Missouri Governor Jay Nixon has activated the National Guard in an attempt to restore order in Ferguson after a week of protests.. Also, there’s a growing division within the Democratic party over how the U.S. should address the crises in Syria and Iraq. Then, how do you identify yourself socioeconomically?
Missouri calls up National Guard to Ferguson
Missouri Governor Jay Nixon has activated the National Guard in an attempt to restore order in Ferguson after a week of protests, including some violence and looting.
The weekend culminated in molotov cocktails, tear gas and civilian shootings on the streets, and off the streets the publication of an autopsy report showing Michael Brown was shot 6 times -- twice in the head -- by a Ferguson police officer.
The independent autopsy was ordered by Brown's family and conducted by the former chief medical examiner for New York City, Dr. Michael M. Baden. The U.S. Department of Justice will conduct its own autopsy of Brown. Eyewitness accounts vary of events leading up the shooting.
How will the National Guard change the policing on the streets of Ferguson? What can the public discern from Dr. Baden's autopsy report?
Guests:
Eugene O’Donnell, Professor of law and police science at John Jay College of Criminal Justice; former NYPD officer; former prosecutor in Kings County (Brooklyn)
Laurie Levenson, Professor of Law, Loyola Law School
What growing divisions within Democratic Party over Syria, Iraq mean for the party
There’s a growing division within the Democratic party over how the U.S. should address the crises in Syria and Iraq. It’s a division that’s pitting democrats like President Obama against more hawkish politicians such as Senator Bob Corker and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who’ve criticized the Obama administration’s more dovish approaches to foreign policy issues.
The latest fissure arguable began with an interview Clinton gave to The Atlantic, where she referred to earlier approaches to Syria under the Obama administration as a “failure.” Is this just a healthy debate that will strengthen the party or does this apparent intra-party fighting mark something more sinister that could have lasting political implications?
Guests:
Will Marshall, president, Progressive Policy Institute, a D.C.-based think tank
Brian Katulis, Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress, where his work focuses on U.S. national security policy in the Middle East and South Asia
Putting LAUSD’s school board elections in context
Only 8% of voters turned out to give George McKenna a victory in the 1st district school board election this week, but that vote could greatly impact the future of the roughly 640,000 students in the LAUSD.
Superintendent John Deasy no doubt would have preferred the politics on a school board favoring the charter reform movement, but McKenna’s win solidifies a 4-3 pro-teacher union school board and marks the second time in two years that a labor candidate has won against a well-funded charter reform candidate in an open seat.
So what happened to the influence of the charter reform movement? And from iPads to UTLA’s contract, what obstacles lie ahead? We’ll take a deeper look at the direction of LAUSD under a charter reform superintendent and a pro-labor school board.
Guests:
Annie Gilbertson, KPCC education reporter covering LAUSD
Fernando Guerra, Director of The Thomas and Dorothy Leavey Center for the Study of Los Angeles and Professor of Political Science, as well as Chicana/o Studies at Loyola Marymount University; SCPR Board of Trustees member
Alex Caputo-Pearl, president, UTLA
Gary Borden, Executive Director, California Charter Schools Association Advocates
Talking money and social class in the era of income inequality
Occupy Wall Street, the one percent versus the 99 percent, income inequality--these topics dominated the national conversation after the collapse of the US financial system in 2008. Six years since, the economy has slowly climbed out of the doldrums, but the narrative of wealth disparity has remained ingrained.
Reactions to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's recent gaffe about being "dead broke" after she and President Bill Clinton left the White House show just how hypersensitive the country has become when it comes to the topic of wealth--both for those who have acquired it and for those who haven't.
Clinton, of course, eventually apologized for her "inartful" remark, but it got us at AirTalk thinking about how difficult it is to talk money today. How do you identify yourself socioeconomically? Do you talk to your friends and colleagues about your socioeconomic status? How do you do approach the topic?
Guests:
Douglas G. Brinkley, Professor of History at Rice University and the author of many books, including “The Reagan Diaries” (Harper Perennial, 2009) and The Nixon Tapes: 1971-1972 (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2014), which he’s a co-author of
Amanda Clayman, a certified financial social worker and she blogs about financial matters at The Good, the Bad, and the Money
Questioning the profundity of America's Ivy League
As a former Yale professor, William Deresiewicz sat on an elite admissions committee that thoroughly raked student applications so much so that it left scars and bruises. The applicant needed extracurriculars with quality and quantity (more than six); top scores across categories; evidence of strong "PQs" (personal qualities); a prodigious skill in a niche area; and the undefined attribute of "leadership."
As he writes in his new book "Excellent Sheep," the last one particularly vexes Deresiewicz because he says it's become meaningless. The elite schools are churning out timid and self-serving "careerists," he argues, citing graduation statistics such as Harvard University's 2010 class — half of which lined up jobs in finance and consulting.
Before the meritocracy took hold, Deresiewicz said leadership had meaning among the American elite. He writes:
“The concept made demands. It meant devotion to the benefit of others, not yourself. It called for allegiance to ideals; a commitment to the stewardship of institutions; a code of public service that was something more than a commencement afterthought. The country was being placed in their care and they were expected to a hand it on in better shape than they received it.”
If that concept has changed, is it the fault of Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Stanford? What should those schools be doing differently?
Guest:
William Deresiewicz, Author, "Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life" (August 2014, Free Press); Deresiewicz is an essayist and critic.