Wednesday, March 26, 2008

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Take Back This Country

The lull before the end game. The quiet before the storm. Pennsylvania, coming up. Soon thereafter, the final primaries. Here we go folks. Hillary vs. Barack – the Final Battle. I can even hear the announcer and the reverb. In an age where Professional Wrestling is the country's most popular sport, and in a culture of dualism that puts face off’s at the core of contemporary entertainment, we’re in for a fight that tops all of the hype. Just like 911 beat the best Hollywood disaster movie, this here's a throw down the likes of which this country ain't never seen. But it’s not a fair fight. Fact is, the Clintons and the McCains have way more in common with each other and Big Business than that whole Cabal does with Barack Obama. Barack’s raised his money from over 1,000,000 teeny tiny donations! People LOVE him. Nobody really loves the Cabal. So yes, it seems as if Barack can win it, but at the same time we stop and look at what’s going on and it seems so unbelievable that a guy that looks like Barack and talks the way he does could actually get elected. He looks too good and he talks too straight. Big Business must be shitting their pants. Their only hope is Hillary. At least she can be controlled. And she’ll probably lose to their boy McCain anyway. But there’s no telling what the crazy nigger might do. Hillary’s only hope is to get on a roll, paint Barack as a scary black guy in all the subtle ways that she already is doing, and shake up the super-delegates just enough to eke out a victory. It’s a page right out of the Republican play book -- hell, it is the Republican playbook -- but don’t doubt that this time around we will see our share of Stockholm Syndrome from the Clintons. It sounds ugly, and a recipe for losing in November, but watch out for that kitchen sink and don’t forget to duck!

For the moment, Barack is on vacation and Hillary is making hay. She said today that she would have split with Reverend Wright. Fair enough. Tough to imagine her not jumping on that one. And there was an editorial in the SF Chronicle today saying we really ought to wonder about Barack insofar as the two main people he picked to be in his life seem to hate America. And it’s true that his wife said recently that “for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country.” And Wright has said that we deserved 911 and that we should not bless, but rather damn, America. If Big Business and McCain and Clinton can all get together around pushing the idea out there that both the wife and the pastor of the guy who wants to be President are traitors to America, they might be able to stop him. And don’t doubt it: they will do anything to stop him. If they don’t, they’re hosed.

But let’s delve a little deeper. What exactly is the America Wright wishes to damn? Is it every version of America, or was he referring to the America that looks the other way when 30 million Americans still live in poverty? Did he want us to damn the America of Reverend King, or was perhaps in the context of Wright's sermon the America an America of haves and have nots, an America that still oppresses minorities and only respects the almighty dollar? I suspect it was a pretty unAmerican America that Wright was damning, and his rhetoric was in the set and setting of the black historical experience of that America. Come to think of it, Obama practically said as much in his speech on racism a few days ago.

Regarding the 911 comment, well, that’s the third rail of national politics, and very few people are going to be willing to accept that we deserved 911. Comments referring to “little Eichmanns” deserving to die make it hard to look for any nuance in this debate. So it’s tough to admit that we have comported ourself on the world stage with an arrogance that inevitably would occasion some response. The fact that it was a come-uppance on the epic scale of a Hollywood disaster movie with an Arabic elegance and precision doesn’t make it any easier. It’s hard for us driving around in our little bubbles, living in our little bubbles, working in our little bubbles, to understand that if the US uses 25% of the world’s resources, and generates 25% of the world’s pollution, and has only 5% of the population, then we are using and wasting 5 times as much as is our share. And we’re doing so on the backs of the poor and underpriveleged people. Our temporary wealth comes at the expense of the impoverished. New York, and the World Trade Center, stood as monuments to that wealth machine, and that’s why they were struck. I’m not condoning the attacks. But saying our chickens are coming home to roost is technically not that far from the truth. Obama can’t get into that, at least not yet, but he knows it, and deep down, he agrees with it. And deep down, I bet half our country does too. We know we’re on the losing end. We just need to be convinced that it will go easier for us if we face up to the truth vs. turn up the music and the lights and keep dancing (the Republican strategy from Reagan through Bush).

Regarding Michelle’s quote, that’s a toughie. She’s his wife, and first ladies simply have to be the very picture of dutiful, loyal, patriotism. As female, they must be mother, woman, and daughter of the American dream, the very image of Lady Liberty. They are Betsy Ross. Mamie Eisenhower. Homey Michelle don’t play that. She is darker than her husband, which makes her even scarier to people than her mulatto husband. She is pretty, but somewhat striking looking. She has a fierce face, a muscular posture, a fierce demeanor. Her eyes are fiery. Looking at her close up, as Mr. and Mrs. America are starting to do, they might think: I wonder if she doesn't like white people? They may not feel the soft, embracing love of femininity from Michelle Obama. I don't know if we're ready for the stern black lady that brooks no nonsense. What if she gets wise to our carryings on and whoops us upside the head? On the other hand, she may be way more conservative than her husband.

