tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37007796457618001332024-03-08T11:41:02.058-08:00The Samurai-Lawyer BlogSamurai(n.): a Japanese warrior, who was a member of the feudal military aristocracy.
<br>
<br>
Lawyer(n.): a person licensed to practice law; one who does battle in court for the rights of others.
<br>
<br>
<br>
Samurai-Lawyer:
<br>
<br>
1) (common n.): One who lives by the code of bushido, whether doing battle inside or outside of the court-room.
<br>
<br>
2) (proper n.): Hero of legend , supposedly sworn to protect the citizens of the East Bay from threats internal and external.Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-86511738540392638662015-08-11T22:37:00.000-07:002015-08-11T22:39:54.158-07:00Invisible Man, Revisited (In Which Our Hero Becomes An Obstacle Unseen)<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
It's
Tuesday night. Melissa and I are
scheduled to have dinner with a good friend; but, he has to cancel at the last
minute. We are disappointed, but then, we can still enjoy a sit-down dinner together.
Picking a place proves to be a more difficult endeavor than expected, as
our first choice has a ridiculous wait, and our second choice closes in ten
minutes. Finally, I suggest Honor Bar,
located in Emeryville. The place comes
to mind because it's where I last went to dinner with Jeff, who
had to cancel on us on this particular evening.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
We
pass the "Please Seat Yourself" sign that stands just before the
five-foot wide entryway, and begin to look for a table. It's a little crowded; but the table right by
the door appears to have just been left.
We're right next to the ATM, on the left side of the five-foot entrance;
but, it's the only table left, and it's serviceable. A waiter clears it for us, and says that he'll
be back to wipe it down.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
Minutes
pass. No waiter appears to take our
order. We wait a little longer. The table eventually gets wiped down; but
still, no one has come yet to ask us what we want. All around, everyone else seems either to be
ordering, or eating. Is this just a
simple oversight, or is something more sinister going on? I certainly hope I'm not being ignored. Maybe they think that I'm not going to be a
very good tipper? Am I going to have to
assert myself? How will that be
received? Oh… my anxiety's being
triggered. Breathe, John, breathe;
you're probably just hungry. </div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
These
thoughts occur, and are dismissed, in the span of a few breaths. By now, I have become accustomed to talking
myself down in this fashion. The reality
of being "other" in America is, you never know when micro-aggression
will strike. Like the Shaolin masters
populating classic Kung Fu movies, one must be prepared for social assault at the drop
of a hat. The downside, of course, is
the risk of tilting at windmills. Like,
for example, when you go to a restaurant like Honor Kitchen, which doesn't
really have conventional waiters and sections; you just order at the bar, or you
can flag down a waiter. This, our waiter
explains to us when he comes over a few moments later. He takes our order with aplomb, providing all
the useful information one wants a waiter to provide along the way. All is well, after all. We are content.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
We
sip our drinks, and wait for our food. A
curly-haired young man enters. He is
tall, and has a Ben Savage look about him.
He stands on the opposite side of the five-foot entryway, next to the
host's stand, looking around. Melissa
and I continue our conversation, talking of this, of that, and of my personal
favorite, the Other. After some time, I
look back towards the door. The young
man is still standing there. Is he
waiting to be seated? Might he have
missed the "Please Seat Yourself" sign? Perhaps he, like I a few minutes ago, is not
fully aware of how this place works. I decide to take action.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
I get to my feet
and cross over to the door, where he stands, waiting. "You just grab a seat where ever,"
I begin to explain. "You can order
at the bar, or from the waiters." </div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
"Thanks,"
he says, almost apologetically. "I
know; no, I'm actually looking for a place for two people two sit." He is waiting for a friend, it seems. As we begin to idly chat, I can feel that someone has
begun to approach from the right. My
back is turned mostly away from them; I am facing Ben Savage, who, in turn, is
standing at the host's stand, facing into the restaurant. Soon, the new person draws near enough that I can see
her out of the corner of my eye.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
"Excuse
me." Now she is standing directly
to my left. I turn to face her. I can see now that this is an elderly woman;
grey hair, red blouse, white sweater, glasses.
She looks at me expectantly.
Perhaps she, too, has a question about the restaurant?</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
"Well?"
she says. "Can I leave?" Her tone is not kind, or polite. She places the emphasis on "leave," suggesting that, because of something that I am doing, she is currently <b>not </b>able to
leave. I am completely nonplused. While I and Ben Savage were having a
conversation, this woman has walked directly up to me, in such a fashion as one might if one were
about to ask a question. Yet she now
seems to be demanding that I get out of her way? Why didn't she simply walk around? Did I mention that this entryway is five feet
wide?</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
I
do not move. I turn on the spot, so that
I can simultaneously look at the woman and at the remaining three feet of
space, which neither I nor Ben Savage am occupying, through which she may make
her means of egress. "Excuse me,
ma'am," I say; "but it seems that there is plenty of room for you to
walk around me." By the time I get
to "me," I am already watching her walk away; after all, true to my
word, she had about three feet of space to work with. "Have a nice night, ma'am," I tell her, knowing that she is not thinking
anything nearly so nice about me.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
Ben
Savage and I look at each other for a moment.
I can't remember who speaks first.
I know that all I can manage is "Was that?" And then I just stop. Because I don't know what I'm going to say
next. Ben Savage, luckily, intuits my
meaning. "Oh, no," Ben Savage
says, "that wasn't you. I don't
know what her problem was." Ben
Savage goes on to explain that he's actually the type of person that, in that
type of scenario, would give a little nudge with his elbow as he passes by, to
let someone know that they're being a little inconsiderate. "But no," Ben Savage finishes,
"you didn't do anything wrong."
I already suspect this, of course; but there is something gratifying
about hearing it come out of Ben Savage's mouth; a complete stranger whom I
have never met. I cannot recall being
more grateful for the presence of a stranger.
It's a small thing, and yet everything, when someone honors your
experience.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
I
sit back down with my wife, now deep in thought. Truly, here was a person who seemed to find
objectionable my very occupation of space!
This person felt empowered to walk directly up to me, in order to demand
to occupy (momentarily!) the space that I was occupying. Indeed, not only did she make this demand; at
the time, there was no need for it! The
fact that she ended up walking around me, without my having to move from the
spot, proved that. I found myself
staring at the doorway, over and over, asking myself whether it were possible
that there might be some illusion at work, and that the doorway was only two
feet wide. At
one point, my wife caught me staring at the entryway, instead of listening to whatever she was trying to tell me. I even think I measured at one point.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
I simply could not understand it. I found it baffling. What was going on in this woman's head, causing her to see an obstacle that wasn't there? What was it, truly, that she was seeing? And suddenly, I remembered this passage from <i>Invisible Man</i>, Ralph Ellison's seminal work on the 20th-century experience of the then-called Negro:</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
One
night I accidentally bumped into a man, and perhaps because of</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
the
near darkness he saw me and called me an insulting name. I sprang at</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
him,
seized his coat lapels and demanded that he apologize. He was a tall</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
blond
man, and as my face came close to his he looked insolently out of his</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
blue
eyes and cursed me, his breath hot in my face as he struggled. I pulled</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
his
chin down sharp upon the crown of my head, butting him as I had seen</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
the
West Indians do, and I felt his flesh tear and the blood gush out, and I</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
yelled,
"Apologize! Apologize!" But he continued to curse and struggle, and I</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
butted
him again and again until he went down heavily, on his knees,</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
profusely
bleeding. I kicked him repeatedly, in a frenzy because he still</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
uttered
insults though his lips were frothy with blood. Oh yes, I kicked him!</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
And
in my outrage I got out my knife and prepared to slit his throat, right</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
there
beneath the lamplight in the deserted street, holding him by the collar</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
with
one hand, and opening the knife with my teeth -- when it occurred to</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
me
that the man had not seen me, actually; that he, as far as he knew, was</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
in
the midst of a walking nightmare! And I stopped the blade, slicing the air</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
as
I pushed him away, letting him fall back to the street. I stared at him</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
hard
as the lights of a car stabbed through the darkness. He lay there,</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
moaning
on the asphalt; a man almost killed by a phantom. It unnerved me.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
I
was both disgusted and ashamed. I was like a drunken man myself,</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
wavering
about on weakened legs. Then I was amused. Something in this</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
man's
thick head had sprung out and beaten him within an inch of his life. I</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
began
to laugh at this crazy discovery. Would he have awakened at the point</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
of
death? Would Death himself have freed him for wakeful living? But I</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
didn't
linger. I ran away into the dark, laughing so hard I feared I might</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
rupture
myself. The next day I saw his picture in the Daily News, beneath a</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
caption
stating that he had been "mugged." Poor fool, poor blind fool, I</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; margin-left: .375in; margin: 0in;">
thought
with sincere compassion, mugged by an invisible man!</div>
Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-17831846843963748302013-04-11T09:57:00.001-07:002013-04-11T10:47:26.230-07:00Physics and Martial Arts, Part I: Of Staves and Gravity<span style="background-color: black;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="headword" id="headword" style="background-image: url(http://www.merriam-webster.com/styles/default/images/reference/headword-background.jpg); background-position: 0% 100%; background-repeat: repeat no-repeat; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 60px 12px 11px;">
<h2 style="background-color: black; background-image: none; display: inline; font-family: georgia, arial, verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 22px; font-weight: normal; margin: 20px 0px 10px; padding: 0px 7px 0px 0px;">
staff</h2>
<span class="pr" style="background-color: black; color: #717274; display: inline; font-size: 12px; margin-left: 10px;">\<span class="unicode" style="background-image: none; font-family: 'lucida sans unicode'; font-size: 0.9em; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">ˈ</span>staf\</span></div>
<div class="d" style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 20px; padding: 0px 18px 20px 10px;">
<div class="sblk">
<div class="scnt" style="margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 20px;">
<span style="background-color: black;"><span class="ssens"><em class="sn" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: bold;">a</em> <strong>:</strong> a long stick carried in the hand for support in walking</span><span class="ssens"></span></span><br />
