Friday, February 29, 2008

MY Hero

Quaker Dave's hero supports my candidate.

I think mine would too. Sometimes I hear him speaking from the grave to prove that there is no such thing as death and that the human spirit lives eternal. I am suspicious of all leaders on principle and this goes for heroes, too. Something about the concept smacks of vanity and idolatry, but I make an exception for Mr. Debs.

My most favorite quote of his sums up my philosophy neatly, which is why it adorns the first page of this blog and always will.

Here are a few more words.

  • I have no country to fight for; my country is the earth; I am a citizen of the world.

  • Of course, Socialism is violently denounced by the capitalist press and by all the brood of subsidized contributors to magazine literature, but this only confirms the view that the advance of Socialism is very properly recognized by the capitalist class as the one cloud upon the horizon which portends an end to the system in which they have waxed fat, insolent and despotic through the exploitation of their countless wage-working slaves.

  • As a rule, large capitalists are Republicans and small capitalists are Democrats, but workingmen must remember that they are all capitalists, and that the many small ones, like the fewer large ones, are all politically supporting their class interests, and this is always and everywhere the capitalist class.

  • Foolish and vain indeed is the workingman who makes the color of his skin the stepping-stone to his imaginary superiority. The trouble is with his head, and if he can get that right he will find that what ails him is not superiority but inferiority, and that he, as well as the Negro he despises, is the victim of wage-slavery, which robs him of what he produces and keeps both him and the Negro tied down to the dead level of ignorance and degradation.

  • The man who seeks to arouse prejudice among workingmen is not their friend. He who advises the white wage-worker to look down upon the black wage-worker is the enemy of both.

  • For myself, I want no advantage over my fellow man, and if he is weaker than I, all the more is it my duty to help him.
The working class must be emancipated by the working class.
  • Woman must be given her true place in society by the working class.

    Child labor must be abolished by the working class.

    Society must be reconstructed by the working class.

    The working class must be employed by the working class.

    The fruits of labor must be enjoyed by the working class.

    War, bloody war, must be ended by the working class.

  • Now my friends, I am opposed to the system of society in which we live today, not because I lack the natural equipment to do for myself, but because I am not satisfied to make myself comfortable knowing that there are thousands of my fellow men who suffer for the barest necessities of life. We were taught under the old ethic that man's business on this earth was to look out for himself. That was the ethic of the jungle; the ethic of the wild beast. Take care of yourself, no matter what may become of your fellow man. Thousands of years ago the question was asked: "Am I my brother's keeper?" That question has never yet been answered in a way that is satisfactory to civilized society.

    Yes, I am my brother's keeper. I am under a moral obligation to him that is inspired, not by any maudlin sentimentality, but by the higher duty I owe to myself. What would you think of me if I were capable of seating myself at a table and gorging myself with food and saw about me the children of my fellow beings starving to death?

  • If it had not been for the discontent of a few fellows who had not been satisfied with their conditions, you would still be living in caves. Intelligent discontent is the mainspring of civilization.

    Progress is born of agitation. It is agitation or stagnation.

  • When we are in partnership and have stopped clutching each other's throats, when we have stopped enslaving each other, we will stand together, hands clasped, and be friends. we will be comrades, we will be brothers, and we will begin the march to the grandest civilization the human race has ever known.

  • I never had much faith in leaders. I am willing to be charged with almost anything, rather than to be charged with being a leader. I am suspicious of leaders, and especially of the intellectual variety. Give me the rank and file every day in the week. If you go to the city of Washington, and you examine the pages of the Congressional Directory, you will find that almost all of those corporation lawyers and cowardly politicians, members of Congress, and misrepresentatives of the masses — you will find that almost all of them claim, in glowing terms, that they have risen from the ranks to places of eminence and distinction. I am very glad I cannot make that claim for myself. I would be ashamed to admit that I had risen from the ranks. When I rise it will be with the ranks, and not from the ranks.

  • The Man of Galilee, the Carpenter, the workingman who became the revolutionary agitator of his day soon found himself to be an undesirable citizen in the eyes of the ruling knaves and they had him crucified.

  • Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind then that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it; and while there is a criminal element, I am of it; and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free.

  • It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.

  • When great changes occur in history, when great principles are involved, as a rule the majority are wrong.

  • That man with the burning eyes actually believes that there can be such a thing as the brotherhood of man. And that's not the funniest part of it. As long as he's around I believe it myself.- Spoken about Debs upon his death.

Answers to Yesterday's Quiz

Look here, for the questions.

1. C
2. D
3. C
4. B
5. C
6. D
7. A
8. C
9. B
10. D
11. B
12. D
13. A
14. B
15. C
16. D
17. A
18. B
19. A
20. B

Thanks to all who participated! You all did rather well!

Wishful Thinking from Clinton Supporters

Sorry, try again, Susan.

This sounds like wishful thinking from a woman who has already served as Clinton apologist and unabashed Hillary supporter. What you are really saying is that since Hillary has proved herself largely impotent to slow Obama's momentum, the jury's still out on whether McCain and the GOP can accomplish the same, so then that the only chance for Hillary to win will be a negative media backlash. And yes, that would probably succeed except for the fact that it's an implausible scenario unless Obama says something extremely offensive on the record or something extremely degrading is discovered about him, which although possible, is highly unlikely to occur.

Now, I will concede you this. The press will turn on Obama eventually, but my feeling is that a more realistic timeframe would be closer to 4-6 months after being elected, assuming he wins the Democratic nomination and defeats John McCain in November in the General. No one is friends with the press for long and the very people who shout your hosannas at the outset will be the first to dance on your grave. But again, this sounds like spite and bile from a person whose candidate is not longer Miss Scarlett at the ball. Listen, Hillary, you ain't never gonna be a size 6 again, okay?

Do not forget that Bill Clinton enjoyed a brief honeymoon lasting roughly the same period of time from the press and that it petered out very shortly, particularly after the Hillarycare backlash of 1993 which arguably cost the Democrats control of both the House and the Senate a year later.