But did she really say she was proud of her country for the first time? No. She said for the first time as an adult, she was _really_ proud (emphasis mine). And you know, I can hear that. She and I are the same age. I remember being really proud of America when we landed on the moon and broadcast the video to the planet. I remember being really proud of America when we impeached Nixon and proved that we were a nation of laws and not of men. I remember being really proud when an honest man named Jimmy Carter won the Presidency and got out of his car and walked up Pennsylvania Avenue. But those things happened when I was 8, 14 and 16. Since I’ve been an adult, since Reagan, what’s there to be _really_ proud about?

Read the words of the conservative writer John Podhoretz: “Really proud of her country for the first time? Michelle Obama is 44 years old. She has been an adult since 1982. Can it really be there has not been a moment during that time when she felt proud of her country? Forget matters like the victory in the Cold War; how about only things that have made liberals proud — all the accomplishments of inclusion? How about the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1991? Or Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s elevation to the Supreme Court? Or Carol Moseley Braun’s election to the Senate in 1998? How about the merely humanitarian, like this country’s startling generosity to the victims of the tsunami? I’m sure commenters can think of hundreds more landmarks of this sort. Didn’t she even get a twinge from, say, the Olympics?”

I got no twinge from the Olympics. Ruth Bader Ginsburg? Please. George Bush's Civil Rights Act of 1991? Sorry John, but as I go through your list, to be honest, it seems really weak. Those are pretty minor accomplishments, and even some of the nicer ones really don’t make me proud of my _country_. The fact that the Soviet Union fell apart didn’t necessarily make me proud of the USA, but it did make me proud of the world. But America waking up, believing in democracy for the first time since Reagan's voodoo, daring to hope we can turn this thing around, that’s something to be proud of! Listen to what Michelle actually said: http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=49244. She’s saying that this movement is real, that she’s witnessing something that’s actually moving her to love her country again. If she and her husband unite around that quote, stand behind it, talk about how much they love this country, so much that they aren’t willing to hide behind a false patriotism, but so much that they are willing to force us to grow as a people, that the time is now to take it to the next level, they can take this debate right out of the hands of this Cabal that has controlled things for so long, and we can take back this country.

Sunday, March 23, 2008

Eco Barack?

One thing I’d really like to see is Barack Obama stop drinking from all those plastic water bottles. I would like to get him his own custom water bottle. Or sell Barack Obama branded water bottles. Why not?

Monday, March 17, 2008

Free China!


Here we go again with China. I don't know how they do it. Between Taiwan, Tibet, the lack of human rights, copyrights, the proliferation of censorship and environmental devastation, it's amazing how much they're getting away with. We seem to be shamed into quietude, somehow because my own country so imperfect. I agree, but that's really besides the point. Nancy Pelosi said it best when she said: "(I)f freedom loving people throughout the world do not speak out against China's oppression in Tibet, we have lost our moral authority to speak on behalf of human rights anywhere in the world." That's it: If our lives are worth a damn we ought to try to help these people. The monks are so brave, and the Chinese government is made up of such cowards, that the USA should help protect the monks, and stop the Chinese from taking over the world. So I asked my camaraderie of symbolic figureheads what they thought, and here's what they said:


Paul Bunyan noted the Chinese government's explanation of the protests: "Some ignorant monks led by a small handful of people did some illegal things that can challenge social stability."

That's a perfect and compact expression of the whole commie-chinese thing.

Tibet is over. The have been absorbed like Rome absorbed Sicily. The only difference between now and then is the world has developed a sense of shame about conquest for some reason, and so there are certain pretenses maintained (mainly, 1., that china didn't take tibet, they just "always" owned it, and 2., they are doing this all for the "greater good" of tibetans, who were being oppressed by a theocracy.). Power has spoken, as far as the tibetan geography is concerned.

But there is something to do, which is to help the monks in exile. Cause they are in exile forever, like the Jews. There are a lot of them in No. Cal I think. There are also a lot of them in the twin cities for some reason.

Paul's Brother added:

Helping them in exile. It is being done to some degree. I think money to SaveTibet helps preserve the culture too.

The biggest thing that I see being done, and that I support -- and the most helpful no matter what happens to Tibet -- is the strong effort being made to preserve the Tibetan heritage in exile. In particular, the core of the Tibetan Buddhist teachings is being kept alive. The Buddhists are good at seeing what is really happening and they have put a lot of energy into this, realizing that this is more important than the country in crucial ways.

The Chinese are simply exterminating the culture. Lots of intermarriage is helping to make the death a soft death. The Chinese are absolute masters at this shit. And they don't give a shit about world opinion. Even less than we do.

My friends, who don't agree with what the Chinese are doing, are nevertheless taking the famous new Chinese railway up into Tibet (Lhasa eventually?) and seeing Tibet. Partly, they say, to see it before it is utterly destroyed. :-(

But this is just talk. Good question. What can be done besides just donating money. That's all I do at this point.