<div class="break" style="height: 10px;">
</div>
<span style="background-color: black;"><span class="ssens">
<em class="sn" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: bold;">b</em> <strong>:</strong> a supporting rod: as </span><span class="ssens"><em class="ssn" style="font-style: normal;">(1)</em> <em>archaic</em> <strong>:</strong> <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shaft" style="color: #1122cc; font-size: 14px; font-variant: small-caps; text-decoration: none;">shaft</a> 1a(1) </span><span class="ssens"><em class="ssn" style="font-style: normal;">(2)</em> <strong>:</strong> a crosspiece in a ladder or chair <strong>:</strong> <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rung" style="color: #1122cc; font-size: 14px; font-variant: small-caps; text-decoration: none;">rung</a> </span><span class="ssens"><em class="ssn" style="font-style: normal;">(3)</em> <strong>:</strong> <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flagstaff" style="color: #1122cc; font-size: 14px; font-variant: small-caps; text-decoration: none;">flagstaff</a> </span><span class="ssens"><em class="ssn" style="font-style: normal;">(4)</em> <strong>:</strong> a pivoted arbor</span><span class="ssens"></span></span><br />
<div class="break" style="height: 10px;">
</div>
<span class="ssens" style="background-color: black;">
<em class="sn" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: bold;">c</em> <strong>:</strong> <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/club" style="color: #1122cc; font-size: 14px; font-variant: small-caps; text-decoration: none;">club</a>, <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cudgel" style="color: #1122cc; font-size: 14px; font-variant: small-caps; text-decoration: none;">cudgel</a></span></div>
<div class="scnt" style="margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 20px;">
<span style="background-color: black;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="scnt" style="margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 20px;">
<span style="background-color: black;">I have recently begun a love affair with the staff as a weapon. Perhaps the simplest martial arts weapon, and perhaps the simplest weapon of all, a staff is merely a rod. By sheer definition, it is nothing more, and nothing less. Yet, despite its simplicity, I argue that the staff is truly a thing of beauty; a wonder of a weapon, and, in the right hands, a thing to shock and awe. What makes the staff such a beautiful weapon? Physics. Simple physics. </span></div>
<div class="scnt" style="margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 20px;">
<span style="background-color: black;">We begin with the staff's construction. Most staves used in martial arts are constructed of wood. Red oak is common, or rattan, for a lighter-weight staff; but whatever a staff happens to be composed of, it is invariably a hard material, light enough to wield, but solid enough to make an impact.</span></div>
<div class="scnt" style="margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 20px;">
<span style="background-color: black;">It is here, in examining the construction of the staff, that we discover the key to its beauty: mass. A staff, be it made of wood, metal, or plastic, has mass. It has substance. It is there.</span></div>
<div class="scnt" style="margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 20px;">
<span style="background-color: black;">There are two reasons why mass is important. The less-important one is this: in order to be effective as a weapon, a staff must have appropriate mass. It need not be excessively massive; a staff constructed of osmium, or iron, would be incredibly difficult to wield. However, it must have sufficient mass. A staff constructed of glass, or hard candy, for example, would be very little use as a weapon.</span></div>
<div class="scnt" style="margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 20px;">
<span style="background-color: black;">Mass is important because it gives the staff substance, and makes it effective as a striking weapon; but mass is significant for a far greater reason. Physics dictates that, when an object has mass, it is affected by gravity. Gravity is a force that causes an object with mass to be attracted to any other object with mass. Here, on planet Earth, all objects are attracted to the Earth, the most massive thing in our immediate environment. This is "weight." Every object is attracted to the center of the Earth, in varying degrees, depending upon how great its mass is. Regardless of weight, however, all objects </span><span style="background-color: black;">fall at the same rate.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: black;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: black;">A staff, then, like any other object, must have weight. Like any other object, the staff's weight is concentrated in its "center of gravity." Everyone, and everything, has a center of gravity. Depending on the object's shape, its center of gravity may be difficult to find; but an object's center of gravity is the point around which the object, if thrown, rotates. It is the point where an object can be balanced, even upon a very sharp point, as long as the point is placed directly under.</span></div>
<div class="scnt" style="margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 20px;">
<span style="background-color: black;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: black;">This brings us back to the staff. A staff, by definition, is a simple rod. It is, in essence, a three-dimensional line. Thus, a staff, as long as it is straight and true, must have its center of gravity directly in its middle. There, in its exact middle, lies the point around which it rotates, and there lies the point where it may be balanced.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: black;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: black;">Ok. A staff has mass, so it has weight. It has weight, so it rotates around its center of gravity. Its center of gravity has to be in its middle. So what?</span><br />
<span style="background-color: black;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: black;">So, this brings us to torque, both the key, and the "<i><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qi" target="_blank">ki</a>,</i>" (ha!) to the staff's power. Stay tuned...</span></div>
</div>
</div>
Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-67794551247649709992012-03-24T04:45:00.000-07:002012-03-24T04:45:43.590-07:00We are all Trayvon Martin ... and George Zimmerman.The weekend before last, I had a rather distasteful experience. I was walking down the street in my neighborhood, which, I am happy to say, is fairly nice. There are "nicer" neighborhoods out there, of course, but I like the neighborhood where I live, and I feel reasonably privileged to live there. As I strolled west on the northern side of the block, I noticed a man walking east, towards me, on the same side of the sidewalk. He was fairly non-descript; older than I, perhaps 50's or 60's, carrying a bag from Whole Foods Market. I probably wouldn't have even really noticed him. I probably would have just nodded to him and gone on my way. I certainly wouldn't have noted that he was of a different race than I...<br />
<br />
...except that, instead of passing me on the sidewalk, he stepped off the sidewalk, cut a semi-circle around me, then got back onto the sidewalk once he'd passed.<br />
<br />
I was floored. Granted, I was dressed a little scrubby; I was wearing cargo shorts, sneakers, a baseball cap, a grey hoodie. So what? I'm an attorney. I wear a suit and look dignified every single day of the week. I think I'm entitled to wear whatever the hell I want on the weekend. Beyond that, I've lived in my neighborhood for years. People I've never met still know my face, and smile, or nod. Heck, I've even taught self-defense classes at the local Y. Here I was, a pillar of the community; what gave this guy the right to question MY presence in MY neighborhood? Although I couldn't be sure what the man was reacting to (my race? my clothes? some combination thereof? just didn't want to crowd me?), I knew that I had a really unclean feeling about the situation. Really, that's the insidious thing about prejudice; when someone mistreats you, you can't help but wonder if that was the reason. At the end of the day, though, I decided that this was no big deal. I just fired off a <a href="https://twitter.com/#!/wjmcmath/statuses/178581017068707840" target="_blank">quick tweet</a> about it to let off some steam, and let it go at that...<br />
<br />
<br />
...until the next day, sitting down to breakfast with my soon-to-be wife, when I read about <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=trayvon+martin&hl=en&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS393US393&prmd=imvnsuo&source=univ&tbm=nws&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=34ptT7i5H4KYiQKlpeSVBQ&ved=0CE8QqAIoADAA" target="_blank">what happened to Trayvon</a>. <br />
<br />
And then, at the breakfast table, I did something then that I never do. I'm not usually one to let the latest tragic news affect me too much. Oh, it's sad, sure, but beyond that, things happen, right? Being sad about it isn't going to change anything, or bring anyone back, so why waste time on woe? Better to just try to keep moving forward. But this day. This day was different. On this day, I looked up from the news story, up at my wife. I thought about what it would be like to be taken from her. I thought about what she would go through; she, my mother, my father, siblings, friends. I thought about the magnitude of such a terrible tragedy. And then ... and then, looking into my wife's eyes, I cried.<br />
<br />
I cried because, in light of my recent experience, it hit just a little too close to home. I cried because such a tragic thing could happen. I cried for Trayvon. Because he died. He died a child, already a tragedy. He died, in fear, in pain, in a manner in which the worst of us should not have to die. For nothing. No cause. No purpose; hell, poor Trayvon never even had the time to discover what he was willing to fight for, to die for. At best, Trayvon died for no other reason than that George Zimmerman, was scared of him. <br />
<br />
I cried because, by dying a death that <u>no</u> <u>one</u> deserved, Trayvon proved that really, truly, he could have been any of us.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>That is the truth, of course</b>. If Trayvon could die this way, why couldn't any of us? That messed with, and messes with, me. I just kept asking myself, what if Whole Foods Bag had been someone different? What if we weren't in California? What if it were nighttime? What if he'd previously been a crime victim? What if he thought the guy that victimized him looked like me? What if he thought I looked like I was "on drugs?" What if he'd had a concealed weapon? Come to think of it, how could I be sure that he hadn't? Geez, what if the guy had been just a little more scared? I thought about a million different facts, a million different variables. And each time, I came to the same conclusion: I could not sufficiently convince myself that I could not be Trayvon Martin. No matter what I told myself -- that this could never happen to someone like me, that Trayvon and I were worlds apart -- I could not, and still cannot, place myself anywhere but directly in Trayvon's shoes. Why couldn't any of us find ourselves, in the wrong place, at the wrong time, face-to-face with the wrong person, scared of us in just the wrong way? Just think. We're scared of things all the time that we have no real reason to fear: spiders, the dark, clowns. But George Zimmerman thought that he was justified in taking a life because he saw a boy, in a sweatshirt, talking on a cell phone. Okay, it was dark. Okay, Zimmerman didn't know what Trayvon had in his hands. These are facts that justify the use of deadly force? These are facts that justify what essentially amounts to, at <u>least</u>, murder in the second degree? Even <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernhard_Goetz" target="_blank">Bernie Goetz</a> might be scratching his head at this one. <br />
<br />
The question that needs to be explored, truly, is why George Zimmerman was scared. And I submit that the answer is this: it is because we, all of us, have failed. We have failed as a society. We have failed because we have permitted a status quo to exist whereby we judge people, taking into consideration traits as meaningless as the color of their skin. We have participated in this status quo; we have permitted it to exist. We have even ADAPTED to it; we accept it as an inconvenient truth. We have all failed. And now, we are all, yet again, paying a terrible, terrible price. We failed Trayvon Martin most of all, because his was the innocent life snatched away without reason. But we have also failed George Zimmerman.<br />
<br />
"Now, just a minute," you say. "He's a monster," you say, "he's nothing to do with me!" "I'M not racist," you say. "I love everybody," you say. "Oh, sure, some people ARE racist, but that can't be avoided...". "Anyway, what about free speech?" These are all fair points ... but ultimately, they are excuses. Maybe race isn't your particular issue...but you, too, have at some point in your life jumped to a conclusion about someone. So skin color doesn't matter to you; maybe you don't like the gays. Maybe you're a misogynist. Maybe you've got a less, ah, "conventional" bias, like <a href="http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/103676/" target="_blank">ginger kids</a>, or plumbers, or something. Or maybe, just maybe, you're one of those people who thinks that it's alright to use words like "hick," or "redneck." Maybe you think it's okay to use "Red states" as an epithet.<br />