An Examination of UK Criticisms of Obama

It is often interesting for me to examine the attitudes towards our politics from a British perspective. The UK perception is indicative of a European mentality to an extent, though it would be a vast oversimplification to assume that the UK provides a patently and exclusively European viewpoint. Any critique it makes is filtered first through a nationalistic lens, then a continental one.

Consulting the British media as a source of supreme veracity in all matters caters to the Anglophilic tendencies among many of us on the American left, but it proves to often not be any more objective than our own media. Those who believe that the mainstream media in any country has a sort of fundamental objectivity ought to reconsider that sentiment strongly. British media presents a partisan bias, albeit one different from our own with its own unique sense of skewed perspective.

Consider this. The British right condemns Obama for many of the same reasons as does the American right, but phrases it slightly differently. Conservatives from the UK lambast Obama for being a proponent of French socialism, which is a revealing sentiment because it underscores a historic Francophobic sentiment in Great Britain which has persisted longer than our country has been a sovereign nation or even been compromised of immigrants from Europe. The commonality among the US and UK right is a patent fear of socialism and socialistic excess. The reality is that even if Obama was in fact some sort of closet socialist, he does not begin to have the power to transform this nation into a socialistic state. No presumptive President, Hillary Clinton included, has that sort of political clout or would stand a snowball's chance in hell of accomplishing such a thing. Americans have historically been very critical of increased taxation and increasing governmental oversight in their own lives, particularly when proposed from the left. The only way they would ever concede to socialism is if it was pushed from the GOP in some sort of stealth manner. And if the current administration should be credited for anything, it has increased the role of government, albeit not in a socialistic fashion, but rather a fascist sense.

Obama: is America ready for this dangerous left winger?

Among the left, the UK left lambasts Americans, particularly conservative Americans, for still adhering to a sense of racial prejudice that is evidenced by the very fact that we would even still be contemplating racial dynamics in this day and age. Furthermore, that this blatant racism could even be seriously utilized as a means of discrediting another candidate is the larger point they raise.

Barack Obama hits back After Hussein Taunts

Their argument essentially boils down to "Why Is This Even Still An Issue?" and it casts a shadow of skepticism that a brutal nation like ours could ever really cast aside the issue of race when selecting its President. That is a notion belied by those of us on the left, even those of us who support Hillary Clinton.

Underneath this critique is a damning indictment that raised a valid point. If Obama were to run in an EU country, his policies would seem center-right, not liberal or left-leaning. These criticisms have some merit because Obama has thus far positioned himself, arguably, as a more moderate leftist and not the flaming tax and spend, expanded government, liberal the GOP would have us believe and will continually assert over the course of the next seven months.

Obama yesterday drew a sharp attack from Trevor Phillips, an arguably influential black British figure, whose politics have been criticized as far-right by critics. Though condemned by many Britons, these criticisms reveal a skepticism among conservative UK blacks that is two part. a) That he is a conciliatory black figure who has decided to integrate into white society rather than fight for a unique black perspective in racial politics and b) a cynicism that Obama is a mere charlatan who is no more authentic and genuine than the husband of the woman he is running against in the Democratic primary.

Obama victory will prolong US racial divide

What can be safely drawn from all of these perspectives is a decided sense of sour grapes, regardless of political allegiance. Much to the dismay of the rest of the world, we are the most powerful country on the face of the earth, with the most powerful economy, and the biggest guns. We have been for quite some time now and these attitudes have grown rather entrenched in our neighbors across the ocean. Though it is interesting to contemplate their particular perspective and give credit and contemplation to the points they raise, what we should first understand is that they are just as biased as we are. Their base prejudices and assertions about us may or may not be any less potent than our critique of them. The truth lies somewhere in between and even that is clouded by every individual's take. Even I writing this out to you have my own agenda and ulterior motive, though I would safely entertain that mine is probably more in line with yours.

Thursday, February 28, 2008

The Latest GOP Fear Bomb

Haven't you heard the new one? Barack Obama hates white people and, if elected, we should expect this nightmare scenario.

Yes, it is sad in this day and age, some might actually find this plausible.

Could You Pass My Quiz?

Today I am making out the quiz for next week's lesson in my class, which covers roughly the period 1835-1861 in American History. I will paste in the results for all of you and if you wish, you can test your aptitude.

Answers will be posted tomorrow. :-)

MULTIPLE CHOICE. Choose the one alternative that best completes the statement or answers the question.

1) Which product became the Old Northwest's major cash crop for the northern market? 1) ______

A) hogs

B) corn

C) wheat

D) soybeans

2) The revolutions of 1848 were driven by: 2) ______

A) the Protestant clergy.

B) peasant laborers.

C) high-ranking army officers.

D) the working and middle classes.

3) What happened immediately after General Santa Anna was
elected as president of Mexico?
3) ______

A) Tejanos immediately attacked his forces at Mexico City.

B) Texas declared it was part of the United States.

C) He overturned the liberal constitution and became a dictator.

D) Sam Houston crossed the Rio Grande with American forces.

4) In an intriguing race for the U.S. Senate in Illinois, Abraham
Lincoln was opposed by:
4) ______

A) John C. Fremont.

B) Stephen A. Douglas.

C) James M. Mason.

D) John C. Breckinridge.

5) Before 1850, who was the dominant power on the north
and central Great Plains?
5) ______

A) the United States cavalry

B) the Cherokees who had been removed from their homeland

C) the warrior-hunters of the Sioux tribe

D) whites who had migrated from the South

6) In the last days of his presidency, James Buchanan was: 6) ______

A) criticized for firing southern cabinet members.

B) successful at stalling secessionist fever.

C) responsible for the secession of all Upper South states.

D) ineffective and powerless.

7) The Mexican army annihilated defenders at: 7) ______

A) the Alamo and Goliad.

B) San Jacinto and Mexico City.

C) the Nueces River and the Alamo.

D) the Alamo and San Jacinto.

