One 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.
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.
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.
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 perfectly. 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.
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, and we are always working towards perfection.
Let's Keep Going!
Som Pourfarzaneh
Monday, February 16, 2009
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Black Friday Massacre: Separating Love and Consumerism
In my previous installment, 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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, then 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.
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.
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.
To be continued...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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, then 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.
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.
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.
To be continued...
Friday, November 28, 2008
Black Friday Massacre: Great Holiday Deals at the Cost of our Humanity
By now, pretty much everyone knows about Jdimytai Damour, a temp Walmart employee who met his untimely demise 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.
I'm going to repeat that last part, just so it can sink in. A crowd of people, in pursuit of things, trampled a person 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.
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.
CONSUMER CULTURE: SPENDING OUR WAY TO "HAPPINESS"
As a wise person once said, "Success is getting what you want. Happiness is wanting what you get." We received an object lesson from Wall-E 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
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.
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.
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.
To be continued...
I'm going to repeat that last part, just so it can sink in. A crowd of people, in pursuit of things, trampled a person 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.
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.
CONSUMER CULTURE: SPENDING OUR WAY TO "HAPPINESS"
As a wise person once said, "Success is getting what you want. Happiness is wanting what you get." We received an object lesson from Wall-E 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
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.
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.
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.
To be continued...
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Live Coverage from Henry's
I'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.
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 true colors 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.
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. Obama's website, 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 election news sources, Youtube videos of rallies and gaffes, and the Obama iPhone program? I imagine the youth are quite excited.
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, he specifically refrained from an endorsement, 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.
3:15pm. Got Holly's phone number. Not relevant to the election, but hey.
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 true colors 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.
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. Obama's website, 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 election news sources, Youtube videos of rallies and gaffes, and the Obama iPhone program? I imagine the youth are quite excited.
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, he specifically refrained from an endorsement, 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.
3:15pm. Got Holly's phone number. Not relevant to the election, but hey.
Live Election Coverage: My Voting Experience
Whew, 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).
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.
2:00 - 3:30 - Coverage at Henry's.
5:00 - ? Coverage at Luka's Tap Room
11:30pm - Fly to Washington DC!
Plus whatever other updates I can squeeze in. Stay tuned!
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.
2:00 - 3:30 - Coverage at Henry's.
5:00 - ? Coverage at Luka's Tap Room
11:30pm - Fly to Washington DC!
Plus whatever other updates I can squeeze in. Stay tuned!
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Live-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.
6:06. Joined by a motley crew tonight. Dana, Sandhya, Shawn, William, Emily, and Alex. Obama talking.
6:06. I guess the question's about the economy?
6:07. Whatever Obama's saying, the CNN line tells me that the women are responding better than the men.
6:08. McCain's back on. Telling a story about some plumber in a higher tax bracket.
6:09. McCain promising low taxes, health care. Pitting Obama against Joe the Plumber.
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?
6:11. McCain responds. Keeps using the phrase "spread the wealth around" in reference to Obama. I think he's playing the socialist card.
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.
6:14. Bob Schieffer with a new topic: specifics about the deficit.
6:15. Obama first. Talking about correctly structuring the rescue package.
6:15. Racer 5 is delicious.
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.
6:16. Serious energy policy will also alleviate "borrowing from China to pay Saudi Arabia." The line says he's doing well.
6:17. McCain responds.
6:18. Alex notes that McCain "is getting pissed."
6:18. McCain is talking about ethanol subsidies. An Obama attack.
6:19. Again with the "I know": I know how to save taxpayers millions.
6:19. Tamar observes that McCain keeps saying this kind of thing.
6:19. Alex is right. McCain's gonna explode.
6:21. McCain claims that he loves President Bush.
6:22. McCain cites the record. Attacking Barack for not going against the leaders of his party.
6:23. Obama landed a punch, judging by reactions, but I didn't hear it. Oh, he backed something up by citing Fox News.
6:24. Obama went after him hard. McCain responding. It sounds like he's defending his record as a maverick.
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.
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.
6:27. Reference to Sarah Palin.
6:28. Obama still looks bemused. Think he's ready for this. McCain just called Obama a "longshot candidate."
6:28. McCain criticizes the high spending of the Obama campaign. I think he's criticizing Obama for making more money.
