koroviev at 04/24/2008 @ 03:22am

13. Madlib

    thanks for the cliche. When I think about the situation am I angry? Yes. Am I angry about that issue all the time? No. For one thing there are other important issues. For another, if you are angry all the damned time, your life sucks and you are likely to say and do stupid things. I understand constant anger when Babylon throws its decadence in your face while you go hungry. I think I would feel constant anger if I was subjected to that. But while understandable and probably justified, constant anger would change nothing, except that my wife would be unhappy. One of the reasons to be happy we are not subjected to what the poor endurse is the emotional toll it would take on us. Just one though.

    Posted by Poppolphil at 04/24/2008 @ 03:28am

14. "I am proud to have been a member of its board for more then twenty years."

    And how much success have you and the association been having these last 20 years?

    According to your own article?

    Posted by Mask at 04/24/2008 @ 08:46am

15. "the true nature is that something is seriously messed up," said "Frosty Zoom."

    Salutations, "Frosty," and many thanks for the eye-opening stats!

    Those who prefer their commentary empty of facts and full of racism are free to check out "MarkCanyon."

    Posted by JakobFabian at 04/24/2008 @ 08:46am

16. Posted by MARKCANYON 04/24/2008 @ 05:26am | ignore this person

    it's ALL nonsense. I have lived in NYC for 40 years, so take my word for it. crime declined in ALL cities, most of which did not have mean Rudy as mayor.

    again pay no attention to the Nazi.

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/24/2008 @ 08:51am

17. Posted by MARKCANYON 04/24/2008 @ 05:26am

    Mark, I don't know if I agree with all of your assesment. Although many here would call your comments racist and bigotted. Having said that, I think a bigger problem in the Black community was mostly created by welfare. It was supposed to be a "well intended" safety net, but we all know the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

    This one program alone has done more damaged and devastated so many families then any other programs combined. It literally forced the removal of black men from the home. Even with the revised welfare program limited in scope and function now, it still may take the black community decades before they can get back on it feet.

    Posted by ACook at 04/24/2008 @ 09:04am

18. Posted by ACOOK 04/24/2008 @ 09:04am

    ACOOK, you DO know that MARKCANYON is an actual neo-Nazi?

    Posted by Mask at 04/24/2008 @ 10:08am

19. "ACOOK, you DO know that MARKCANYON is an actual neo-Nazi?"

    Posted by MASK 04/24/2008 @ 10:08am

    Mask, I don't if he is. I know that's what all of you on this thread call him because of his controversial remarks. And I've read just about all of his posts. Has he stated directly that he was a neo-nazi or white supremist?

    Posted by ACook at 04/24/2008 @ 10:19am

20. Posted by JOMAMMA 04/24/2008 @ 10:23am

    Logically, yes it would effect the nubmers a great deal. However, we know the left doesn't bother with logic too much.

    Posted by ACook at 04/24/2008 @ 10:29am

21. Mask, I don't if he is. I know that's what all of you on this thread call him because of his controversial remarks. And I've read just about all of his posts. Has he stated directly that he was a neo-nazi or white supremist?----Posted by ACOOK 04/24/2008 @ 10:19am

    No...but how would YOU translate this statement?--

    "For one bright moment that came to view well enough in Europe when there were no people of color to confuse the picture. Then the right people, for once, were locked up, and put on Death Row, and sent to gas chamber. For a short moment the picture was clear and honest folks knew what to do.

    That gave the crooks a fright. That was when they hollered like stuck pigs and forced America into war, and bombed Europe to rubble."---Posted by MARKCANYON 10/06/2007 @ 1:15pm

    BLOG | Posted 10/05/2007 @ 5:23pm Prison Reformers Finally Set Free by Matthew Blake

    He's talking about the HOLOCAUST.

    Posted by Mask at 04/24/2008 @ 10:39am

22. "No...but how would YOU translate this statement?--."