8) As a novel with social power, Uncle Tom's Cabin
succeeded because it:
8) ______

A) portrayed southerners as virtuous defenders of freedom.

B) included symbolism which was difficult to interpret.

C) presented real characters and not just abstract arguments.

D) never directly addressed the moral issues of slavery.

9) The Southwest Ordinance allowed slavery in all territories south
of the __________ River.
9) ______

A) Missouri

B) Ohio

C) Colorado

D) Platte

10) In the controversial Dred Scott decision, the Supreme Court
declared that:
10) ______

A) blacks were only free when they entered free territory.

B) only the national government could end slavery in new territories.

C) Dred Scott had the right to sue, but not the right to freedom.

D) blacks were not citizens of the United States.

11) Whites had originally been reluctant to settle on the
western plains because:
11) ______

A) land on the western plains was extraordinarily expensive.

B) they believed the region had little potential for agriculture.

C) they felt guilty about displacing eastern Indians into that region.

D) they had no desire to see the spread of freehold farming.

12) In January of 1848, gold was discovered in: 12) ______

A) Florida.

B) New Mexico.

C) Texas.

D) California.

13) Mestizos were usually a mixture of: 13) ______

A) Indian and Spanish.

B) African-American and European-American.

C) Indian and African-American.

D) Spanish and English.

14) Anti-immigrant, anti-Catholic sentiment gave
rise to this party.
14) ______

A) the Democratic Party

B) the Know-Nothing Party

C) the Anti-Masons

D) the Republican Party

15) In the early part of the nineteenth century, the largest
concentration of Indians in the Southwest region was in:
15) ______

A) New Mexico.

B) Arizona.

C) California.

D) Utah.

16) The Wilmot Proviso proposed that: 16) ______

A) the property of western slaveholders should be protected.

B) the gag rule should be restored in Congress.

C) slavery should be ended by the turn of the century.

D) free labor should exist in territory gained in the Mexican War.

17) Which practice did settlers bring to Texas that was
illegal under Mexican law?
17) ______

A) slavery

B) commercial farming

C) the sale of huge tracts of land

D) land speculation

18) John Brown hoped that his raid on Harper's Ferry, Virginia
18) ______

A) cause the government to support the Lecompton Constitution.

B) start a slave rebellion in the state of Virginia.

C) cause the resignation of James Buchanan.

D) force governments of the South to voluntarily emancipate slaves.

19) Juan Cortina instigated a rebellion in 1859: 19) ______

A) because Mexicans in American territory were abused by white Americans.

B) that was ultimately successful.

C) that eventually led to the Mexican-American War.

D) in northern New Mexico.

20) The Republicans became the clear favorite in the
presidential election of 1860 when:
20) ______

A) Stephen Douglas refused to run.

B) the Democratic Party split into sectional factions.

C) James Buchanan supported Abraham Lincoln.

D) William Seward defected from the Democratic Party.

Hillary Haters Don't Need A Sexist Crutch

What she said, and said better.

Quakerism: A Study in Contradictions

I have just finished reading Thomas Hamm's 2003 book The Quakers in America, which for recently convinced friends such as me was quite an eye-opening experience.

What I see as the most substantial challenge to the Friends movement is that it is no monolithic entity. Though all Quakers ascribe to the same basic methodology, the presence of very Conservative Evangelicals counterbalanced with very liberal Unprogrammed Friends (of which I am the latter) presents a unique roadblock to unity. However, let me also argue that the diversity of Quakerism has a means of grounding and is far more akin to that of a traditional Protestant denomination. There are liberal Methodists and liberal Episcopalians and their more conservative brethren. As such, I feel like achieving any sort of mass unity between Quakers is likely implausible and impractical.

If I had to guess, I would place myself somewhere on the left-leaning continuum. Unabashedly liberal but skeptical of radicalism in any form. Liberal in some areas, and more moderate on others. Committed to social justice, but cautious that social justice can be divisive, though I agree it has a deeply moral and spiritual component to it. This places me more in line with Pastoral and Unprogrammed Friends than our Evangelical and Conservative brethren. But lest that seem as though I am conceding defeat, let me qualify what I am saying more firmly.

Quakers have many strengths, not least of which is name-recognition and our devotion to many important causes now lauded by the mainstream, not least of these is our historic support for Abolition, Women's rights, and Civil Rights. In recent times, we Friends have fractured and split and shrank in number much the same ways many liberal Protestant denominations have. Acknowledging that the world we live in is very different and that society at large has taken on a much more secular posture, I see us with two options. Either we change with the times or fight upstream and return to the past. I believe the former option is much more sound.

Moreover, I think it is imperative that all historically liberal Protestant faiths address this issue and there is growing evidence that reformers among many are quite willing and capable to do so. I do not have any pie-in-the-sky expectations and I expect denominational loyalty to trump common purpose every time. In conceding this point, however, let me add that I believe it is up to a new generation of believers to propose solutions for his/her own unique spiritual group. These are not unifying times. These are times which will see us increasing split and co-divided amongst ourselves, but my true focus is in growth, and growing in a way that is simultaneously orderly and refrains from overt attempts to convert. It is a focus that I think should start from the bottom up, rather than the top down. I believe it is imperative that the change should start from within ourselves first, our home church, congregation, fellowship, or meeting second, and then the larger denominational world last of all.

In that spirit, I encourage us to make alliance with other faith groups in our region, including the members of our own numbers. So often membership in a liberal Protestant group is an experience akin to an isolated oasis, where all concerns are focused inward, rather than outward towards the greater world behind the four walls of where we worship. To me, finding a spirit of common purpose will be its own reward and as we increase our networking ability, converts will follow. One should not underestimate the sound policy of leading by example and leading by the example of Jesus. I see no Biblical record in his words that placed focus on bringing souls to the world by force or by coercive measures, rather his approach was more subliminal. If we hold that each individual has free will, and we lift that doctrine up and let freedom of choice be sacrosanct, then I firmly believe we will see results. I am not expecting a raging river of swelled growth, seats in pews swelling, and monetary donations on the uptick. But what I am expecting is a renewed devotion to reaching out to our fellows in the ways we best deem necessary.