<br />
Guess what? It's not. None of these things are okay. Because they all boil down, in essence, to one problem. That problem, the true problem, is intolerance. We, as a nation, have tolerated intolerance for far too long. We have permitted fellow countrymen, our brothers, to harbor beliefs that are not serving them. To harbor false tenets, ideas, about how to get through life. To harbor ideas that have lead them to hate and fear others for things that they cannot change: race, gender, sexual orientation, nationality. Yet, when fate, circumstances, or whatever you care to call it, places such a misguided person in a very, very unfortunate situation, where that person acts in the only way that, theretofore, they know how, we point everywhere but at ourselves. We pretend that we have not <u>all</u> learned to hate and fear each other because of the things that <u>distinguish</u> us from one another. "Distinct" is not the same as "other," "different," or "opposite." "Distinct" means "disparate." That's it. No value judgements about which is better, or which is worse. No pre-conceived notions about what a certain trait means. Just the simple, important truth that, whoever you are, I am you, and yet not you.<br />
<br />
Franklin Delano Roosevelt once admonished us, once upon a time, that we have nothing to fear but fear itself. We have been given countless opportunities, over the years, to let that lesson sink in: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watts_Riots" target="_blank">Watts</a>; <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_King" target="_blank">Rodney King</a>; even the afore-mentioned Bernie Goetz incident, just to name a few. Yet we continue to permit these false dividers to exist. We do not fight them like the insidious cancer that they are, the blight that eats at the very roots of our society. Do we really need another wake-up call? How much worse can it get? How much worse does it have to? <br />
<br />
It is time for us all to move forward as a nation. Messrs. Gingrich, Santorum, Romney: I implore you, all of you, to condemn what happened to Trayvon Martin. Publicly. Openly. And in a way that makes it clear, crystal clear, that racism in America is unacceptable. I am sorry, but no amount of votes, and no office, not even the highest in the land, is worth selling your soul. Speak truth to power, and bugger the consequences; who wants to be President of the proverbial <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln's_House_Divided_Speech" target="_blank">house divided against itself</a>, anyway? Oh, <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/gingrich-calls-obamas-trayvon-martin-remarks-disgraceful/" target="_blank">and, Mr. Gingrich</a>? If I, you, President Obama, or anyone else had a son, they too would look just like Trayvon Martin. Because they would be a human being, you see. An individual guaranteed "<a href="http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/" target="_blank">certain inalienable rights</a>." The right to live. The right to be free. The right to follow their dreams.<br />
<br />
Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton <u>did</u> have a son. His name was Trayvon. He was seventeen. He had a sweetheart; he had aspirations. He <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57403126/trayvon-martins-father-he-saved-my-life/" target="_blank">saved his father's life</a> at the age of 9. And now? Now he is gone. Not because he was "on drugs;" not that. He is not dead because he failed to identify himself; nor did he have any duty to so. He is <u>certainly</u> not dead because his "minority" parents neglected their purported duty to warn him about wearing a hoodie -- despite the<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/23/geraldo-rivera-trayvon-martin-hoodie_n_1375080.html" target="_blank"> ignorant, poorly conceived, and mind-numbingly stupid comments of Geraldo Rivera</a>. Indeed, Trayvon did <u>nothing</u> wrong. Let's be crystal clear about that: <u>Trayvon</u> <u>did</u> <u>nothing</u> <u>wrong</u>. Trayvon is dead for one reason, and one reason only: because George Zimmerman shot him.<br />
<br />
George Zimmerman shot him. Because he was scared.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
* An aside, here at the end, because Mr. Rivera's comments really don't warrant serious treatment along with the rest of this subject matter. But you, sir, should be ashamed of yourself -- you know, <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74403.html" target="_blank">like your OWN SON is</a>. Thank God Gabriel got some common sense from somewhere; hopefully, he'll talk some into your other son, who apparently sees nothing wrong with what you had to say - or being advised by his father, essentially, that he'd better know his place. I'd call you a "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncle_Tom's_Cabin" target="_blank">Tio Tomas</a>;" but that would be hypocritical in light of what I'm attempting to say here. So, for God's sake, <u>please</u> just stop talking.Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-68046300389034953502011-06-22T09:03:00.001-07:002011-06-22T09:03:53.542-07:00Random Musings<div><p>Guy at the courthouse is wearing a t-shirt which says, "This is the shirt I wear when I don't care."</p>
<p>...I really hope he's not here for his own case.  If so, his lawyer forgot the talk about proper courtroom attire. Hopefully the judge has a sense of humor.</p>
</div>Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-43612104443218442042010-08-31T13:40:00.000-07:002010-08-31T13:46:04.276-07:00The Knowledge Gap: What You Don't Know That I Know (Could Help or Hurt You)Some time ago, I was aboard a BART train, en route to my office for another exciting day of work. I had gotten on the train at the Rockridge station, as is my custom; the train was now pulling into the Macarthur station. The doors parted, and the new passengers boarded the train. Among them was a young woman. She took her place leaning against a post, facing toward the back of the train. I was already positioned facing toward the front of the train, and so I had an unobstructed view of the woman. She could have been no older than 25, and was, by all fair accounts, a knock-out.<br />
<br />
Beyond that initial observation, I paid the woman no heed; she disembarked the train shortly thereafter. As I got off at my own stop, however, I heard the following conversation take place between two others getting off the train. One had been seated at the front the train, behind the woman. The other had been seated near me, in front of her. Both spoke as though they knew each other; perhaps they were coworkers who had perchance run into each other on their morning commute. <br />
<br />
Guy #1: ...I've seen her before actually.<br />
<br />
Guy #2: Me too, but only from the back. Is she as hot from the front as she is from the back?<br />
<br />
Guy #1 (wryly): I don't know.<br />
<br />
Guy #2 (pleading): Come on, man, don't hold out on me.<br />
<br />
Guy #1: I don't know, man, you're going to have to find out for yourself.<br />
<br />
I smirked and went on about my day; however, I couldn't help but mentally revisit the encounter some time later. Here was one person who, by dint of being in the right place at the right time, had acquired some knowledge: specifically, what this woman looked like. On the other hand, here was his buddy. By dint of where he had been seated on the train, he had not been able to acquire that knowledge. However, he coveted the knowledge that his friend had acquired: he wanted to know what the woman looked like. The friend, for his part, had three choices. First, he could tell his buddy the truth about his observations. Although this wouldn't be the same as if he'd seen the woman himself, at least he'd then have some idea what the woman looked like. Second, he could tell his buddy nothing, in which case his friend would gain or lose nothing. Third, he could provide his friend a false description; as a result, the friend would have false information, believing it to be true. In this particular instance, it appears that the friend had opted for the second option.<br />
<br />
<br />
The concept of the knowledge gap, the idea that I know something that you don't (or vice versa) is an interesting one. It is not something that we are born understanding. If you hide a toy in a room in front of a toddler, for example, and then a second adult enters the room, the toddler will assume that the second adult knows the location of the toy. The toddler does not yet understand that all knowledge is not universal knowledge; the mere fact that one person knows something does not mean that everyone, or even anyone, does as well. This realization sets in sometime later in childhood.<br />
<br />
<br />
It is sometime after this realization sets in that we begin to recognize that, where a knowledge gap exists, and we possess the knowledge sought, we have an opportunity to affect that situation. Your mother may ask you, for example, who ate the cookies from the cookie jar; further, you may know that it was you. However, because you are privy to that information, and she is not, you have an opportunity. You can tell her the truth, and risk punishment (or possible leniency for having been truthful). You may lie and say that it was your brother (although this could backfire if he has an alibi). You might simply shrug. However, the mere fact that she says "Who ate the cookies from the cookie jar?" and not "You ate the cookies from the cookie jar" means that you, the person with the pertinent knowledge, have a choice to make about whether or not to share that knowledge.<br />
<br />
What is the upshot of all this? Simply put, we are all privy to knowledge which no one else has. Some knowledge pertains to matters of grave import (for instance, who is truly responsible for the death of JFK? Someone, somewhere, knows). Some knowledge is trivial, e.g. what color socks someone wears on a given day. Whatever knowledge we may possess, whatever the possibilities for that knowledge, the choice is ours what we will do with it. The same knowledge may be used to hurt or to help, depending on the situation. A martial arts expert may use her knowledge to assist a person who is being attacked. The same person may also use her knowledge to attack another person without reason. She may teach martial arts to others, so that they may acquire her knowledge, and be able to defend themselves. She may instead hire her services out as a bodyguard, and keep her knowledge to herself for profit. She is the guardian of her knowledge, and, up until the moment she shares it, its sole custodian.<br />
<br />
The knowledge that we possess determines what we are capable of in this world; because you <u>know</u> how to tie your shoes, for example, you are <u>able</u> to tie your shoes. Given that what we are able to accomplish while we are in this world is directly related to what knowledge we have acquired, it becomes clear that the sharing of knowledge is essential to our survival. Accordingly, I want to take this moment to encourage my readers to be more aware of knowledge gaps in their lives. Notice when someone doesn't know something that you happen to know. Ask yourself the question of whether you will share your knowledge with that person, and if so, how much. Ask yourself what will happen, on the other hand, if the knowledge is withheld. I assert that it is best to use one's knowledge in ways that benefit other people, or in ways that enrich their lives. Conversely, I would assert that one should not use a knowledge gap to take advantage of another person, nor withhold knowledge from that person if they will be harmed because they are uninformed. <br />
<br />
Either way, we must all use our knowledge in ways that we can live with. Whether you choose to share your knowledge in a given situation, you and you alone must live with the knowledge of your decision.Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-13276042904954341892010-08-25T20:25:00.000-07:002010-08-27T15:25:47.739-07:00Samurai Lawyer is online!Welcome to the Samurai-Lawyer Blog, part of my all-new online presence here at samurai-lawyer.org! After a fairly long hiatus from the blogosphere, I am excited to once more assume the "bully pulpit" -- particularly given that current events have not taken a similar hiatus, and that the direction current events have taken is, well, unsettling. I'm not going to subject my readers to a laundry list of topics I plan to expound upon; suffice it to say that I still have quite a bit to say. Rather, I'd like to take this moment to talk about my own perceptions and experiences of what it means to be a samurai lawyer. <br />
<br />
Being a warrior and being a lawyer are not so different. Both must study if they wish to have the best chance of success. Both test themselves against an adversary in the heat of the moment. In the course of engaging their foe, both choose which techniques to employ, at which times, in the hope that they will strike a decisive blow. The techniques that each uses in the course of battle, whether the lawyer's well-timed legal objection or the samurai's well-timed <i>kesa giri<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: normal;">, comprise each person's martial art, or </span>bujutsu.</i> From <i>bu</i>, meaning "martial," and <i>jutsu</i>, meaning "art," <i>bujutsu</i> generally refers to the techniques used by a person in pursuit of a martial victory.<br />