    Posted by MASK 04/24/2008 @ 10:39am

    I'd translate that statement as an opinion. Even you yourself have been accused of saying some contraversial things, and are labeled with some not so nice words, but does that make you anything less of person because you hold a different view?

    When you label someone out of ignorance or arrogance, it truly benefits no one.

    Posted by ACook at 04/24/2008 @ 11:01am

23. KATRINA has condemmed the US system because of the numbers but addressed none of the reasons why there are so many in jail except a mandatory sentencing rule, which can't possibly account for all of it. Her article therefore has no substance-its just a bitchpost.

    She did give one clue though. The increase has taken place "in under a generation" and that would be our generation. Perhaps one more indication the The Lousiest Generation, the one with all the great ideas, the one that, as Balint Vazony declared "never grew up" of which Katrina is a part,just doesn't get it.

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/24/2008 @ 11:11am

24. When you label someone out of ignorance or arrogance, it truly benefits no one.----Posted by ACOOK 04/24/2008 @ 11:01am

    Okay, let me get that straight....calling THE HOLOCAUST "one bright moment" in history is...just an "opinion" to you.

    And I'm "labelling someone out of ignorance and arrogance" for calling MARKHIMMLER on it?!?!?

    Is that what you're saying?

    Posted by Mask at 04/24/2008 @ 11:16am

25. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/24/2008 @ 11:10am

    So you're weighing "one person's suffering" as a prisoner versus the potential suffering under a more (not total) egalitarian economic system...and siding with the former?

    Posted by Mask at 04/24/2008 @ 11:18am

26. "Is that what you're saying?"

    Posted by MASK 04/24/2008 @ 11:16am

    Mask, what I'm saying is both you and Mark Cannon are entitled to make remarks that are viewed as less than desirable. However, he never said he was a neo-nazi, but you and others accused and labeled him as such because you found his remarks to be offensive. Do you feel you were right to say that?

    Posted by ACook at 04/24/2008 @ 11:40am

27. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/24/2008 @ 11:40am

    First, note this is a philosophical question.

    Second, note also I said "not TOTAL"...for instance, would you accept a certain up-tick in the prison population, if we were to eliminate Social Security? If so, how much? If not, then what is your cost-benefit of prison down-turn to say a universal health care system?

    Posted by Mask at 04/24/2008 @ 11:52am

28. Posted by ACOOK 04/24/2008 @ 11:40am |

    ACOOK, go back to Matthew Blake's article and read ALL of MARKCANYON's remarks.

    Second, explain in great detail, how "awful" and "unfair" it is to label somebody who hate called (again) THE HOLOCAUST a "bright moment" a neo-Nazi.

    Posted by Mask at 04/24/2008 @ 11:53am

29. "ACOOK, go back to Matthew Blake's article and read ALL of MARKCANYON's remarks."

    "Second, explain in great detail, how "awful" and "unfair" it is to label somebody who hate called (again) THE HOLOCAUST a "bright moment" a neo-Nazi."

    Posted by MASK 04/24/2008 @ 11:53am

    I remember the article and read quite a bit of the responses. And a lot of it was pretty controversial indeed.

    As for the "bright moment" comment, what do you want me to say? Should I become angry? Should I find out where this man lives and cut his throat and lop off his hands because of his hateful remarks?

    There are few things in this world that makes me angry and yet hateful speech is not one of them. Don't become the very thing you detest.

    "Words only hurt one's pride, not their soul."

    A lesson I learned from my grandmother a long time ago...

    Posted by ACook at 04/24/2008 @ 12:28pm

30. Posted by ACOOK 04/24/2008 @ 11:01am

    Problem is he is condoning the murder of 6 million jews.

    "The people in the jails are not there because of Jim Crow laws. They are there because those laws, including lynch laws, are gone."