Change is a potent force in humanity. We have a paradoxical relationship with it. On one hand, many of us demand it, but on the other hand, many of us are slow to warm to it and may openly resist reform even when it is for our own best interest. Let us then strive to understand the challenges we face, with our eyes, minds, and hearts open and strive for the good of all. Let us challenge ourselves to think communally, rather than individually, and in doing so realize that the Kingdom of God exists within each of us.

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Stuff White People Like

Shameless plug here.

The website devoted written for and devoted to rich, entitled white people.

Wednesday Song

The Twentieth (and Final) Debate?

Those expecting a knockout punch from either candidate last night were sorely disappointed. Though there were a few contentious moments, particularly at the outset, Obama declined the opportunity to attack her head-on or launch direct attacks to her sometimes caustic rebuttals. A wise strategy, to be sure, but a disappointing one for those of us who crave confrontation and negative attacks.

The impact was that of a released pressure valve for what had increasingly grown bitter and mean-spirited between both campaigns. Obama played the high ground again, a tactic that has served him well during the course of the campaign and continues to be his best defense against an increasingly emboldened offensive from Team Clinton and Team McCain. At the outset, I thought this was a strategy doomed to fail, because it does not cater to that side of human nature which relishes throw-downs, gotchas, and blood lust. However, it is proving to be a more civilized approach which renders his campaign increasingly better and better able to deflect attacks and seem above the fray.

The theme of Obama's delivery might well of been that of desiring to seem Presidential. If that was the intent, he succeeded. Let us not be distracted from the key issue. The key issue now is who can defeat John McCain and the GOP in November. They key is who can unify rather than polarize. The key is who can pull together the largest coalition while not isolating and emboldening the other side.

Hillary Clinton's final pleas were a transparent play to shore up her last remaining base of support, white women. She said that electing the first woman president would be a sea change in policy. As I have mentioned before on this site, the implication of such a statement is that somehow women could do it better. I disagree with that strongly because if we are truly set on thinking in those terms, and true gender equality is what we favor, then we ought concede that women are equally as capable of making mistakes and the same ones that men have made. A cursory glance across the pond at our friend and neighbor the U.K. proves that ten years of Margaret Thatcher as Prime Minister did not prevent her from being less likely to be just as fallible as any male from serious mistakes, lapses of judgment, and popular opinion. Though she was a popular figure in the Conservative party, she was utterly reviled by the left and by Labour. By the end, she was driven out of power not by her opposition, but by massive popular backlash and a coup from within her own party who both were desperate to end her extensive tenure in office.

Perhaps this is the fairer comparison. Women might be inclined to rule differently while in power, but it would certainly be a fairy tale and belief in celestial choirs to think they have some sort of purity of infallibility. This is a holdover from the Victorian ideal, a long antiquated concept that somehow women had a superior edge on men from the standpoint of moral decency, a nuturing demeanor, should remain the keeper of home and hearth, and were thus unfit to toil in the brutality of a man's world. But as Senator Obama pointed out, regarding her claims to include eight years of First Lady as part of her oft-quoted thirty five years of experience, you cannot have it both ways. You cannot take credit for the ways in which your gender supposedly has an advantage, and then also disregard the reality that a woman in power would quickly prove herself to be quite human indeed if she held the highest office in the land.

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

In Support of a Fellow Blogger and Friend

Feel better, Dr. Zaius!

As we Quakers say, I am holding you in the light!

Monday, February 25, 2008

Hillary Clinton and the Death of Second-Wave Feminism

Hillary Clinton's increasingly desperate attempts to undermine Barack Obama, resorting to negative, harshly condemning, and snide put-downs are creating a backlash among Democratic voters and the entire electorate as a whole. Put into the context of the current phase of the race, these attacks are revealed as transparently designed merely to rip Obama to shreds in the futile hopes that somehow she can cast enough doubts among his supporters to effectively throw their support behind her. I was willing to tolerate Saturday's first volley, in which she called Obama to the carpet for his condemnation of her universal health care plan and his criticism of NAFTA.

However, the last straw for me was her rant yesterday in Rhode Island.

None of the problems we face will be easily solved. Now, I could stand up here and say lets just get everybody together, lets get unified." Clinton continued, "the sky will open, the light will come down celestial choirs will be singing, and everyone will know that we should do the right thing and the world will be perfect. Maybe I'm just lived a little long but I have no illusions about how hard this will be. You are not going to wave a magic wand and make the special interests disappear."

That's is a particularly unwise strategy because it directly labels all Obama supporters as delusional and represents a significant change in political discourse. She's not just attacking her opponent, but she's attacking his supporters, and that's is no way to win friends and influence people.

But these tactics are also causing a backlash, perhaps not as easily comprehended, in the feminist community. Her few remaining supporters are socially active women who out of a sense of indignation and sour grapes have fallen over themselves defending her latest rants as somehow empowering and indicative of a double standard against women when they go on the attack. Even Tina Fey on the latest edition of SNL heavily implied that there was something empowering about supporting a female candidate who dared to stand up against Patriarchy.

"Bitch is the new Black", she proclaimed, as though "bitch" should be seen as some badge of honor given to all women who forget that resorting to mean-spirited tactics of any kind is hardly any cause for celebration. Instead of men acting like fools, we now have women who act like fools. Negative attacks like these are never endearing, no matter what gender a person happens to be.

As an Obama supporter AND feminist, I find this sort of misguided logic deeply offensive. For one, it implies that feminism and supporting someone other than a female candidate are mutually exclusively. For another, it attempts to reclaim some intrinsically negative epithet assuming that anyone who calls Hillary Clinton "a bitch" must be acting out of some spirit of sexist critique. I certainly do wish we could get to the point where we could denote mean-spirited people and mean-spirited attacks for what they are, without attempting to spin them out as some mark of sticking it to the system.