<br />
<i>Budo</i> asks the question of <b>why </b>we use our martial arts. An experienced martial artist, like an experienced attorney, has a certain power in the right situation. Should they <b>choose</b> to exercise their power, and should they choose an effective technique for that particular situation, they may be able to affect the outcome. The outcome that would have occurred but for their action will never be. Given that samurai and lawyer carry such power, it quickly becomes apparent that both must also know when not to use that power. The lawyer must not make arguments which are illegal or unethical, even if he or she knows that they will win. The samurai, likewise, should not dispatch a harmless drunk with his sword if a supportive arm will suffice. <br />
<br />
Thus, it is imperative that one must have a <i>budo</i>, or "martial way." A true <i>bujin</i>, samurai or lawyer, knows intimately the scope of his or her <i>bujutsu</i>, and seeks each day to improve those skills. However, bujin's "martial way" is what guides him or her in deciding whether to employ those skills, and why or for whom. <i>Budo</i> is why the samurai risks his or her life to protect a defenseless child from a much greater foe. <i>Budo</i> is also the reason why the lawyer stands firm and keeps objecting, even under threat of contempt, if it is necessary to preserve his or her client's rights on appeal.<br />
<br />
This blog, and this website, are all about my own personal <i>budo</i>. Welcome, and please enjoy.Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-66499678549823873342009-02-16T15:07:00.000-08:002009-02-16T15:33:02.261-08:00Water, and how we relate to the elementsOne way of understanding who we are as human beings is to realize our connection to the natural elements, Fire, Water, Earth, Wind and the Void. Most of us, through birth and through the way that we have been raised, emulate certain qualities of one or two of the elements through our emotions, thought processes, body movements, likes and dislikes, and this conditioning can both be a source of growth for us just as it can limit us into forming routines and habits.<br /><br />A little bit of background may be helpful in visualizing this concept: a person who most identifies with the element of Fire may be very social and intense, and may have a great sense of initiative and an infectious personality. A Water person is generally pretty adaptable and is very good at caring for other people, and finds interesting ways to accomplish goals. Earth people are very steady and have great self-confidence, and generally are helpful in grounding others. People who identify with the Wind are great listeners, very sensitive, and unattached to one way of doing things.<br /><br />Usually, a person has one element that is dominant, and another that is less dominant, and they manifest in different ways. Taking myself as an example, I was born and raised as a Water/Earth person, meaning that my tendencies are to adapt and flow with people and situations, while I like to be grounded and am very committed to people and ideas. One of our goals as human beings, however, can be to become more and more Void about our personalities and actions - meaning, to use Consciousness to utilize whichever element is necessary at any time, and become more Balanced by using all the elements in concert.<br /><br />An example of this, which I think is very appropriate for the Water month of February, is the way that water moves in nature, perfectly. I took a walk through the UC Berkeley campus today, and spent some time in the eucalyptus grove that is just west of the campus center. From there one can walk along the creek that runs through the University. Just after the rains, the creek was running pretty freely through the small and muddy ravine by the grove. In watching it, an idea came to me that although the water has no established pattern of movement - it moves freely around stones, roots, branches, and debris while taking different paths every time - it always moves <span style="font-style: italic;">perfectly</span>. One cannot judge its path, saying that it should move this way or that; rather, it moves where it needs to and where it is meant to, without judgement and without hesitation. It moves perfectly.<br /><br />I think that one of the things to take away from this story is that as we study the elements to understand who we are, we have great examples in nature as to how we can become more Balanced. Even Water people can look for water in nature to find an example of the perfect motion of this element, without hesitation or notions of judgement. As Kancho Toribio says, we are perfect the way we are, <span style="font-style: italic;">and</span> we are always working towards perfection.<br /><br />Let's Keep Going!<br /><br />Som PourfarzanehSom Pourfarzanehhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08390213773179461061noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-84022131623750573292008-12-13T18:10:00.000-08:002008-12-13T22:29:15.225-08:00Black Friday Massacre: Separating Love and ConsumerismIn my <a href="http://bayareabudo.blogspot.com/2008/11/black-friday-massacre-great-holiday.html">previous installment</a>, I put forth the opinion that, once upon a time, people expressed their love through words. Later, people began augmenting those words with trinkets, baubles, knick-knacks; tangible objects representing the feelings we carry for one other. Finally, there came a time, for many people, when gift-giving took the place of love entirely, rather than being a means of expressing it. I'd like to flesh that last assertion out a little bit more, then suggest some possible solutions to the problem. To do so, however, I must address the nature of love itself.<br /><br />Wiser individuals than I have tackled this complex subject, of course. I possess no more foundation on the subject than any other person, but as a human being, I believe I'm qualified to speak on the subject. So I'm going to take a stab at it. Imagine, if you will, water dripping from a faucet into a cup, drop by drop by drop. At some point, depending upon the size of the droplets, and the rate at which they fall, the cup runs over. Real love, in my subjective and abundant opinion, is precisely like this. The cup, in this instance, is the human heart. The droplets represent the accumulation of good feelings towards another person. Each droplet is a single iteration of a three-step process of awareness, assessment, and action. First, you have to get to know someone. Second, you have to take some time away from that person in order to decide how you feel about them. Third, you make a judgment about that person based upon the interaction of the first two. And that process repeats.<br /><br />Think, for a second, about your first love, or your best friend. There was that moment of awareness; that point where you first met that person. Maybe you had yourself a nice little chat over coffee. Maybe you met in line at the grocery store. Maybe you were already friends. Next came assessment. You found yourself thinking about that person when they weren't around. Perhaps you missed feeling good in the particular way that you felt when you were around that person. Finally, you took action. You decided, "yeah, you know what? I'd like to see that person again." And the process repeats.<br /><br />Each time you saw that person, each time you learned something new about them, you went through the same three-step process. Sometimes the droplets were small; a friendly wave in passing. Sometimes they were large; "until we met, I thought I was the only one who believed fervently in international human rights for everyone except clowns!" Sometimes the droplets were far apart; a coffee date, followed by two weeks of not seeing each other. Sometimes they were close together. Regardless of how it happened, those drops accumulated, until finally, one day, the cup just spilled over.<br /><br />There came a point in time, though, when we started filling our cups with things instead of feelings. Don't ask me when it happened, or why it happened, but at some point gift-giving began taking the place of real love. Maybe it started innocuously; a woman got so used to men buying her drinks at bars that pretty soon, she wasn't talking to any other guys but the ones spending money on her. Maybe it started not-so-innocuously; some Richard III-esque character decided to mask his sheer abhorrence as a human being by showering his intended with gifts. However it happened, the trend caught on. And with this trend, as with most that turn out to be particularly profitable, enterprising individuals and market-savvy industries were ready to capitalize on it.<br /><br />And so it continued. People kept substituting the acquisition of things for the love of people, to a greater and greater degree. Not just for romantic reasons any more; pretty soon, the acquisition of things became a means of filling the empty spaces in our own hearts as well as the hearts of others. Think about all the products that exist now which separate us from real people. Where you once might have engaged in conversation with the person next to you on the bus, white earbuds are now rampant. Where kids once played baseball in the street with their neighbors, out in the sunshine, they now sit at home, alone, allowing Super Mario and Master Chief to be their new playmates. Where families once ate and talked together around the dinner table, now mother, father, sister and brother take their meals alone, often eating while doing something else (watching TV?). And speaking of TV, at least there was a time when people gathered around the TV to watch together. Heck, a TV program might even foster discussion, about why someone would want to crash planes into buildings, or whether Gilligan and Co. would ever get off the island. And now? Now most of us have TVs in our rooms.<br /><br />And yet, all this obsession over the getting of stuff, by itself, is not the worst thing in the world. It's not ideal, mind you. But a world where everyone wants and gets stuff is not the most terrible thing ever. Actually, this was the world that Wall-E showed us this summer. Oh, sure, people got fat, and completely isolated from each other, but at least no one got hurt. Suppose, though, that everyone can't get what they want? What if, due to economic downturn, say, there's a lot less money to go around? No problem; people have been purchasing stuff on credit for years. Ok, but what if the credit markets dry up, maybe because of said economic downturn? What then? We're still telling ourselves we can't do without our stuff; "how am I supposed to give my family a great Christmas without money for presents?" "Once I've got that HDTV, <span style="font-weight: bold;">then</span> I'll be happy." But now we can't just drop a ton of cash on it, or put it on a credit card. Now we find ourselves in a real pickle: how to purchase "happiness," itself a highly-desirable commodity, with less money? Two words: Black Friday. Here's your big chance to get the things you "need" for cheap. But there's only so many $388 32" HDTVs to go around. So you'd best be sure you get yours. And if that means pushing, shoving, or worse, so be it. We're talking about the pursuit of happiness, after all.<br /><br />In short, we got to a place where we began replacing love of people with love of things. Not universally, of course; we're talking about a matter of scale. Just like there are guys out there like the Dalai Lama, filled with love of people and almost totally unconcerned with stuff, there are also the truly materialistic among us, those that value things most of all, and pay mere lip service to people. Unfortunately, it doesn't take too many of such individuals to do some real damage. Jditymai Damour learned this in a way that no one ever should.<br /><br />So. How do we fix the problem? As I mentioned in my first post, I suggest two things we can do to start improving the situation. First, we need to be more appreciative of each other. Second, we need to engage in "responsible" gift-giving: the giving of gifts that require us to really, truly know someone. I shall cover these in my next installment.<br /><br />To be continued...Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-75337339446564319062008-11-28T16:50:00.000-08:002008-12-14T12:29:40.348-08:00Black Friday Massacre: Great Holiday Deals at the Cost of our HumanityBy now, pretty much everyone knows about <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/30/nyregion/30walmart.html">Jdimytai Damour</a>, a temp Walmart employee who met his <a href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008478202_trample07.html">untimely demise</a> on "Black Friday". For the .0000000001% of the population that reads my blog (already an infinitesimally small percentage), doesn't know about this, AND is too lazy to click a link, here's the synopsis: the day after Thanksgiving, "eager" shoppers in pursuit of deals on holiday gifts trampled to death a 34-year old black man.<br /><br />I'm going to repeat that last part, just so it can sink in. A crowd of people, in pursuit of <span style="font-weight: bold;">things</span>, trampled a <span style="font-weight: bold;">person </span>to death. A real live person, with hopes, dreams, and aspirations. If that right there does not indicate a major systemic error in society, I don't know what does. The last time I checked, humanity still had yet to create an HDTV that could dream, or that could love. Yet some 2,000 people judged such things as more valuable than the life of a person--who, incidentally, is now as lifeless as the inanimate objects for which he died.