6:29. Obama points out that 2/3 of Americans believe McCain's running a negative campaign. People care about health care, tax policy.
6:30. Obama says the attacks don't matter; just fix the problem. The women seem to like that one.
6:31. McCain criticizing Obama's spending again.
6:32. Obama just brought up "terrorist," "kill him." McCain getting antsy.
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.
6:34. McCain just called the racists "fringe people." Apparently some T-shirts have hurt Senator McCain's feelings.
6:35. Obama: "Disagree without being disagreeable."
6:36. Gergen's pundit-meter not doing much; Alex asks whether he fell asleep.
6:36. McCain brings up ACORN. Obama still looking bemused.
6:37. Obama calls Ayers the "centerpiece" of McCain's campaign. Obama explains the Ayers connection, mentions that Ronald Reagan funded it.
6:38. ACORN, according to Obama, paid people to register voters. Obama represented them alongside the Justice Department.
6:38. The Line is responding well. McCain looks uncomfortable. Like, "what the fuck am I gonna say?" The women like this.
6:39. Henry's just burst into applause. Obama's remarks played well.
6:40. McCain's response was muddled. Something about taxes. Next question.
6:40. Which running mate is better? Obama first.
6:41. Obama is pointing to Biden's expertise. Scranton.
6:41. The bar is a lot quieter when Obama talks. This is Berkeley, of course, but still.
6:42. Obama advocates for energy independence. McCain's up.
6:43. I don't envy him; he's got to defend Palin. The hoots are starting.
6:43. He's pointing to Sarah's pipeline to nowhere--a pipeline that doesn't exist--as her experience.
6:44. McCain brings up special needs families. My lord, he actually went to Sarah Palin's Down's baby.
6:44. Dana: Look at the retarded-baby spike! Bwah ha ha ha ha!
6:46. McCain attacks Obama again for wanting to raise taxes. Schieffer changes the subject to energy.
6:48. Alex popints out the McCain's suit is shittier than Obama's. Intentional?
6:48. Whatever McCain said, it got a favorable response.
6:49. Obama responds. Expand domestic production. But we can't drill our way out of the problem due to the numbers.
6:50. Obama points out that we invented the auto industry. That probably earned him some red state points.
6:52. Playing the "uppity" card. Can Obama field this without "getting black"?
6:54. Obama refers to car dealerships closing. Talks about the "fuel-efficient cars of the future."
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."
6:56. McCain has lost the plot.
6:57. Next question. Controlled health care costs or expanded health care coverage? Obama says we need both. The Line likes it.
6:58. The Line is maxed out, women and men. McCain is comfortably at the middle.
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.
7:03. Obama is killin' this question. Explaining his health care plan, showing why McCain's sucks.
7:03. More regulation.
7:04. McCain on "spread the wealth" again. I think he's really trying to call Obama a socialist.
7:05. McCain is playing the communism card re: Obama's health plan. Here's the thing: that worked on Kerry in 2004.
7:07. Roe v. Wade. Schieffer wants to know if they'd nominate a Supreme Court Judge that disagrees with their position on it.
7:07. McCain says he's a "federalist;" he would leave it to the states, not have a "litmus test."
7:07. McCain points to his maverick record.
7:09. Obama answers. He hasn't looked uncomfortable this hold debate.
7:09. Obama says that any judge must be able to provide fairness to the American people.
7:10. Obama's killin' it. McCain knows he's fucked.
7:11. Obama's talking about the statute of limitations. Oh, he's going after the women. More applause from Henry's.
7:12. Me: "This debate's not fair to both candidates. When are they gonna ask a question about Matlock?" Tamar: "McCain kind of looks like Matlock..."
7:14. Obama supports a ban on late-term abortions, except where the mother's life is threatened. I hate abortion, but I agree.
7:15. Obama maxed out the line again. McCain is dead in the water.
7:16. McCain takes it to his adopted Bangladeshi child--which, if you'll recall, was a liability in 2000.
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?
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.
7:18. Obama: $4,000 tuition credit for public service: military service, peace corps.
7:19. Obama says "we can't do it just for the schools; parents must step up."
7:19. McCain alleges that we have equal school access. He's talking about charter schools and vouchers.
7:20. McCain advocates Teach for America.
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.