It's time to call a spade a spade.

A mean man is a prick or a bastard.

And a mean woman is a bitch.

But is the term "prick" or "bastard" somehow pejorative of all men altogether, or only men? Or maybe we should make it so that these are more egalitarian terms that lambast men and women equally. Or maybe we should apply "bitch" equally across the spectrum so that it spreads more loathing and more "empowerment" to more people and both genders. Let's all be equal-opportunity haters who do not discriminate our hate based on race, creed, color, or gender. Let's rejoice in all who wield their authority without giving a thought to tact or getting along with other people.

As though somehow hate was a good thing. As though somehow we should take pride in being feared, loathed, and despised. As though compromise and good sportsmanship have some kind of double standard to them by which women get a free pass because they're being "assertive". If Barack Obama had been down in the polls at this time and had resorted to negative attacks, I doubt he'd have anyone in his corner and I'm pretty sure that "empowering" would not have been among the words used to describe his tactics.

There comes a time when you can play semantical games only so long and Hillary Clinton has in the past two days proven herself not "a bitch", as though that is something to be proud of, but desperate, petty, vindictive, snide, and spiteful.

These are all adjectives that when applied to men are just as condemning.

If you want to dig for sexism, you'll find it anywhere, particularly if you are looking to be offended. Hence we have the fallacy of second-wave feminism. Hence we have the fallacy of any movement that seeks to lift all people up when all it really does is subvert the paradigm and assign the same illogical thinking except this time with women in a dominate role. I think if women were in control of the world that they would probably make many of the same mistakes that men do. This is why I simply do not understand the argument that "it's time for a woman because a woman could do it better". Gender by itself has no sense of purity. Women have lauded lots of important causes but women have also proven themselves utterly human and inclined to make the same mistakes as men and throw their support behind the same evil causes. You'll find that women played a large hand in abolition and you'll also find they played a
large role in advancing Nazism.

A subsequent generation of women running for elective office would be wise to learn from the mistakes of the second-wave feminists. A subsequent generation of women would be wise to learn that playing the gender card and manipulating popular opinion based on perceived sexism, which while justified in some instances, can just as easily be used to score political points and win cheap sympathy. This reflects badly on all of us, not just women.

In summary, Clinton got out foxed politically and now she's resorting to increasingly more desperate tactics that make her seem in my opinion, not like a "bitch", but a sore loser.

Saturday, February 23, 2008

The Last Word

Just ignore her. Paying attention just encourages her.

One Final Note

I am over at The American Street today, if anyone's curious. :-)

Question of the Hour

particularly if there are superdelegates to win and lobbyist money to be used to win elections.

Saturday Song

Portishead were the first self-proclaimed trip-hop band. This single "Sour Times" was the their only significant hit in the US, though they were very popular in their native UK and Europe for a while. Portishead sold 150,000 copies of their first album in the U.S. back in those long ago days of 1994 but failed to capitalize on this for the long run. This is primarily due to the fact that they released only one truly quality album, Dummy, and waited three years before releasing a follow up.

Beth Gibbon's sexy vocals are counterbalanced by jazz guitar flourishes and a hip-hop beat. Skillfully combining three seemingly disparate genres was the group's key to success.

Friday, February 22, 2008

Throwing the Gender Card From the Deck

Susan Estrich refers to The G Word in this analysis.

The problem that dare not speak its name, as feminist crusader Betty Friedan put it, is the best way to explain what she is saying.

There are two major problem with Estrich's analysis.

1. We do need to have a serious analysis about gender and its effects upon society, however, phrasing it in terms of men versus women has proven to be highly ineffective and counter-productive.

2. Gender is a construct that has never been as easily defined as racism. You can criticize Barack Obama for not being black enough, the implication that he is an Uncle Tom and not credibly black enough to be taken seriously. But you can hardly use that same line of thinking to criticize Hillary Clinton for being not woman enough. That implies that she is somehow too weak to be taken seriously if she shows herself for what she is, a woman.

Nor can you flip it around and say that she's not man enough either, because that's an implication that she has to pass as something other than the gender she was born with.

Feminism has yet to overcome its core failing, and that has been to define itself in contemporary terms. And to a new generation, gender and its application and policy of division into us versus them is a dying idea. Subsequent generations of feminists (notice I did not add the caveat, men and women both) are realizing that gender is so very broad and so hard to pin down to specifics that I would accuse feminists not of having failed in what they tried to accomplished, but failed to keep stay current to serve changing times.

A new generation of us realize that gender does matter, but it matters in a totally different way in an totally different context. As we evolve, we're growing beyond men versus women. If a woman cries, then we feel sorry for her, we don't pile on her and reduce her to some sort of weakling. If Hillary Clinton had not been so hellbent on trying to seem like some man/woman combination and had let her true self shine, then she would be the nominee. We have progressed far enough that no one except for a few true bigots is going to accuse her of being somehow less than for being brave enough to show her true self. Likewise, Obama's race factors in but only to a rapidly dying dynamic of virulent racists who would be so behind the times as to think in such terms.

And by man/woman combination I mean that she pointedly made reference to the fact that she was the first woman running for President with a serious chance at winning the election. Obama, to his credit, did not make light of the fact that he has become the first black male with a serious chance to win the Presidency. And he has not framed himself in terms of some white/black hybrid. All along Clinton's supporters and she indirectly have framed their debate in terms of us verus them. Obama has tried to reach beyond gender and race.

I left this comment up on Daily Kos and received, as always negative criticism. The poster implied that MSNBC was sexist because it failed to throw its support behind Clinton. Bias may exist and it is certainly skewed towards Obama, but aside from one pundit, I do not think sexism is at the core of its criticism of her. Authenticity and the ability to believe what a person is saying goes far beyond identity politics.

But again, you'll never please everyone, and I know that well.

Thursday, February 21, 2008

It's Over (Big Surprise)

You can ride off in the sunset now with what remains of your dignity. The media decided that you deserved to have the last word.