<br /><br />I've been sitting on this post a long time. This is partially due to the beast that is finals. But only partially. More than that, I simply cannot find the right words to describe the utter failure of human values that permits a tragedy like this to happen. I would like to take this opportunity to do two things: first, to generally denounce consumer culture as a partial (if not predominant) cause of a tragedy like this, and second, to encourage everyone to engage in copious appreciation, and what I'm calling "responsible" gift-giving, this holiday season.<br /><br />CONSUMER CULTURE: SPENDING OUR WAY TO "HAPPINESS"<br /><br />As a wise person once said, "Success is getting what you want. Happiness is wanting what you get." We received <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/opinion/06rich.html">an object lesson from Wall-E</a> this summer about what happens when you focus too much on getting what you want. It was a parable about a society where people were so focused on getting stuff (all vended, no less, by a Wal-Mart-esque company called "Buy-N-Large") that they neglected personal connections, themselves, and eventually, society at large. The planet Earth filled up with all the crap they accumulated and they found themselves forced to abandon the planet. Now, a luxury spaceship carries the human race aimlessly through the cosmos. No one seems to notice this state of affairs, however; consumerism is present even on the ship, everyone gets everything they want brought right to them<br /><br />Wall-E's message, alas, has gone largely unheeded. Nowadays, everyone seems to believe that the answer to all our problems lies in the spending of money. So you've gotten fat, have you? Heaven forfend you go for a run, or change your diet; no, the answer to your problems is diet pills, expensive gym memberships you're not actually going to use, or imitation foods marketed as "healthy." Don't have a girlfriend, huh? Not to worry; countless dating services, self-help books, and singles events are at your disposal. Even the simplest of human problems, hunger, has fallen victim. Feeling a mite peckish? Don't bother taking the time to cook yourself a healthy meal; McDonald's, Wendy's, and other proper-names-that-aren't-really-people are ready to cater to your needs. All this leading to the same general theme: if you're not quite satisfied with the way things are going in your life, you're not throwing enough money at the problem.<br /><br />The perception of money as a cure-all is most evident in our personal connections--or lack thereof. Once upon a time, people showed love to each other through appreciation: "Thanks for a delicious dinner, Mom." "Thanks for the ride to the airport; I really appreciate it." "This presentation was hard to put together; I couldn't have done it without you." Then, somewhere along the way, gift giving became a proxy for appreciation. "Talk is cheap," as they say; if you really want to show someone you love them, you've got to buy them a gift. Thus, we have scads of commercials touting this, that, or the other as the "perfect gift" for that special someone on your list, regardless of what their particular needs or preferences might be. Got a sweetie? Buy her a diamond ring! Teenager? Xbox 360! Wife? New car! And God forbid if you've got a young kid; there's always a Furby, Tickle-Me Elmo, or whatever-the-hell-it-is-this-year to be had.<br /><br />And yet, even this kind of "one size fits all" gifting, by itself, wouldn't be so bad. Maybe your wife does need a new car. Maybe your kid really does want that Tickle-Me Elmo (and anyway, he's a kid; who among us didn't have their tastes shaped by fads as a child? Cut him some slack). No, the real problems came when gift-giving, instead of acting on behalf of appreciation, took its place entirely. To put it bluntly, when people began mistaking things for love.<br /><br /><a href="http://bayareabudo.blogspot.com/2008/12/black-friday-massacre-separating-love.html">To be continued</a>...Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-61120497702753935852008-11-04T14:52:00.000-08:002008-11-04T15:28:18.971-08:00Live Coverage from Henry'sI'm sitting here at Henry's I'm surprised to see the place so empty, actually; it's been a pretty hopping place for my election coverage up until now.<br /><br />I've been chatting with Holly, who is a senior at Cal. This is Holly's first time voting for a President, and she's pretty glad to be voting for Barack Obama. I can't even imagine what it's like, having Obama be the first president that you vote for. I mean, the first election I voted in was 2000, and while I liked Al Gore, I wasn't really excited about him. Granted, Al hadn't really let his <a href="http://futurama.wikia.com/wiki/Al_Gore">true colors</a> shine throught at the point, so he wasn't the easiest guy for a 19-year old kid to get excited about. I also think I didn't know as much as I know now, which made it more difficult to follow the election.<br /><br />But now? The youth are more precocious than ever; I imagine there are high school and college students with a better grasp of certain issues than I've got. Not only that, the youth are more likely to be technologically-apt. <a href="http://www.barackobama.com">Obama's website</a>, remember, has been a major front for his campaign. Phone-banking, donation, and information about the issues have all been proliferated from there. Add in <a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com">election</a> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com">news </a><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com">sources</a>, Youtube videos of rallies and gaffes, and the Obama iPhone program? I imagine the youth are quite excited.<br /><br />Interesting news of the moment: apparently McCain's got robocalls going out to Cuban-Americans touting Castro's "endorsement" of Obama. This, of course, is not completely true. While Castro did have some positive things to say about Obama, <a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/26/castros-stinging-endorsement/">he specifically refrained from an endorsement</a>, lest he hurt Obama's campaign. In fact, he articulated some specific criticisms. Still, I don't know why we'd expect McCain to play fair now.<br /><br />3:15pm. Got Holly's phone number. Not relevant to the election, but hey.Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-17439136969385344452008-11-04T14:34:00.000-08:002008-11-04T14:52:18.303-08:00Live Election Coverage: My Voting ExperienceWhew, what an exciting day! I haven't been this excited for something since I was a child waiting for Christmas. My local polling place (the fire station across from the Seven-Eleven on College, for anyone keeping score) opened at 7, and my roommate and I were there. I am glad to report that my experience was relatively painless. The line was short, it moved quickly, and things seemed to be well-organized. They even called me out for wearing a small Obama button, a violation of voter laws (I wore it specifically to see if I could get away with it).<br /><br />There definitely seems to be an electricity in the air today. People walking down the street seem to be more friendly, and there's a general air of cautious optimism about town. Further updates to come, but here's the plan for the day.<br /><br />2:00 - 3:30 - Coverage at Henry's.<br /><br />5:00 - ? Coverage at Luka's Tap Room<br /><br />11:30pm - Fly to Washington DC! <br /><br />Plus whatever other updates I can squeeze in. Stay tuned!Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-34408935524592769842008-10-15T18:00:00.000-07:002008-10-15T19:33:18.126-07:00Live-blogging the third debate!6:05. Back at Henry's. Can barely hear. McCain looks crazed. If I didn't know better, I'd think he's been crying.<br /><br />6:06. Joined by a motley crew tonight. Dana, Sandhya, Shawn, William, Emily, and Alex. Obama talking.<br /><br />6:06. I guess the question's about the economy?<br /><br />6:07. Whatever Obama's saying, the CNN line tells me that the women are responding better than the men.<br /><br />6:08. McCain's back on. Telling a story about some plumber in a higher tax bracket.<br /><br />6:09. McCain promising low taxes, health care. Pitting Obama against Joe the Plumber.<br /><br />6:09. Obama responds. McCain wants to cut taxes for the rich. Obama wants to cut taxes for the poor. 95% of working Americans. The line loves this; how will McCain respond?<br /><br />6:11. McCain responds. Keeps using the phrase "spread the wealth around" in reference to Obama. I think he's playing the socialist card.<br /><br />6:13. The screen is littered by little graphs that appear to pertain to various pundits. But I have no idea how to read them.<br /><br />6:14. Bob Schieffer with a new topic: specifics about the deficit.<br /><br />6:15. Obama first. Talking about correctly structuring the rescue package.<br /><br />6:15. Racer 5 is delicious.<br /><br />6:16. Obama wants to eliminate federal programs that don't work. This is in step with "Obama's New Deal," which he alluded to in the last debate.<br /><br />6:16. Serious energy policy will also alleviate "borrowing from China to pay Saudi Arabia." The line says he's doing well.<br /><br />6:17. McCain responds.<br /><br />6:18. Alex notes that McCain "is getting pissed."<br /><br />6:18. McCain is talking about ethanol subsidies. An Obama attack.<br /><br />6:19. Again with the "I know": I know how to save taxpayers millions.<br /><br />6:19. Tamar observes that McCain keeps saying this kind of thing.<br /><br />6:19. Alex is right. McCain's gonna explode.<br /><br />6:21. McCain claims that he loves President Bush.<br /><br />6:22. McCain cites the record. Attacking Barack for not going against the leaders of his party.<br /><br />6:23. Obama landed a punch, judging by reactions, but I didn't hear it. Oh, he backed something up by citing Fox News.<br /><br />6:24. Obama went after him hard. McCain responding. It sounds like he's defending his record as a maverick.<br /><br />6:25. Next question. Candidates have not taken the high road as they said. Dana loves the question. Alex sees this as a softball to bring up Ayers.<br /><br />6:26. McCain responds that it's a tough campaign. McCain criticizing Obama for not doing town halls. Obama looks bemused. Talking about the negative aspects of "both" campaigns.<br /><br />6:27. Reference to Sarah Palin.<br /><br />6:28. Obama still looks bemused. Think he's ready for this. McCain just called Obama a "longshot candidate."<br /><br />6:28. McCain criticizes the high spending of the Obama campaign. I think he's criticizing Obama for making more money.<br /><br />6:29. Obama points out that 2/3 of Americans believe McCain's running a negative campaign. People care about health care, tax policy.<br /><br />6:30. Obama says the attacks don't matter; just fix the problem. The women seem to like that one.<br /><br />6:31. McCain criticizing Obama's spending again.<br /><br />6:32. Obama just brought up "terrorist," "kill him." McCain getting antsy.<br /><br />6:32. Obama denounces the civil rights comparison, but points out that American people are tired of the back-and forth in politics. Which he wants to focus on.<br /><br />6:34. McCain just called the racists "fringe people." Apparently some T-shirts have hurt Senator McCain's feelings.<br /><br />6:35. Obama: "Disagree without being disagreeable."<br /><br />6:36. Gergen's pundit-meter not doing much; Alex asks whether he fell asleep.<br /><br />6:36. McCain brings up ACORN. Obama still looking bemused.<br /><br />6:37. Obama calls Ayers the "centerpiece" of McCain's campaign. Obama explains the Ayers connection, mentions that Ronald Reagan funded it.<br /><br />6:38. ACORN, according to Obama, paid people to register voters. Obama represented them alongside the Justice Department.<br /><br />6:38. The Line is responding well. McCain looks uncomfortable. Like, "what the fuck am I gonna say?" The women like this.<br /><br />6:39. Henry's just burst into applause. Obama's remarks played well.<br /><br />6:40. McCain's response was muddled. Something about taxes. Next question.<br /><br />6:40. Which running mate is better? Obama first.<br /><br />6:41. Obama is pointing to Biden's expertise. Scranton.<br /><br />6:41. The bar is a lot quieter when Obama talks. This is Berkeley, of course, but still.<br /><br />6:42. Obama advocates for energy independence. McCain's up.<br /><br />6:43. I don't envy him; he's got to defend Palin. The hoots are starting.<br /><br />6:43. He's pointing to Sarah's pipeline to nowhere--a pipeline that doesn't exist--as her experience.<br /><br />6:44. McCain brings up special needs families. My lord, he actually went to Sarah Palin's Down's baby.<br /><br />6:44. Dana: Look at the retarded-baby spike! Bwah ha ha ha ha!<br /><br />6:46. McCain attacks Obama again for wanting to raise taxes. Schieffer changes the subject to energy.<br /><br />6:48. Alex popints out the McCain's suit is shittier than Obama's. Intentional?<br /><br />6:48. Whatever McCain said, it got a favorable response.<br /><br />6:49. Obama responds. Expand domestic production. But we can't drill our way out of the problem due to the numbers.<br /><br />6:50. Obama points out that we invented the auto industry. That probably earned him some red state points.<br /><br />6:52. Playing the "uppity" card. Can Obama field this without "getting black"?