    That sounds to me like he condones mobs lynching blacks in the street and he wants those days back. I don't know about you Cook but when I see someone say that it's a good thing to kill 6 million people I don't think that is an opinion to be excused. Sure freedom of speech whatever doesn't mean I have to sit by an tolerate it. I also happen to be one of those people is condoning the lynch mobs and Jim Crow laws for. Saying someone controversial and then condoning the murder ot 6 million jews and the enslavement and murder of blacks is a little bit more than a controversial opinion to me. It baffles me. Conservatives jumping all over Obama because Reverend Wright says God damn America, then you will defend and condone a person saying "good job killing jews" and lets lynch some more black people." Jesus Christ do morals mean anything. They don't only apply when it is politically expedient.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/24/2008 @ 12:36pm

31. Posted by ACOOK 04/24/2008 @ 12:28pm | ignore this person

    hitler spewed forth a lot of words...perhaps people should have listened closer.

    but i enjoy having a nazi in the discussion. i've always enjoyed peering into the abyss and trying to figure out what makes evil people tick, how they rationalize their evil...

    i just accept my evil side and think that thereby i overcome it (usually).

    by the way, hows your son?

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 04/24/2008 @ 12:40pm

32. Posted by EULER 04/24/2008 @ 12:46pm | ignore this person

    so you're ok with hitler, just not with lefty abominations?

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 04/24/2008 @ 12:49pm

33. Criticism of the article that compares U.S. to China, USSR, or Cuba etc..is not valid. They are not western countries.

    Posted by KOROVIEV 04/24/2008 @ 03:22am

    but they are humans.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 12:50pm

34. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/action/ignore.mhtml?who=Euler

    you are an idiot. Che was NOT a mass murderer, in fact he was not a murderer at all.

    Canyon is a self described Nazi.

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/24/2008 @ 12:50pm

35. Russia, there is no USSR, must be described as a western country. what would you call them, an Eastern country?

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/24/2008 @ 12:52pm

36. Posted by EULER 04/24/2008 @ 12:42pm | ignore this person

    we have almost one percent of our people behind bars...actually i believe its around .8%, which is twice the percentage of our nearest incarcerating competitor, russia. are we that bad?

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 04/24/2008 @ 12:52pm

37. we are a more violent society than most. Let's not lose any sleep over it.

    Posted by EULER 04/24/2008 @ 12:42pm | ignore this person

    tell it to the Columbine and Virginia Tec parents and other survivors. are they losing any sleep over it.

    do you enjoy making swinish comments here? is that the only attention you get?

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/24/2008 @ 12:54pm

38. Has he stated directly that he was a neo-nazi or white supremist?

    Posted by ACOOK 04/24/2008 @ 10:19am

    what mask has shown you are but a few.

    and he has never denied any accusations, yet he will vehemently defend a point he made about reagan.

    go ahead, call me a nazi and see what happens.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 12:54pm

39. Do you feel you were right to say that?

    Posted by ACOOK 04/24/2008 @ 11:40am

    100% right.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 12:57pm

40. we are a more violent society than most. Let's not lose any sleep over it.

    Posted by EULER 04/24/2008 @ 12:42pm

    yeah, let's go kick some iranian ass!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 1:00pm

41. Posted by ACOOK 04/24/2008 @ 11:01am

    The funniest thing about this to me ACOOK is that Mark is the biggest hypocrite on here. He has been one of the biggest Obama is a racist spreaders there is on this website. However he will then say we need the Jim Crow laws back and Hitler had the right idea. He will condemn Reverend Wright for being a racist and then when it comes to white people he said anyone who isn't a racist is a fool. He is a hypocrite of the first order. He has no real convictions and no real beliefs. I respect the right to voice your opinions but you also have to respect the right of those of us who don't like intolerant people to voice ours. Especially when some of us happen to be the people he is condoning the lynching of.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/24/2008 @ 1:02pm

42. (and other truisms from 1970 era shows).

    Posted by EULER 04/24/2008 @ 12:42pm

    i always knew your philosophy was based on "pink lady and jeff".

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 1:03pm

43. ultimately its just another sign of our societal collapse, imo...

    we're like rome in the third century - at the height of our power and rotten to the core. we'll throw our weight around for a while yet, but the glory days are drawing to an end. i think its the best thing for the world anyway considering our track record at the top.