So you had it. And it was about as forced and authentic as you are. So no, you do not get the right to gloat how you won one final utterly symbolic, and totally meaningless battle that was pitched to you underhanded in case you swing and miss. You won one rigged battle and lost the war.

And history is written by the victors, Mrs. Clinton.

I've seen Nazi rallies that were better choreographed.

By the way, Mrs. Clinton, the woman who photographed, choreographed, and directed this bit of stage drama was A WOMAN who has 198% more talent and skill than you will ever had. See that Senate seat I'm pointing at? That's yours, by the way. The people elected you to serve them. I recommend you be the best Senator you can possibly be.

May I advise you to stop referring to yourself as the first woman presidential contender and understand that you are a human being who happens to be second best. Gender is rapidly becoming utterly irrelevant to the debate, as is race, or at least defined in terms you could not possibly begin to understand.

You ran a campaign based on old ideas and it failed. Period.

Dear John McCain

May this be a warning from the prophet Thom. The enemy of my enemy is not my friend.

Can't get the stink off
He's been hanging round for days

Comes like a comet
Suckered you but not your friends

One day he'll get to you
And teach you how to be a holy cow

You do it to yourself, you do
And that's what really hurts
Is that you do it to yourself

Just you and no-one else
You do it to yourself
You do it to yourself

Don't get my sympathy
Hanging out the 15th floor
You've changed the locks three times
He still comes reeling through the door
One day I'll get you
And teach you how to get to purest hell

You do it to yourself, you do
And that's what really hurts
Is that you do it to yourself
Just you, you and no-one else

You do it to yourself
You do it to yourself

You do it to yourself, you do
and that's what really hurts
Is that you do it to yourself
Just you, you and no-one else

You do it to yourself
You do it to yourself, yourself, yourself.

Beyond Pretty Words and Good Speeches

Words are the beginning, but they are only as effective as the actions people take to put them into place. Calls to actions have fallen on deaf ears before, and if they fall on deaf ears long enough we call them eloquent, but empty rhetoric. We call them pretty words and good speeches.

Obama is correct. As he said in his victory speech in Texas, the President cannot do it alone. He is one man who gets blamed for everything that goes wrong and commended for some things that go right.

Those who do not dream or would project dreams as idle fantasies for fools are doomed to live our their own dreams of defeatism.

As Dwight Eisenhower put it, and as his Grandaughter echoed in her ringing endorsement of Senator Obama,

A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction...

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.

John McCain has some words, too, but those are not his words. He is no Eisenhower conservative. He is a war hawk disguised as a maverick who is on record stating we will be in Iraq for 50 to 100 years. He has been quite willing to bomb Iran and has gone hand in glove with The Decider in that respect.

I can think of many other eloquent words in American politics. Here are a few.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Thomas Jefferson, 1776

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Abraham Lincoln, 1863, Republican.
With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.

Abraham Lincoln, 1865, Republican.

Let us not wallow in the valley of despair.

I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.

This is our hope. This is the faith that I go back to the South with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

This will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with a new meaning, "My country, 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrim's pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring."

And if America is to be a great nation this must become true.

And when this happens, when we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"

Martin Luther King, 1963, American

What would happen to me from some our our sick white brethren?

Well, I don't know what will happen now. We've got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn't matter with me now, because I've been to the mountaintop.

And I don't mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over. And I've seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land!

And so I'm happy, tonight. I'm not worried about anything. I'm not fearing any man!

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord!!

Martin Luther King, 1968, American.

Eloquent, but empty rhetoric? That's up for you to decide. Only you can make dreams a reality. Not those who make speeches and lead nations. The American Dream is only real if we believe in it.

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Mutually Assured Success

Boxer Rebellion commended me (and I thank him for doing so), DarkBlack referenced this brilliantly in his own blog and I have been pointing it out to anyone within earshot today.

So let's spell out what we've all been collectively saying, with our own individual spin on the topic for quite some time. I've seen it all over the place, this underlying leitmotif. It's time. It's past time.

  • The Revolution will not be about whether a black man who until four months ago wasn't black enough can win a delegate fight against a white woman who apparently isn't woman enough.

  • The Revolution will not about be whether a war hero can defeat a political newcomer. The revolution will not be about whether a woman's place in politics is that of meek deference to that of her husband alongside a semantical argument about feminism and what it really means.

  • The Revolution will not be brought to you by anybody with 500 cameras and microphones on them at all times and it will NOT be analyzed by 50 talking heads, all wondering whether the future of the country is at stake.

  • The Revolution will not be brought to you by nude pictures of Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton and it will not be funded by corporations.

  • The Revolution will not make you feel better about yourself or make you automatically love everything your country does because you're a good patriotic American, by God.

The Revolution is now and it will be live.

Down By The Riverside

I’m going to lay down my sword and shield
Down by the riverside
Down by the riverside
Down by the riverside

Going to lay down my sword and shield
Down by the riverside
Ain’t going to study war no more

Ain’t going to study war no more
Ain’t going to study war no more
Ain’t going to study war no more
Ain’t going to study war no more
Ain’t going to study war no more
Ain’t going to study war no more

I’m going to put on my long white robe
Down by the riverside
Down by the riverside

Down by the riverside
I’m going to put on my long white robe
Down by the riverside

Ain’t going to study war no more
I’m going to talk with the Prince of Peace

-Spiritual, traditional.

Earth to John McCain

You've seen this video before, my apologies. I've been waiting for a while to spring it on the old man. He won't remember and it's not like he reads my blog anyway.

Hey you!
You've been around for
a while.

If you admit that you were

Then we'll admit that
we're right.

h/t Kevin Hayden at The American Street

Obama’s momentum in the Democratic race was apparent in McCain’s remarks, which included criticism of the Illinois senator’s sweeping rhetoric, but no obvious references to Clinton.