<br /><br />6:54. Obama refers to car dealerships closing. Talks about the "fuel-efficient cars of the future."<br /><br />6:56. McCain's up. The line just went from the top to the bottom. McCain goes from there to preconditions again. The ladies hate him. "Senator Obama wants to restrict trade and raise taxes."<br /><br />6:56. McCain has lost the plot.<br /><br />6:57. Next question. Controlled health care costs or expanded health care coverage? Obama says we need both. The Line likes it.<br /><br />6:58. The Line is maxed out, women and men. McCain is comfortably at the middle.<br /><br />7:00. Alex: "Those are the shittiest-looking hand stitched lapels I've ever seen. Aren't you supposed to be rich?" Tamar: "He's trying not to show it." Maybe.<br /><br />7:03. Obama is killin' this question. Explaining his health care plan, showing why McCain's sucks.<br /><br />7:03. More regulation.<br /><br />7:04. McCain on "spread the wealth" again. I think he's really trying to call Obama a socialist.<br /><br />7:05. McCain is playing the communism card re: Obama's health plan. Here's the thing: that worked on Kerry in 2004.<br /><br />7:07. Roe v. Wade. Schieffer wants to know if they'd nominate a Supreme Court Judge that disagrees with their position on it.<br /><br />7:07. McCain says he's a "federalist;" he would leave it to the states, not have a "litmus test."<br /><br />7:07. McCain points to his maverick record.<br /><br />7:09. Obama answers. He hasn't looked uncomfortable this hold debate.<br /><br />7:09. Obama says that any judge must be able to provide fairness to the American people.<br /><br />7:10. Obama's killin' it. McCain knows he's fucked.<br /><br />7:11. Obama's talking about the statute of limitations. Oh, he's going after the women. More applause from Henry's.<br /><br />7:12. Me: "This debate's not fair to both candidates. When are they gonna ask a question about Matlock?" Tamar: "McCain kind of <span style="font-style: italic;">looks</span> like Matlock..."<br /><br />7:14. Obama supports a ban on late-term abortions, except where the mother's life is threatened. I hate abortion, but I agree.<br /><br />7:15. Obama maxed out the line again. McCain is dead in the water.<br /><br />7:16. McCain takes it to his adopted Bangladeshi child--which, if you'll recall, was a liability in 2000.<br /><br />7:16. Schieffer with the next question, re: education. U.S. spends most on education, yet we suck. Is this a national security threat? How do we fix?<br /><br />7:17. Obama: It's tied to our economic future and national security. Debate his between more money and reform; Obama says we need both.<br /><br />7:18. Obama: $4,000 tuition credit for public service: military service, peace corps.<br /><br />7:19. Obama says "we can't do it just for the schools; parents must step up."<br /><br />7:19. McCain alleges that we have equal school access. He's talking about charter schools and vouchers.<br /><br />7:20. McCain advocates Teach for America.<br /><br />7:21. Schieffer wants to know if federal gov't should play larger role in education. Obama says the government should step up and help. No Child Left Behind, alas, sucks.<br /><br />7:22. Obama wants to provide higher salaries and more support. Obama seems to attack every problem on two fronts. I like that.<br /><br />7:23. McCain is on about vouchers. Parents want them, he says, because parents want the ability to choose.<br /><br />7:25. McCain's Sarah Palin reference doesn't play well at Henry's.<br /><br />7:26. Obama responds re: vouchers in DC.<br /><br />7:27. Schieffer puts in a weird plug for "mydebates.org."<br /><br />7:27. McCain closing. "My friends" returns!<br /><br />7:28. McCain says America needs a new direction. McCain, the Maverick, will deliver.<br /><br />7:29. McCain says that it comes down to the candidate that you can trust.<br /><br />7:29. Now he's talking about a "long line of McCains" that has served the country.<br /><br />7:29. Obama responds. Looks straight into the camera; this could be a fireside chat.<br /><br />7:30. The Line is responding well to Obama's closing.<br /><br />7:31. Obama renews his old message, that we all have to work together.<br /><br />7:31. Obama's closing drew applause in Henry's.<br /><br />7:31. Schieffer: "Go vote now. It'll make you feel big and strong."<br /><br />7:33. P.Y.T. playing at Henry's. Sweeeet.Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-86367422314573795822008-10-09T13:42:00.000-07:002008-10-09T14:42:54.971-07:00An Open Letter to John McCainBy now, everyone is familiar with the <a href="http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/10/mccain_100percent_negative_ads.html">negative direction</a> taken by the McCain-Palin campaign. Obama has been accused of "pal[ling] around with terrorists," of being a secret Muslim fanatic, of being an outsider. "We don't know him," we hear over and over again. He's dangerous, we're told. He doesn't see America the way that we see America. And so on.<br /><br />These attacks are morally repugnant, yes. I shan't go into detail about why, as I think it's a topic that has been addressed <span style="font-style: italic;">ad infinitum</span>. Suffice it to say, I think this sort of thing runs against the principles upon which our country was founded, and for which our country is supposed to stand. I'm really much more interested in the question of just why you, Mr. McCain, are going along with this.<br /><br />Oh, sure, I can theorize as to why your campaign has taken on this tack. Quite simply, I think the sort of folks that buy into this sort of thing may be <a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/what-is-obamas-ceiling.html">all that you have left</a>. As the economic crisis has reared its ugly head, and more voters have defected from the party perceived to have caused this mess, I think it's possible that you've been left with the guys who are too scared--of the unknown "Other," of terrorists, or what have you--to jump ship. From a political standpoint, if the folks most strongly in your camp are the ones that respond to this sort of thing, why not just appeal directly to your base? Perhaps from a political strategy viewpoint, this makes perfect sense.<br /><br />Of course, the fact that there may be a motive behind this sort of campaigning does not excuse it. Sure, I can see why the Republican brass might take things in this direction. There is a status quo in place. A lot of people have a lot at stake in protecting that status quo. So, sure, I can understand why they might go to such lengths to accomplish their goals. <br /><br />I think I can even understand where Governor Palin is coming from. Oh, sure, the things that are coming out of her mouth are fanning the flames of hatred, and I think it's very hypocritical for her to question Obama's qualifications, record, et cetera. But you know what? If the Republican brass approached me with a chance to become Vice President, I might accept it as well, woefully under-qualified or no. And I might spout whatever partisan rhetoric they told me to, as well; these guys, after all, are old hands at this. They must know what they're doing, right? Ms. Palin has already demonstrated that thinking for herself is not necessarily her forte; I think I understand how she finds herself here.<br /><br />But I am extremely disappointed you, John McCain. While I have always identified more with Democrats than Republicans, the truth of the matter is, I used to like you. There was even a time (years past now, but still) when I even thought I'd be willing to vote for you. Here was a guy with such convictions that he'd stand up for what he believed in even when it went against the party line. Here was a guy that pissed off his own party as often as the other guys did. And he didn't seem to care, because this was what he believed in. Clearly a class act.<br /><br />But now. Now. Oh, Senator McCain. I can't believe that, in your heart of hearts, you don't know that this is wrong. Listen to <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/28/obama.pastor/index.html">the things that people are saying</a>, for heaven's sake. So you'd like to President instead of Mr. Obama; I can understand that. But this is a person, a real person, not just an opponent. He has a wife. And children. And family. And friends. Not to mention the support of at least <a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/">half this country</a>. That is a lot of people that, at the very least, would prefer not to hear these awful things said about him. And at worst? We don't want to see him get hurt because you were trying to win an election. I don't think you want that, either.<br /><br />And please, don't hide behind the fact that you're not the one saying the really inflammatory stuff. I know, it wasn't you that yelled "terrorist" or "commie fag" or "kill him." And you have no control over people's thoughts, or the words that come out of their mouths. But you do, sir, have a responsibility to condemn this sort of talk. Because your silence is tantamount to acceptance, Mr. McCain, and I don't think this is who you really are. In any event, Mr. Obama has been forced to denounce the support of individuals who have been identified with intolerance and unrest (<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/28/obama.pastor/index.html">Rev. Wright</a> and <a href="http://www.suntimes.com/news/mitchell/821131,CST-NWS-mitch02.article">Louis Farrakhan</a> spring to mind). Are you unwilling to dissociate yourself with an entire atmosphere of bigotry because votes are votes? You are better than this, sir.<br /><br />In short, Mr. McCain, Governor Palin is new to Washington, and new to us. She has an excuse for engaging in this kind of behavior (not a justification, mind you, but an excuse). But you, sir? We expected better from you. Or at least, I did.Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-3421877407308465572008-10-07T17:59:00.000-07:002008-10-08T18:06:19.749-07:00Liveblogging the debate--now with hyperlinks!Important moment in history, blah blah blah. I'll spare you the background. It's 6:00. The atmosphere is tense. The Presidential debate is about to start. I'm with Sandhya and Shawn, two friends from law school.<br /><br />6:01<br />They're setting the stage.<br /><br />Everyone expects attacks. On McCain re: <a href="http://www.keatingeconomics.com">Keating</a>, on Obama, re: <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-08-25-ayers_N.htm">Ayers</a>.<br /><br />6:01<br />Brokaw's on. Explaining that it's a town hall.<br /><br />6:02<br />Still talking about the rules. 2 min. responses to common question, one minute follow-up. Side note: apparently, a town hall can be bad for a candidate, cf. Bush in '92.<br /><br />6:03<br />Eisele is an asshole.<br /><br />6:04<br />First question, bald white man. Economy on downturn; what's the fastest most positive solution to bail these people out of the grind.<br /><br />Obama first. Thanking people, for now.<br /><br />6:05<br />A "final verdict." Strong language from Barack.<br /><br />6:05<br />Obama is rambling a bit. I think he should have just answered the gentleman's question, then thanked people when appropriate.<br /><br />6:06<br />He's really saying a lot. But it seems a little disjointed. Almost...Palin-esque?<br /><br />6:06<br />McCain uses a classic trial technique. Goes to the guy, answers his question.<br /><br />He's talking slow and easy. I'm worried.<br /><br />6:07<br />He's talking about how the problem has gotten severe. But, hello, that's the fucking problem the Republicans created. He really thinks we'll swallow this?<br /><br />6:08<br />Who would you appoint secretary of the treasury? I don't think that's a fair question.<br /><br />McCain says "someone we can trust." That sounds like vague Bushery. Mentions Meg Whitman, CEO of eBay.<br /><br />6:10<br />Obama is on the attack now.<br /><br />6:11<br />Just noticed that Brokaw is wearing a <a href="http://www.livestrong.org/">Livestrong </a>bracelet. Cool.<br /><br />6:11<br />Black guy asking question. Quite a hot burgundy shirt, beige suit combination.<br /><br />6:13<br />Just tossed Eisele under the proverbial bus. Not sorry!<br /><br />6:13<br />Still no knockout punches. Hottest story so far is the guy's sweet suit.<br /><br />6:14<br />Obama responds to black guy. He's looking at the guy. He seems to be discussing like a professor.<br /><br />6:14<br />I gotta correct McCain's history, Obama says. He's pointing out McCain's hypocrisy.<br /><br />He's pointing to the record, now, showing that he wrote a letter about this, and no one acted.<br /><br />6:15<br />Obama's doing well.<br /><br />6:15<br />Barack is coming across half-Economics professor, half trial lawyer. Almost <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/opinion/21dowd-sorkin.html">Bartlet</a>-like.<br /><br />6:18<br />Give me a fucking break. You wrote a letter Obama didn't sign? McCain, pull your head out of your ass.<br /><br />6:18<br />Obama needs to set the record straight. McCain is full of shit.<br /><br />6:18<br />Slightly retarded woman (?) just implicated both parties. Obama first...stumbles trying to decipher the question.<br /><br />6:19.<br />Sandhya points out that it's "Mentally-disabled." I am shamed(?)<br /><br />6:22<br />Eisele is a cad.<br /><br />6:22<br />OK, so am I.<br /><br />6:24<br />Brokaw asks for a straight up list of priorities. McCain says work on all three at once. The whole bar is laughing. Did I mention we're watching at <a href="http://www.yelp.com/biz/henrys-berkeley">Henry's</a>?