    According to Joseph Tainter, in his book The Collapse of Complex Societies (1990), societies that inevitably collapse adhere to one or more of the following three models in the face of collapse:

    1. The Dinosaur: The best example is a large scale society in which resources are being depleted at an exponential rate and yet nothing is done to rectify the problem because the ruling elite are unwilling or unable to adapt to said changes. In such examples rulers tend to oppose any solutions that diverge from their present course of action. They will favor intensification and commit an increasing number of resources to their present plans, projects and social institutions.

    2. Runaway Train: An example would be a society that only functions when growth is present. Societies based almost exclusively on acquisition, including pillage or exploitation, cannot be sustained indefinitely. The society of the Assyrians and the Mongols, for example, both fractured and collapsed when no new conquests were forthcoming. Tainter argues that Capitalism can be seen as an example of the Runaway Train model as it requires whole economies, individual sectors, and companies to constantly grow on a three month basis. Current methods of resource extraction and food production may be unsustainable, however, the philosophy of consumerism and planned obsolescence encourage the purchase of an ever increasing number of goods and services to sustain the economy.

    3. House of Cards: In this aspect of Tainter's model societies that grow to be so large and include so many complex social institutions that they are inherently unstable and prone to collapse.

    hmmm...dinosaur, runaway train, house of cards...

    but eventually the hordes of imprisoned and enbittered will wise up to the true enemy and begin directing their violence on those who deserve it rather than on each other...or should i say, as well as each other.

    The British historian Arnold J. Toynbee, in his 12-volume magnum opus A Study of History, theorized that all civilizations pass through several distinct stages: genesis, growth, time of troubles, universal state, and disintegration.

    Toynbee argues that the breakdown of civilizations is not caused by loss of control over the environment, over the human environment, or attacks from outside. Rather, it comes from the deterioration of the "Creative Minority," which eventually ceases to be creative and degenerates into merely a "Dominant Minority" (who forces the majority to obey without meriting obedience). He argues that creative minorities deteriorate due to a worship of their "former self," by which they become prideful, and fail to adequately address the next challenge they face.

    He argues that the ultimate sign a civilization has broken down is when the dominant minority forms a "Universal State," which stifles political creativity. He states:

    " First the Dominant Minority attempts to hold by force--against all right and reason--a position of inherited privilege which it has ceased to merit; and then the Proletariat repays injustice with resentment, fear with hate, and violence with violence when it executes its acts of secession. Yet the whole movement ends in positive acts of creation--and this on the part of all the actors in the tragedy of disintegration. The Dominant Minority creates a universal state, the Internal Proletariat a universal church, and the External Proletariat a bevy of barbarian war-bands. "

    He argues that, as civilizations decay, they form an "Internal Proletariat" and an "External Proletariat." The Internal proletariat is held in subjugation by the dominant minority inside the civilization, and grows bitter; the external proletariat exists outside the civilization in poverty and chaos, and grows envious. He argues that as civilizations decay, there is a "schism in the body social," whereby:

    abandon and self-control together replace creativity, and truancy and martyrdom together replace discipleship by the creative minority. He argues that in this environment, people resort to archaism (idealization of the past), futurism (idealization of the future), detachment (removal of oneself from the realities of a decaying world), and transcendence (meeting the challenges of the decaying civilization with new insight, as a Prophet). He argues that those who Transcend during a period of social decay give birth to a new Church with new and stronger spiritual insights, around which a subsequent civilization may begin to form after the old has died.