“I will fight every moment of every day in this campaign to make sure Americans are not deceived by an eloquent but empty call for change … that promises no more than a holiday from history and a return to the false promises and failed policies of a tired philosophy that trusts in government more than the people,” McCain said - a clear reference to Obama, whose soaring rhetoric has led critics, including McCain, to question whether he’s all style and no substance.

“Our purpose is to keep this blessed country free, safe, prosperous and proud,” McCain added.

He also keyed in on Obama’s statements about foreign policy and his willingness to meet with leaders of rogue nations, painting him as a novice who would put the country in danger.

“Will the next president have the experience?” he asked. “Or will we risk the confused leadership of an inexperienced candidate who once suggested bombing our ally, Pakistan, and suggested sitting down without preconditions or clear purpose with enemies who support terrorists and are intent on destabilizing the world by acquiring nuclear weapons?”

Last August, Obama had said if the United States had actionable intelligence about top terrorist targets in Pakistan and President Pervez Musharraf wouldn’t act, the U.S. would. That pledge set off ripples of resentment in the relationship between Washington and Islamabad, prompting Pakistani officials to warn against U.S. incursions into their country.

Obama’s statement was conditional: if Musharraf wouldn’t act after receiving actionable intelligence, the US would. Musharraf and his forces in this case DID NOT ACT, so the US did. Why is that different than what Obama suggested?

Also, Obama didn’t even cover whether he’d seek permission. But even if he had said he’d seek that first, what would McCain do if Perv said ‘no’? Would McCain let the target get away or bring him down anyway? Presidents make tough choices like that. Clinton did, while missing the targets.

In essence, yes, that’s what McCain said last night: Obama would take out the target, Bush did, and McCain wouldn’t.

And he claims his experience will keep us safer. Really. He said that with a straight face.

Let There Be More Light

As a Quaker, the word "light" resonates with me powerfully, particularly when it regards God's presence within a person and to a direct and personal experience of God. Quakers believe that God speaks to everyone, but that in order to hear his voice, one must learn to be still and actively listen for it; what Paul Lacout called a "silence which is active."

We believe not only that individuals can be guided by this Inner Light, but that Friends should meet together and receive collective guidance from God by sharing the concerns and leadings that he gives to individuals. It is a light that creates no deities or false prophets. It is a light that does not resort to blind optimism. It is a light that challenges each individual to listen and be awake.

So, let there be more light, America.

Far, far, far away
People heard him say

I will find a way
There will come a day

Something will be done.

Then at last the mighty ship
Descending on a point of flame
Made contact with the human race
and melted hearts

Now, now, now is the time

Time to be aware

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Wingnut Attack!

Yes, this is what we're up against, friends.

*rolls eyes*

Freedom's Enemies.

*coughs*. Let's just say this. The picture at the top of the screen of Osama Bin Laden next to Senator Obama. That clearly was not a mistake.

To Hillary Supporters Everywhere

All aboard! The sinking ship is leaving!

Dear Hillary,

On The Horizon

These are a few of the states I'm in
The first one Jersey, the second one thin

The nicest thing of mine is yours
So take a letter down
And send it to the highest bidder

On my team and my horizon
And you'll shine in that scene capitalizing
Now just the thing for me is baby let me be
Because someone's gotta sign on the dividing line

I'll be setting up my sights
To watch me programming all the glamor rights

The thing for you to do was leave
I'll see you when it's snowing
And give me back the master key

To my place on the horizon
And we'll shine all of time capitalizing
And you'll beat out all the odds of staying thin

Wouldn't you like to keep moving
Your life would be slightly improving ?

When you better come on by
And take a letter down
And send it out as sympathy

For my team on the horizon
And we'll shine all in that scene capitalizing
So just sign it, underline it

And represent the scapegoats
And we will blame it on you

'Cause someone had to state it
So I could imitate it masterfully


Comrade Kevin.

An Unseen Dynamic

This idea has been brewing and festering in my mind for quite some time but it wasn't until recently that I was able to put it into its proper context.

Some of the most vicious comments I have ever received I have received in recent days from Clinton supporters who are appalled at the very thought I could dare support Obama. Interestingly, all of these Pro-Clinton folks are baby boomers.

I am not speaking to every Baby Boomer. But I am speaking to some who would resort to vicious tactics and prove themselves rather hypocritical in the process.

The idea that I might be drinking the kool-aid implies that I am naive enough to be duped by a cult of personality. Let's not transpose mistakes here. Baby boomers are implying that we, Gen Xers, would sell into an idea without carefully contemplating what might happen if we fail. Baby boomers know all about selling into a dream only to find the dream revealed for a charade. YOU made that mistake. We did not. We probably would be, if anything, LESS inclined to be that way. You made us that way. We are the product of your successes and your failures. But we have also made our voices heard and our numbers are beginning to play a major role in how we frame the context of political debate and worldwide discourse. This is true in the media and it is true in the greater world outside.

Baby boomers critical of Obama and in support of Clinton as she is beginning to self-destruct and falter are projecting their own frustrations. It's true that in rough times, humans display a side of themselves that is not always admirable. Clinton's message of stay the course and ride the wave of inevitability was as stale as a 4 day old donut.

Generation Xers like myself are many things, but idealistic and dreamy eyed are not what we are: cynical, skeptical, untrusting. Those might be better adjectives. We are the generation of divorce, children of Watergate, children whose parents bought and sold into the idea of the 1960s, which promised peace, love, and kindness and accomplished none of the above. We languished in the dying embers of a dream deferred, imploded by its own impracticality.

So yes, Baby Boomers. You ARE your parents and you ARE what your parents said you are. But that's inevitable, because it's part of growing old and part of the aging process. In thirty years, we'll be right where you are today. And then we'll get to grumble as we are quickly becoming obsolete. So you have one of a few choices, Baby Boomers. Revise your ways to suit changing times, open your mind to accept new ways of thinking, or kindly get out of the way because you are holding up traffic. The myth you built around yourself and have perpetuated is quickly becoming evident to those of us who did not live in your time.