<br /><br />6:25<br />Something strangely homo-erotic about the phrase "reaching across the aisle."<br /><br />6:25<br />I just realized. I'm watching with the right two people. Sandhya, on my left, is the idealist. Shawn, on my right, is the cynic. Perfect.<br /><br />6:27<br />Obama says he's gonna get rid of the earmarks, line by line. He's a con. law prof.; presumably he knows what he can actually do <a href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/09/mccain-blasts-o.html">(unlike McCain)</a>.<br /><br />6:28<br />He's talking about tax policies a lot.<br /><br />6:28<br />Brokaw's chastising about time: "we'll have more bills than the government."<br /><br />6:29<br />Next question. What sacrifices will they ask us to make?<br /><br />6:29<br />Shawn calls me out for pigeonholing him as a cynic. Damn. But he's right. Re: sacrifice, Shawn points out that Carter was ridiculed for suggesting turning down your thermostat.<br /><br />6:29<br />Claims he's going to cut defense spending? I'm confused...didn't he criticize Obama for cutting funding from troops?<br /><br />6:30<br />Barack just 9/11'd up. Oh fuck.<br /><br />6:31<br />Sandhya fears that McCain will go to military record.<br /><br />Obama ridicules Bush's "<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2006/12/20/bush-shopping/">Go out and shop</a>."<br /><br />Obama is talking about offshore drilling? I...don't understand.<br /><br />6:32<br />I think he's saying that these options are not mutually exclusive.<br /><br />I think what he's saying is that, no matter which option you like, we all have to work. That is about sacrifice.<br /><br />Now he says he wants to double the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_Corps">Peace Corps</a>. He is still talking about sacrifice, "led by Washington."<br /><br />6:33<br />Weird question with "drunkenness metaphor."<br /><br />6:34<br />Obama repeats: Spending side, revenue side. Then another earmark attack.<br /><br />I'm not sure if he's really answering the question.<br /><br />6:34<br />Apparently "a woman in the front row looks like <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000163/">Dustin Hoffman</a>?" Hell, that could BE Dustin Hoffman.<br /><br />6:35<br />McCain claims that Obama's plan is like nailing jello to the wall (?)<br /><br />Now he's criticizing, the "tax increases."<br /><br />NOW he's talking about Senator Obama's "secret": the exact same "50% of businesses attack" from last time.<br /><br />6:38<br />I think Brokaw just bitch-slapped Obama...<br /><br />6:38<br />Yeah, he's not going to respond to the lying tax attack.<br /><br />6:40<br />Still on about tax policies. Tax cuts. What's not fair, what doesn't work. I think he should move on.<br /><br />6:41<br />"I'll answer the question." More McCain snarkiness.<br /><br />6:41<br />McCain makes an experience attack.<br /><br />6:43<br />Candidates both breaking rules, Brokaw points out. Next question re: inspiring Congress to act on the issue of the environment.<br /><br />6:44<br />McCain advocating nuclear power that's not necessarily safe for disposal.<br /><br />But now he's talking about green technology. He seems to be contradicting himself.<br /><br />6:45<br />Obama talking about a leap forward like the computer. Technically, everyone thinks <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/11/mccain-admits-he-doesnt-k_n_106478.html">McCain can't use one</a>. He must have learned by now, though...<br /><br />6:46<br />Apparently, Barack is for nuclear power too...ugh. Henry's doesn't like this one.<br /><br />6:46<br />Points out that McCain had a record of fucking up.<br /><br />6:47<br />He supports drilling. But we have 3% of reserves, use 25% of oil. So we can't drill out of the problem. That makes sense, I think.<br /><br />6:48<br />Who wrote that last question? Sarah fucking Palin?<br /><br />6:49<br />"<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ed-k1xOCsMs">That one</a>?" I think that was out of line.<br /><br />6:51<br />Explaining his health care plan now. Sounds like it makes sense. Here's what happens if you do have insurance, here's what happens if you don't.<br /><br />6:52<br />Points out that McCain wants to tax health care benefits. McCain talking about "community health centers"--that sounds like a clinic. I think the public health people will be against this.<br /><br />6:53<br />Now he's saying..."Senator Obama will fine you?" Or is he saying "find you?" Just what is Senator Obama allegedly going to do?<br /><br />6:56<br />Just taking a moment to think about what is at stake in this election. Boy howdy, do I hope this works out.<br /><br />6:56<br />He's talking about a matter of administrative law. A fine? How much is the fine?<br /><br />6:56<br />"Health care is a right for every American." That drew applause from the bar. This turns it on McCain, I guess.<br /><br />6:57<br />Obama talking over McCain now. Still talking about what he will actually do.<br /><br />6:57<br />Sandhya points out that there are no Asian-Americans in the audience, but then muses that this may be this is taking place in Tennessee.<br /><br />6:58<br />I think Obama landed a punch; lot of applause in the bar.<br /><br />6:59<br />McCain still on about the fine. He seems rattled on the next question, re: foreign policy.<br /><br />7:00<br />Here we go. "America's the greatest force for good in the History of the World." American exceptionalism. Questioning Obama's experience. Claiming this is a matter of judgment. "No time for on the job training."<br /><br />7:02<br />Obama was ready for this one. Wrong judgment? How about Iraq? How about "cheerleading Bush"?<br /><br />7:03<br />Obama points out that we could really use the 79 billion dollar surplus in Iraq right here.<br /><br />7:03<br />We can't do anything about the <a href="http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/10/07/196775.aspx">genocide in Darfur</a> because resources are depleted. Obama will go into Darfur, he says, but we gotta make some changes first.<br /><br />7:04<br />What's the Obama Doctrine? Moral issues are at stake, says Obama. He's invoking the Holocaust. Now McCain will take a go at flattering Israel.<br /><br />7:05<br />We can't do everything at once. We gotta use judgment, and allies. That's what Obama says he'll do.<br /><br />7:06<br />McCain claims to have a "cool hand at the tiller."<br /><br />7:08<br />Ah, there it is. McCain says "Never Again" re: the holocaust.<br /><br />7:09<br />Wonder if Obama baited McCain on this one?<br /><br />7:09<br />Obama is talking about people in Afghanistan plotting to kill Americans right now. Oh dear.<br /><br />7:10<br />Obama wants to change relations with Pakistan, expand non-military aid to Pakistan, insist that they have Bin Laden taken out. Or else we WILL take him out.<br /><br />7:11<br />McCain just named Roosevelt as his hero.<br /><br />7:11<br />Shawn: I think he just badmouthed Obama's big stick.<br />Sandhya: Did you make a joke about a big stick? You did, didn't you?<br />Me: Eisele's a hound.<br />Sandhya: Yeah. But isn't that positive? I like dogs, that's why.<br /><br />7:13<br />Wazirastan?<br /><br />7:13<br />Obama follow-up. Brokaw says he's "hired help."<br /><br />7:13<br />Obama keeps saying "pah-ki-stan" (correct).<br /><br />7:14<br />Clarifying his policy. Pointing out McCain's attack directly. The guy who sang "<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAzBxFaio1I">Bomb Iran</a>." Not an example of "speaking softly." Not bad.<br /><br />7:14<br />Yeah, I think Obama landed a punch there.<br /><br />7:15<br />Obama defends himself on his record. Going back to the experience attack. Another cheesy "<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVflzCZv7MU">my friends</a>."<br /><br />7:16<br />Failure in Afghanistan. Brokaw wants to know how the candidates would reorganize.<br /><br />7:17<br />Obama: <a href="http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gEH8n7_6dU6KQrbVuEisi0fWSS9Q">Our guy in Afghanistan</a> needs help.<br /><br />7:17<br />Huh, Obama blames Karzai? Didn't see that coming.<br /><br />7:17<br />McCain cites Petraeus. Once at the beginning, once at the end. Putting it all on Petraeus.<br /><br />7:20<br />Re: Cold War, McCain is other-izing Putin. Claiming that Putin is after Ukraine. Obama should point out that we can't send troops into Russia or Ukraine or Georgia without a draft.<br /><br />7:21<br />Talking about "international pressure" on Russia.<br /><br />7:23<br />Brokaw: "This is a yes or no question. " Is Russia an evil empire?<br /><br />7:24<br />Obama: They've done evil things.<br /><br />7:24<br />McCain seems to be dodging the question: "Maybe."<br /><br />7:30<br />Lost the plot due to my computer's battery dying. Set up on Shawn's now.<br /><br />Now on last question: What don't you know, and how will you learn it?<br /><br />Obama: My <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/10/michelle_obama_5.html">wife</a> knows, and most of the time I ask her.<br /><br />Then: It's never the challenges you expect, it's the challenges you don't. But this country gave me opportunity.<br /><br />7:30<br />He's talking about public scholarships, social programs, that have propelled him to success. Are we going to pass on the same American dream to the next generation, he asks? He's got a good narrative going.<br /><br />7:31<br />He's talking about a better life. That's what's at stake. This sounds really good, I think.<br /><br />7:32<br />McCain: I don't know what's going to happen. Like all of us. Challenges around the world, new and different...we'll be talking about countries we <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WALIARHHLII">can't locate on a map</a>? That didn't play well at Henry's.<br /><br />7:33<br />Invoking a single mom, his time as a prisoner of war. Having people pick you up and put you back in the fight.<br /><br />7:33<br />He's leaning pretty heavily on the military record. Again with the steady hand at the tiller.<br /><br />7:34<br />Whew, and that's it. I can only wait to see what happens in <a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/">the polls</a>.<br /><br />7:42<br />Well, at least the entire bar is talking...Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-23650647626306558102008-10-04T00:07:00.000-07:002008-10-04T12:31:02.013-07:00Regarding the nature of committment, Pt. 1As Som <a href="http://bayareabudo.blogspot.com/2008/10/october-one-of-months-of-earth.html">notes</a>, October is the month of Earth: a time to reflect upon patience, inner strength, and commitment. Largely as a result of my martial arts training, I have found myself reflecting more and more upon the nature of commitment. I'd like to share some of these thoughts.<br /><br />I believe the nature of commitment depends upon the time-frame you're talking about. Commitment in the short term, though related to commitment in the long term, is not quite the same thing. In order to differentiate the two, I shall call them "Commitment" and "COMMITMENT."<br /><br />A Commitment may be something short term. You and your friend agree on Wednesday that you'll go to see a movie together on Friday. Thursday, another friend calls to ask if you'd like to go bowling that night. You tell him, "I'm sorry, I can't, I have a prior commitment." This type of commitment is active in its operation. You say that you're going to do something on Friday night; either you follow through, or you don't.<br /><br />A COMMITMENT is more long-term, and is made up of Commitments. A person might, for example, decide that she wants to be healthier. To that end, she might decide to ride a bicycle everywhere. She might cut certain foods out of her diet. She might pay closer attention to the things that she eats, and the way they make her feel. Each of these things is a Commitment. You ride your bike to work, you've fulfilled your Commitment for that day. You opt for a salad instead of a cheese steak, you've fulfilled another Commitment. These smaller Commitments, over time, contribute to a larger COMMITMENT: to better manage one's health. As time wears on, and more of these smaller Commitments build up, the larger COMMITMENT becomes reaffirmed.<br /><br />Problems often arise, however, when we talk about "commitment" in the context of a personal relationships (as we so often do). "We've been dating for [insert period of time], but I just can't get him to make a commitment" is a complaint we've all at some point heard (or perhaps made). Problems may also arise where one wants to get out of a commitment: "She promised we'd be together forever, but then she left me!" <br /><br />I believe that these problems arise from a failure to realize the dual nature of commitment; that is to say, when we confuse Commitment with COMMITMENT. More to come.Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-78801241853833704862008-10-02T12:38:00.001-07:002008-10-02T16:36:58.845-07:00The Sarah Palin Debate Party and Drinking Game, Part 2: The RulesAs you are all aware, tonight is the night of the Vice Presidential Debate. Unlike most Vice-Presidential debates in recent memory, this one is actually important. For more on the context surrounding the debate, you can take a look at my <a href="http://bayareabudo.blogspot.com/2008/10/sarah-palin-debate-party-and-drinking.html">prior post</a>, or <a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/02/the-vp-debate-what-to-watch-for/">here</a>. The gist of it, however is this: <a href="http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=palin&btnG=Search+News">Palin hasn't been performing well</a>, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/02/palin-vp-debate-voters-do_n_131142.html">voter confidence in her is low</a>, and Barack Obama, either because of this or in addition to it, is <a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/">stomping McCain</a>.