7:22. Obama wants to provide higher salaries and more support. Obama seems to attack every problem on two fronts. I like that.
7:23. McCain is on about vouchers. Parents want them, he says, because parents want the ability to choose.
7:25. McCain's Sarah Palin reference doesn't play well at Henry's.
7:26. Obama responds re: vouchers in DC.
7:27. Schieffer puts in a weird plug for "mydebates.org."
7:27. McCain closing. "My friends" returns!
7:28. McCain says America needs a new direction. McCain, the Maverick, will deliver.
7:29. McCain says that it comes down to the candidate that you can trust.
7:29. Now he's talking about a "long line of McCains" that has served the country.
7:29. Obama responds. Looks straight into the camera; this could be a fireside chat.
7:30. The Line is responding well to Obama's closing.
7:31. Obama renews his old message, that we all have to work together.
7:31. Obama's closing drew applause in Henry's.
7:31. Schieffer: "Go vote now. It'll make you feel big and strong."
7:33. P.Y.T. playing at Henry's. Sweeeet.
6:06. Joined by a motley crew tonight. Dana, Sandhya, Shawn, William, Emily, and Alex. Obama talking.
6:06. I guess the question's about the economy?
6:07. Whatever Obama's saying, the CNN line tells me that the women are responding better than the men.
6:08. McCain's back on. Telling a story about some plumber in a higher tax bracket.
6:09. McCain promising low taxes, health care. Pitting Obama against Joe the Plumber.
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?
6:11. McCain responds. Keeps using the phrase "spread the wealth around" in reference to Obama. I think he's playing the socialist card.
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.
6:14. Bob Schieffer with a new topic: specifics about the deficit.
6:15. Obama first. Talking about correctly structuring the rescue package.
6:15. Racer 5 is delicious.
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.
6:16. Serious energy policy will also alleviate "borrowing from China to pay Saudi Arabia." The line says he's doing well.
6:17. McCain responds.
6:18. Alex notes that McCain "is getting pissed."
6:18. McCain is talking about ethanol subsidies. An Obama attack.
6:19. Again with the "I know": I know how to save taxpayers millions.
6:19. Tamar observes that McCain keeps saying this kind of thing.
6:19. Alex is right. McCain's gonna explode.
6:21. McCain claims that he loves President Bush.
6:22. McCain cites the record. Attacking Barack for not going against the leaders of his party.
6:23. Obama landed a punch, judging by reactions, but I didn't hear it. Oh, he backed something up by citing Fox News.
6:24. Obama went after him hard. McCain responding. It sounds like he's defending his record as a maverick.
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.
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.
6:27. Reference to Sarah Palin.
6:28. Obama still looks bemused. Think he's ready for this. McCain just called Obama a "longshot candidate."
6:28. McCain criticizes the high spending of the Obama campaign. I think he's criticizing Obama for making more money.
6:29. Obama points out that 2/3 of Americans believe McCain's running a negative campaign. People care about health care, tax policy.
6:30. Obama says the attacks don't matter; just fix the problem. The women seem to like that one.
6:31. McCain criticizing Obama's spending again.
6:32. Obama just brought up "terrorist," "kill him." McCain getting antsy.
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.
6:34. McCain just called the racists "fringe people." Apparently some T-shirts have hurt Senator McCain's feelings.
6:35. Obama: "Disagree without being disagreeable."
6:36. Gergen's pundit-meter not doing much; Alex asks whether he fell asleep.
6:36. McCain brings up ACORN. Obama still looking bemused.
6:37. Obama calls Ayers the "centerpiece" of McCain's campaign. Obama explains the Ayers connection, mentions that Ronald Reagan funded it.
6:38. ACORN, according to Obama, paid people to register voters. Obama represented them alongside the Justice Department.
6:38. The Line is responding well. McCain looks uncomfortable. Like, "what the fuck am I gonna say?" The women like this.
6:39. Henry's just burst into applause. Obama's remarks played well.
6:40. McCain's response was muddled. Something about taxes. Next question.
6:40. Which running mate is better? Obama first.
6:41. Obama is pointing to Biden's expertise. Scranton.
6:41. The bar is a lot quieter when Obama talks. This is Berkeley, of course, but still.
6:42. Obama advocates for energy independence. McCain's up.