The People Will Live On

The people will live on.
The learning and blundering people will live on.
They will be tricked and sold and again sold
And go back to the nourishing earth for rootholds,
The people so peculiar in renewal and comeback,
You can't laugh off their capacity to take it.
The mammoth rests between his cyclonic dramas.

The people so often sleepy, weary, enigmatic,
is a vast huddle with many units saying:
"I earn my living.
I make enough to get by
and it takes all my time.
If I could do more for myself
and maybe for others.
I could read and study
and talk things over
and find out about things.
It takes time.
I wish I had the time."

The people is a tragic and comic two-face: hero and hoodlum:
phantom and gorilla-twisting to moan with a gargoyle mouth:
"They buy me and sell me... it's a game...
sometime I'll break loose...
Once having marched
Over the margins of animal necessity,
Over the grim line of sheer subsistence
Then man came
To the deeper rituals of his bones,
To the lights lighter than any bones,
To the time for thinking things over,
To the dance, the song, the story,
Or the hours given over to dreaming,
Once having so marched.

Between the finite limitations of the five senses
and the endless yearnings of man for the beyond
the people hold to the humdrum bidding of work and food
while reaching out when it comes their way
for the light beyond the prison of the five senses,
for keepsakes beyond and hunger or death.
This reaching is alive.
The panderers and liars have violated and smutted it.
Yet this reaching is alive yet
for lights and keepsakes.

The people know the salt of the sea
and the strength of the winds
lashing the cultural corners of the earth.
The people take the earth
as a tomb of rest and a cradle of hope.
Who else speaks for the Family of Man?
They are in tune and in step
with constellations of universal law.
The people is a polychrome,
a spectrum and a prism
held in a moving monolith,
a console of organ of changing themes,
a clavilux of color poems
wherein the sea offers fog
and the fog moves off in rain
and the labrador sunset shortens
to a nocturne of clear stars
serene over the shot spray
of northern lights.

The steel mill sky is alive.
The fire breaks white and zigzag
shot of a gun-metal gloaming.
Man is a long time coming.
Man will yet win.
Brother may yet line up with brother:

This old anvil laughs at many broken hammers.
There are men who can't be bought.
The fireborn are at home in fire.
The stars make no noise.
You can't hinder the wind from blowing.
Time is a great teacher.
Who can live without hope?

In the darkness with a great bundle of grief
The people march.
In the night, and overhead a shovel of stars for
keeps, the people march:
"Where to? what next?"

Carl Sandburg, 1936.

Me reading said poem, recorded last night before I went to bed.

Monday, February 18, 2008

Dedicated to Trolls Everywhere

To the Tune of "Mr. Reporter"
by The Kinks

Hey, Mr. Wingnut
How 'bout talking about yourself?

Do you like what you're doing,
Or is it that you can do nothing else?

Hey, Mr. Wingnut
I'll believe all that you put down.

I'll believe the sun is going up
Even though it's going down.

Hey, Mr. Reporter,
Don't you twist my words around.

I'll kill you, I won't let you
Distort my simple sound.

Hey, Mr. Wingnut
How 'bout talking about yourself?

Do you like what you're doing
Or is it that you can do nothing else?

Hey, Mr. Wingnut
How 'bout talking about yourself?

Do you like what you're doing
Or is it that you can do nothing else?

Did your daddy stop you playing
With your friends when you were young?

And is that why you run down
All the bloggers having fun

The reason I am morbid
Is because I read you every day.

You misquote all of the true things
Because they rub you the wrong way.

Hey, Mr. Wingnut
How 'bout talking about yourself?

Do you like what you're doing?
Or is it that you can do nothing else?

On Kool-Aid Drinking and Looking Beyond.

Check out what Blue Gal said On The Whole Obama Cult thing.

What she said, and said better.

I'm not drinking anyone's kool-aid. I know better. Obama gets a brief honeymoon period from me from now until the election in November, assuming he wins the Democratic nomination. After election, if that occurs, he gets 100 days to get something actually accomplished. If he does not, I will begin to grumble. He gets two months after that to get stuff done, and if he still hasn't gotten anything done by that point, then I'll really start screaming. I will not be the only one. That's called holding your elected officials accountable for their actions and their promises.

I felt the same way about the Congressional Elections of November 2006 and I will respond the same way to them if he acts the same way they did then and have acted up until this point.

Here's what Eugene Robinson said on Saturday about the actions of one Clinton, Bill and Clinton, Hillary.

What he said, and what goes along with what I said then.

Here's what Paul of Tarsus said,

“Love is patient; love is kind
and envies no one.

Love is never boastful, nor conceited, nor rude;
never selfish, not quick to take offense.

There is nothing love cannot face;
there is no limit to its faith,
its hope,
and endurance.

In a word, there are three things that last forever:
faith, hope, and love;
but the greatest of them all is love.”

Here's what Thom Yorke of Radiohead said,

Here's what I say to certain Kossacks.

I'm a reasonable man
Get off
Get off
Get off my case

After years of waiting
Nothing came

And you realize you're looking
looking in the wrong place

Sunday, February 17, 2008

How I'm Feeling Right Now

Avoid the 70's awful clothing style.

The Logical Song

When I was young,
it seemed that life was so wonderful,
A miracle, oh it was beautiful, magical.

And all the birds in the trees,
well they'd be singing so happily,

playfully watching me.

But then they send me away
to teach me how to be sensible,


And they showed me a world
where I could be so dependable,


There are times when all the world's asleep,
The questions run too deep
For such a simple man.

Won't you please,
please tell me what we've learned?

I know it sounds absurd
But please tell me who I am.

Now watch what you say
or they'll be calling you a radical


Won't you sign up your name,
we'd like to feel you're


a vegetable!

At night, when all the world's asleep,
The questions run so deep

For such a simple man.

Won't you please,
please tell me what we've learned?

I know it sounds absurd
But please tell me who I am.

Proving That the Masses Can Correctly Act in Their Own Best Interest