<br /><br />Which brings us to tonight.<br /><br />Sarah Palin is going head to head with Joe Biden, the Democractic Vice-Presidential Nominee. Palin will be looking to regain (or perhaps gain) credibility with the voters. Biden will concentrate on not appearing sexist, and upon not blowing it. The stage is set for the Palin-Biden Vice Presidential Debate Drinking Game.<br /><br />The rules are a just a tad unconventional, but pretty standard fare. First, I'm introducing the Palin Preparedness Drink Multiplier. The PPDM serves to multiply the number of drinks taken per rule depending upon Palin's overall level of preparedness for the debate.<br /><br />PPDM is calculated as follows:<br /><br />PPDM = 1 if Sarah Palin is not prepared at all. Basically, if Sarah displays the same level of mental acuity that she has displayed heretofore.<br /><br />PPDM =2 if it is apparent that Sarah has done some preparation, but still cannot be mistaken for an intelligent, prepared politician. Use this multiplier if Sarah's doing better than she has been, but obviously still could not survive Meet the Press, say.<br /><br />PPDM = 3 if Sarah Palin actually appears to be a competent individual. Use this one if based upon the things she's saying, you actually might for a second think she's qualified to assume any job that has "President" in it. I don't expect this rule to come into play either, but one has to cover one's bases.<br /><br /><br />With the PPDM out of the way, let's move on to the rules.<br /><ol><li style="font-weight: bold;">One Drink</li><ol><li>Anytime the CNN audience reaction line takes a huge jump DURING a candidate's statement (i.e, not when it jumps back to middle after someone talks).<br /></li><li>Palin mispronounces the name of a world leader.</li><li>Palin shits on any of the following</li><ol><li>Barack Obama</li><li>Community organizers</li><li>San Francisco</li><li>Gays</li><li>Abortion</li><li>The Media<br /></li></ol><li>Palin rambles at length about exactly nothing.<br /></li><ol><li>One drink for the ramble, plus add a drink for any of the following buzzwords:</li><ol><li>The economy</li><li>The bailout<br /></li><li>Job creation</li><li>Health care</li><li>Tax cuts/increases</li><li>Foreign policy/foreign affairs</li><li>Mortgages<br /></li></ol></ol><li>Anyone invokes John McCain<br /></li><ol><li>Add a drink if they call him a "maverick."<br /></li><li>Add a drink if Biden calls McCain his friend.<br /></li><li>Add a drink if Palin contradicts McCain (i.e. on offshore drilling in Alaska).</li></ol><li>Biden stumbles on a line.</li><li>Either candidate sends a shout-out.</li><ol><li>Add a drink if it's Ted Kennedy</li></ol><li>Anyone mentions George Bush</li><ol><li>Add a drink if it's Palin.</li></ol><li>Biden panders to old people.<br /></li><li>Any reference to a Palin scandal, including, but not limited to:</li><ol><li>Troopergate</li><li>Bristol Palin</li><li>Trig Palin</li><li>Her alleged affair.</li><li>Her being Ms. Alaska.</li></ol><li>Blatant hypocrisy by either candidate. Keep an eye out for Palin calling out Obama for not having foreign policy experience, or maybe complaining about sexism, but this one is flexible.<br /></li></ol><li style="font-weight: bold;">Two Drinks</li><ol><li>Palin attacks Biden and gets smacked down.<br /></li><li>Any mention of either Clinton.</li><ol><li>Add a drink if it's Palin comparing herself to Hillary.<br /></li></ol><li>Anyone mentions "lipstick," in a positive or negative context.<br /></li><li>Palin misidentifies a world leader.</li><li>Palin doesn't know who a world leader is.</li><li>Palin gets "cute" instead of answering a question.<br /></li><li>Someone mentions being able to see Russia from Alaska.</li><ol><li>Add a drink if Palin tries to defend the claim that this = foreign policy experience.</li><li>Add a drink if it comes out that Palin's never actually been to the part of Alaska from whence you can see Russia.</li></ol><li>Palin makes fun of Biden (not attacks, mind you, but <span style="font-weight: bold;">makes fun of</span>)<br /></li><ol><li>Add a drink if Biden has a witty rejoinder.</li><li>Add two drinks if Biden has a not-so-witty, more-mean-spirited rejoinder (i.e. "At least I don't have a retard baby" or "Bitch").<br /></li></ol><li>Any reference to Katie Couric or Charlie Gibson<br /></li></ol><li style="font-weight: bold;">Three Drinks</li><ol><li>Biden attacks Palin and gets smacked down.<br /></li><li>Biden says something sexist or patronizing.</li><ol><li>Finish your drink if Palin has a witty rejoinder.<br /></li></ol><li>Someone invokes Reagan</li><ol><li>Finish your drink if there's any mention of coffins.<br /></li></ol><li>Palin mentions something pro-actively to show that she DOES know about it.</li><ol><li>Finish your drink if she's still wrong (i.e. tries to come up with a Supreme Court case, mentions "Hamdi vs. Spider-Man").</li></ol><li>Palin wants to do something blatantly unconstitutional.</li><li>Palin suggests we go to war with someone.</li><ol><li>Finish your drink if it's not someone we expected ("We gotta get in there and bomb Finland, you know?")</li></ol><li>Biden makes a Biden-ism (i.e. "I believe in Barack America.")</li><ol><li>Finish your beer if it turns out to be an awesome catch-phrase, like Barack America.</li></ol><li>Palin mentions her gay friend ("black friend," e.g., also acceptable).</li><li>Any reference to Michelle Obama.</li><li>Any reference to Tina Fey</li><ol><li>Finish your drink if Biden brings her up for the purpose of making fun of Palin.</li><li>Finish your beer if Palin makes fun of Tina Fey. Then hold me back.<br /></li></ol></ol><li style="font-weight: bold;">Finish your Beer</li><ol><li>Palin makes an "us vs. them" play.</li><li>Palin says something you're "just not supposed to say," i.e. racist, sexist, homophobic, et cetera.</li><li>Palin loses it completely (cries, yells, has a break down, whatever).<br /></li><li>Biden somehow comes out of the debate much worse off.</li><li>Palin takes issue with the moderator</li><li>Biden loses his temper.<br /></li></ol></ol>Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-41444337437350809502008-10-01T21:40:00.000-07:002008-10-01T21:57:15.186-07:00Personal Finance Management on a Bi-Weekly ScheduleMany of us are looking to get into the job market in the coming year. The economic downturn being what it is, it's not a bad idea to think ahead about what you're going to do with that bi-weekly paycheck.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.thesimpledollar.com/2008/10/01/personal-finance-management-on-a-biweekly-pay-schedule/">This article</a> on The Simple Dollar gives some advice about that. I generally like this blog (this is where I got the idea to freeze my credit cards while I paid 'em off). Check it out.Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-74187851932583258742008-10-01T17:37:00.001-07:002008-10-01T17:50:13.716-07:00October: One of the months of Earth!October is one of the months in which we practice the concept of Earth. The philosophy of Seibukan Jujutsu is based on the natural elements of Fire, Water, Earth, Wind, and the Void, as understood through working with Consciousness and Balance. <br /><br />As part of this training, the Earth level represents a dedication to believing in one's self and in accomplishing one's goals through Hibi Tanren - every day training! <br /><br />The element of Earth, demonstrated through nature as a peaceful mountain, a strong, polished river rock, and a patient and powerful bear, exemplifies the concepts of Patience, Inner Strength, and Commitment. <br /><br />The concept of Earth also symbolizes the third part of the triangle of Awareness, Assessment, and Action, which encourages us to take decisive Action with confidence and commitment to our goals!Som Pourfarzanehhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08390213773179461061noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-14867520171166404832008-10-01T15:46:00.000-07:002008-10-01T16:39:46.065-07:00The Sarah Palin Debate Party and Drinking Game, McMarthy's Place, 9pmMike and I are throwing a party to watch the Palin Debate. Our place, 9pm, we'll watch off Tivo. E-mail or call me or Mike if you don't know where it is.<br /><br />But if I may be permitted, I'd like to share some thoughts.<br /><br />If you're like me, you're wondering what the hell is going on in politics these days.<br /><br />The economy is going to <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/01/opinion/01friedman.html?em">shit in a basket of shit</a>. The Republicans buried the bailout, lest they <a href="http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/381150_herbertonline01.html">"put a coffin upon Reagan's coffin."</a> John Stewart asks, "who's in that other coffin?" Who indeed.<br /><br />Apparently, letting Wall Street die creates a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/01/business/economy/01leonhardt.html?em">vacuum of trust</a>. This, in turn leads to a Great Depression.<br /><br />Meanwhile, <a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/">everyone's voting for the young black guy.</a> No one's voting for the old white guy. The media is starting to <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/29/mccain-palin-joint-interv_n_130412.html">grow a pair</a>. Up is down, down is up, and clearly anything is possible.<br /><br />And at the center of it all is Sarah Palin.<br /><br />We all know the type. The quintessential mean girl. Where a conventional bully uses her punches, she uses her looks and popularity. If you're a guy, she's used you. If you're a girl, she's made you cry. <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/29/latest-palin-gaffe-cant-n_n_130395.html">But now she's being exposed as a ditz.</a> And in the most beautiful twist of fate, Tina Fey, writer and co-star of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpceLiwn_Pw">Mean Girls</a> is getting her revenge <a href="http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/couric-palin-open/704042/">lampooning her</a>. She's batting her eyes waiting for the boys to save her, but this time they won't save her.<br /><br />Interesting times. But Sarah Palin is a distraction. We're so busy reacting to her, we're not paying attention. If someone grabs your wrist, he's about to punch you in the face; don't just stare at the hand on the wrist.<br /><br />I think the punch in the face is about to hit. As you know, the bailout got killed. Turns out <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/30/report-gingrich-stabbed-b_n_130487.html">it was the zombie Gingrich</a>. Apparently he's back, and even more the villain. Then today I saw <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luwqRA0GWGc">this </a>posted on Facebook. See it for yourself and decide what you think.<br /><br />Meanwhile, It's 4:02 pm, and the Senate is about to vote on the bailout. Now that McCain has taken his shot at "saving the bailout," Barack Obama takes his turn, <a href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gMTux__tYFdM9y-JnbKpzQbc_OtQD93I02CG0">addressing the Senate</a>. Elsewhere, Bill Clinton, finally, is <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=ao0JNQcTCkHk&refer=us">coming through</a>, campaining to geezers in Florida. Biden is about to go into play, yet another assurance to the old people, worried about their money.<br /><br />And tomorrow, tomorrow, Sarah Palin, Republican Belle of the Ball must face Joe Biden, assurer of geezers.<br /><br />In short, there's a lot going on right now, and we know about more of it than ever before. I don't know about you, but I don't want to miss a moment of this. Join us tomorrow night, won't you?<br /><br />Still to come: Part 2, The Rules of the Drinking Game. I invite you to e-mail me ideas for rules.Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3700779645761800133.post-78660229566744015752008-09-30T15:14:00.000-07:002008-09-30T15:27:46.385-07:00Statement of IntentOh, great, you're saying, another blog.<br /><br />Once again, your pretentious friend has gone and decided that his particular thoughts are too precious to keep to himself.<br /><br />Bear with me; this isn't quite that.<br /><br />I went to the half-price bookstore on Shattuck and picked up The Book of Five Rings, by Musashi Miyamoto. As a martial artist, I've long meant to read this. It begins very succinctly.<br /><br /><blockquote>My name is Musashi Miyamoto. I fought my first duel at thirteen. I won. I have now fought sixty duels. I have never lost.<br /><br />I understand the science of martial arts, and now I must write what I know. It's October 10, 1643, at 4:00 a.m. I sit on the mountain.</blockquote>I think Musashi-san understood something then. This was a moment in history, and he felt the need to make a record. To say, "I was here, and this is what I've learned." <br /><br />I think we may be looking at a moment in history right now. We are on the cusp of the Vice Presidential debate. Sarah Palin is under fire. Obama is winning by a landslide. Yet I've the sense that Sarah Palin is a mere distraction, and something more is about to unfold. Today is September 30, 2008. I was here, and this is what I've learned.Walter J. McMath III, Esq.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11873263281146163751noreply@blogger.com0