6:43. I don't envy him; he's got to defend Palin. The hoots are starting.
6:43. He's pointing to Sarah's pipeline to nowhere--a pipeline that doesn't exist--as her experience.
6:44. McCain brings up special needs families. My lord, he actually went to Sarah Palin's Down's baby.
6:44. Dana: Look at the retarded-baby spike! Bwah ha ha ha ha!
6:46. McCain attacks Obama again for wanting to raise taxes. Schieffer changes the subject to energy.
6:48. Alex popints out the McCain's suit is shittier than Obama's. Intentional?
6:48. Whatever McCain said, it got a favorable response.
6:49. Obama responds. Expand domestic production. But we can't drill our way out of the problem due to the numbers.
6:50. Obama points out that we invented the auto industry. That probably earned him some red state points.
6:52. Playing the "uppity" card. Can Obama field this without "getting black"?
6:54. Obama refers to car dealerships closing. Talks about the "fuel-efficient cars of the future."
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."
6:56. McCain has lost the plot.
6:57. Next question. Controlled health care costs or expanded health care coverage? Obama says we need both. The Line likes it.
6:58. The Line is maxed out, women and men. McCain is comfortably at the middle.
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.
7:03. Obama is killin' this question. Explaining his health care plan, showing why McCain's sucks.
7:03. More regulation.
7:04. McCain on "spread the wealth" again. I think he's really trying to call Obama a socialist.
7:05. McCain is playing the communism card re: Obama's health plan. Here's the thing: that worked on Kerry in 2004.
7:07. Roe v. Wade. Schieffer wants to know if they'd nominate a Supreme Court Judge that disagrees with their position on it.
7:07. McCain says he's a "federalist;" he would leave it to the states, not have a "litmus test."
7:07. McCain points to his maverick record.
7:09. Obama answers. He hasn't looked uncomfortable this hold debate.
7:09. Obama says that any judge must be able to provide fairness to the American people.
7:10. Obama's killin' it. McCain knows he's fucked.
7:11. Obama's talking about the statute of limitations. Oh, he's going after the women. More applause from Henry's.
7:12. Me: "This debate's not fair to both candidates. When are they gonna ask a question about Matlock?" Tamar: "McCain kind of looks like Matlock..."
7:14. Obama supports a ban on late-term abortions, except where the mother's life is threatened. I hate abortion, but I agree.
7:15. Obama maxed out the line again. McCain is dead in the water.
7:16. McCain takes it to his adopted Bangladeshi child--which, if you'll recall, was a liability in 2000.
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?
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.
7:18. Obama: $4,000 tuition credit for public service: military service, peace corps.
7:19. Obama says "we can't do it just for the schools; parents must step up."
7:19. McCain alleges that we have equal school access. He's talking about charter schools and vouchers.
7:20. McCain advocates Teach for America.
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.
7:22. Obama wants to provide higher salaries and more support. Obama seems to attack every problem on two fronts. I like that.
7:23. McCain is on about vouchers. Parents want them, he says, because parents want the ability to choose.
7:25. McCain's Sarah Palin reference doesn't play well at Henry's.
7:26. Obama responds re: vouchers in DC.
7:27. Schieffer puts in a weird plug for "mydebates.org."
7:27. McCain closing. "My friends" returns!
7:28. McCain says America needs a new direction. McCain, the Maverick, will deliver.
7:29. McCain says that it comes down to the candidate that you can trust.
7:29. Now he's talking about a "long line of McCains" that has served the country.
7:29. Obama responds. Looks straight into the camera; this could be a fireside chat.
7:30. The Line is responding well to Obama's closing.
7:31. Obama renews his old message, that we all have to work together.
7:31. Obama's closing drew applause in Henry's.
7:31. Schieffer: "Go vote now. It'll make you feel big and strong."
7:33. P.Y.T. playing at Henry's. Sweeeet.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
An Open Letter to John McCain
By now, everyone is familiar with the negative direction 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.
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 ad infinitum. 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.
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 all that you have left. 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 the things that people are saying, 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 half this country. 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.
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 (Rev. Wright and Louis Farrakhan 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.
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.
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 ad infinitum. 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.
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 all that you have left. 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 the things that people are saying, 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 half this country. 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.
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 (Rev. Wright and Louis Farrakhan 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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)