    Toynbee's use of the word 'church' refers to the collective spiritual bond of a common worship, or the same unity found in some kind of social order.

    guess i should watch more american idol...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 04/24/2008 @ 1:04pm

44. Posted by CCCOMFO1 04/24/2008 @ 1:02pm

    i think herr death gets his jollies from seeing poor fools on this blog fall into his hateful gully.

    happy, maasch, frank, a few others......

    i bet he hopes when they agree about reagan, they can agree about mengele.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 1:05pm

45. Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 04/24/2008 @ 1:05pm | ignore this person

    i once had a discussion with a nice zen buddhist monk. we were talking about karma and when it was ok to lie and such. he said it was always a karmic dink for the unenlightened. i hit him with the "jews in the attic" dilema. you know, your neighbors got jews in yer attic, the nazis show up asking if you know where any jews are, and you lie through your teeth to the evil murderous goose stepping abominations.

    he agreed that one should lie in such a situation though its still a karmic dink...then qualified his statement by reminding me that we don't have many nazis these days...

    to which i replied that we are indeed chock full of "nazis". if not real live self realized nazis like markcanyon, potential "nazis" galore, the vast majority of whom would never consider themselves such nor label themselves as such.

    whats the difference between a nazi and a potential nazi when given the choice and opportunity to do evil?

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 04/24/2008 @ 1:13pm

46. "That sounds to me like he condones mobs lynching blacks in the street and he wants those days back."

    I don't know, perhaps you should ask him to clarify his position.

    "I don't know about you Cook but when I see someone say that it's a good thing to kill 6 million people I don't think that is an opinion to be excused."

    You mean when I hear people say such things, should I call them neo-nazis or admonish them for being unsympathetic? You say opinions such as these should not be excused and yet the left is more than willing to excuse bad behavior because of poor circumstances. Tell me, why is that?

    "Sure freedom of speech whatever doesn't mean I have to sit by an tolerate it."

    So, what are you going to do, beat the crap out of him for saying it?

    "I also happen to be one of those people is condoning the lynch mobs and Jim Crow laws for. Saying someone controversial and then condoning the murder ot 6 million jews and the enslavement and murder of blacks is a little bit more than a controversial opinion to me. It baffles me."

    Why does it baffle you?

    "Conservatives jumping all over Obama because Reverend Wright says God damn America, then you will defend and condone a person saying "good job killing jews" and lets lynch some more black people."

    A point to make here, I don't condone any of the words Mark Cannon or Dr. Wright have written or spoken, but I will defend their right to speak in an open forum. Isn't this what our great republic is all about?

    "Jesus Christ do morals mean anything? They don't only apply when it is politically expedient."

    I don't know, you tell me.

    Posted by CCCOMFO1 04/24/2008 @ 12:36pm

    Posted by ACook at 04/24/2008 @ 1:34pm

47. "by the way, hows your son?"

    Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 04/24/2008 @ 12:40pm

    He's OK for now. I'll tell you about it later.

    Posted by ACook at 04/24/2008 @ 1:37pm

48. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/24/2008 @ 1:30pm | ignore this person

    no - thats shrinkology and philosophy. economics is the study of how scarce resources are divided and utilized in a world of plentiful desire...

    but on another level perhaps we are saying the same thing.

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 04/24/2008 @ 1:38pm

49. gasoline, the new crack:

    http://tinyurl.com/582zxf

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 1:38pm

50. or maybe rice:

    http://www.reportonbusiness.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080424.wrrice24/BN Story/Business/home?cid=al_gam_mostview

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 1:40pm

51. "and he has never denied any accusations,"

    Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 04/24/2008 @ 12:54pm

    So it's OK to assume someone is because they have a different point of view? Have youi ever asked him out right if he is neo-nazi or white supremist?

    Posted by ACook at 04/24/2008 @ 1:42pm

52. For Toynbee's ideas in context, see development of religion. Because he took Judaism, Christianity, Islam and communism as a related group, and opposed them to Buddhism, his analysis was very different.

    "The coming of Buddhism to the West may well prove to be the most important event of the Twentieth Century." - AJT

    damn! i knew there was something great about that man!!!

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 04/24/2008 @ 1:42pm

53. Posted by ACOOK 04/24/2008 @ 12:28pm

    ACOOK, did I advocate VIOLENCE towards the little twerp?

    No...I merely said we should call (Or "label" if you like) a person who ENTHUSISASTICALLY ENDORSED the Holocaust of the Jews under the Nazis....by an appellation that seems to be a pretty definitive one.

    What IS it with you on this? Is it because MARKC occasionally makes "conservative" or "right-wing" comments that you agree with, that you feel like you have to defend him for his blatent anti-Semitism and Nazi Era sympathies, in a "black or white" "liberals vs conservatives" mentality?

    If somebody was a "neo-Stalinist" praising the totalitarian Communist state and calling the gulags and show trials and EXECUTIONS of "enemies of the Soviet people" "a bright moment"...

    would you simply slough it off as "an opinion" and chastise those of us who would rightfully call them a "neo-Stalinist"???

    What would be your reaction if some liberal or leftist DEFENDED said comments with the defenses you've offered for CANYON and attacked those who labelled them a neo-Stalinist as "ignorant" and "arrogant"?

    or are you truly so "open-minded" that NOTHING is ever offensive enough for you to "label"?

    or is it that you just can't ever admit you are wrong?

    Posted by Mask at 04/24/2008 @ 1:44pm

54. Posted by CCCOMFO1 04/24/2008 @ 1:02pm

    I understand.

    Posted by ACook at 04/24/2008 @ 1:44pm

55. "You say opinions such as these should not be excused and yet the left is more than willing to excuse bad behavior because of poor circumstances. Tell me, why is that?"

    I don't do this. As many of your compatriots have figured generally with me the whole you must do this because your left argument doesn't work. I have opinions from both sides of the coin. I don't know why the left does it. I don't so I can't explain it.

    "Why does it baffle you?"

    The baffles me comment is apart of the portion below not the portion above. As in "it baffles me that conservatives..."

    "So, what are you going to do, beat the crap out of him for saying it?"

    No but admonishing him for it or calling it as we see it isn't beating him him up. You are sitting here insulting Mask for insulting Mark. Saying Mark is free to voice is opinion. So is Mask.

    Posted by ACOOK 04/24/2008 @ 1:34pm

    If you are fighting for Mark's right to make the comments he makes why don't you also fight for Mask's right to insult him? It's the same basic concept. All Mask is doing is insulting him directly while Mark insults indirectly by saying he thinks people deserve to die because they are Jewish or he thinks they should bring back lynch mobs so blacks like me can go back to being hung.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/24/2008 @ 1:45pm

56. Posted by ACOOK 04/24/2008 @ 1:42pm | ignore this person

    in my experience he always skirts the question or just does not answer.

    ie - he's a nazi. but like i said, i'm glad he's posting here. like you i think every demonic abomination has a right to express his/her opinion.

    also - he's great at drawing out unselfrealized fascists who dont know or dont care that he's a nazi...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 04/24/2008 @ 1:45pm

57. Have youi ever asked him out right if he is neo-nazi or white supremist?

    Posted by ACOOK 04/24/2008 @ 1:42pm

    yes.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 1:46pm

58. Economics is the study of human motivation; not desire.

    Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/24/2008 @ 1:30pm

    well, love IS expensive.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 1:47pm

59. Posted by ACOOK 04/24/2008 @ 1:44pm

    I understand your point of view entirely and usually I can adopt it. But the Jim Crow laws and the lynch mobs apply to me too. The problem I see is since people like him are usually the more fervent and loudest voices in the Republican movement I think most people think you are all like him. I know you are not. It bothers me that he is what represents a party that although I have points of contention with many of you, I think you like the left have many good ideas too. On top of that since he is the most fervent and loudest voice he is what a lot of people think America is.... I don't want a bigot representing me just because he feels the need to scream and I feel the need to converse.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/24/2008 @ 1:52pm

60. Economics is the study of human motivation; not desire.

    Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/24/2008 @ 1:30pm

    Desire creates motivation. If you don't desire something you aren't motivated. Therefore it becomes a study in desire. Not to sound argumentative just pointing that out.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/24/2008 @ 1:53pm