And I heard from Sacagawea too:

A Tibetan teacher said to me that the virtue of the Chinese invasion is that the Tibetan Buddhist teachings were spread all over the world.

And the thing is, there are lots of monks -- and nuns too! -- who need support, because their traditional culture that supported them is broken. I send funds every year to a nunnery in Dharamsala that also educates the nuns far beyond what they used to before the invasion.

And we have the incredible example of HH the Dalai Lama, who does not harbor hatred toward the Chinese. It is his practice.

Sunday, March 16, 2008

Time to Speak Out

First Burma, now this. My heart goes out to these amazingly brave monks who are facing down the government of China. Don't you think the US should be sending protesters? Or at least performance artists? Let them get busted and have the American people see what the Chinese gov't does. We need to infiltrate who among the tribes of the movement is going and get some flights to china ASAP. Code Pink and Move On and partner with some right wing religious orgs too that are willing to send nuns to protest in solidarity. But I dont' see any voices in the movement talking like this. It's so ironic, but the only voice that says it's our job to speak up is George W. Bush's, which is really Michael Gerson's. And he's long gone. Dang. There _must_ be some show of being appalled at the games, but I wonder if we've got it in us.

Friday, March 14, 2008

Obama's Mama

The story in the NYTimes today was really special. It rounds out who Barack is. He emerges as something on an announted one, and his mother as a bit of a Mary figure. His whole candidacy makes even more sense. And what an angel she seems to be. I think we should say a prayer for her. The story, worth a read, is here: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/14/MNCVVJJRK.DTL

Sunday, March 09, 2008

Does Wright Doom Obama?

I wrote my good buddy Paul Bunyan that I was concerned about the white backlash to the Wright controversy. When the general public gets wind of the worst of what Wright has said, I'm afraid it will doom Obama. Paul kind of talked me out of it. He said:

You really think it dooms him? I don't. The African American church is an intense thing, really almost inseperable from being black in america. Or at least that's what black friend of mine in grad school told me. This church was the way he found to connect to that, which he was not born in.

I think it depends on how crazy this Jeremiah Wright guy is. Hmm.. site's down...hmm...wikipedia....

I think it's okay. I was afraid of some anti-semitism, but looks like the worst is some anti-Israelism, a little Blaming-AMerica-for-9/11, and a lot of Blackness-centered theology. Here's an excerpt: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13390609/campaign_08_the_radical_roots_of_barack_obama/print

"Fact number two: Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run!" There is thumping applause; Wright has a cadence and power that make Obama sound like John Kerry. Now the reverend begins to preach. "We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns and the training of professional KILLERS. . . . We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God. . . . We conducted radiation experiments on our own people. . . . We care nothing about human life if the ends justify the means!" The crowd whoops and amens as Wright builds to his climax: "And. And. And! GAWD! Has GOT! To be SICK! OF THIS SHIT!"

Uncle Sam here again, resonding to Paul Bunyan quoting Rolling Stone (above). My thinking has expanded on the subject, mainly due to the point of placing the Black Church in the context of American freedom of religion. It got me thinking, and I wrote this while I was traveling the highways and byways of America:

As an American, I appreciate what it means to have the black church. I have actually been a big fan of some of the rhetoric of Farrakhan, and at times even dig where he's coming from. He takes care of his own, and believes in wholesomeness, speaks truth about his own people's problems, and aspires to greatness (as does Wright). His last formally racist comments were 24 years ago, and if you read them, there is the interesting distinction he makes between the “true Jews” which he respects, and the “false Jews,” which he doesn’t. Similar distinctions have been made about Christians through the millenia, and in the Bible, even by Jesus when referring to a "tepid Christianity" (most famously quoted by Dostoevski), and so anyway it’s possibly not 100% straight up Jew hating. It’s probably more complicated.


The million man march was a huge moment in our history, and Farrakhan's speech there rocked my world. I even love the way some black churches have taken aspects of Islam and connected them to black people, half-baked as it may sound to a true Muslim. It's enough truth with enough creativity that enables it to fly.Black people have had their culture ripped from them and to have a new American-style made up culture to bolt onto such a fragmented experience does make sense. But Wright and his ilk, starting with Farakkhan, broke from the Black Muslims, and focused more on roots. And what these connections to "roots" do is nothing short of transformational. Look at Muhammad Ali. Without the Black Muslims, he never would have been who he was. He could not have been the true Champion of the World, the all time greatest, as Cassius Clay. And to anticipate what Obama is gonna do when it all hits the fan about Obama and Trinity, Ali in all his name changing self creation is at its heart as American as it gets. So Trinity kind of does this same "connection with your roots" thing, only not so much with Islam as with Africa itself. Not perfectly or perfectly true, but better. But neither is the Jewish people connecting with 2000 years ago Israel entirely true. But it's true enough and it gives the identity the Jews need to survive. People need that historiocity. It's crucial. So 1) it saved Obama, and 2) it's a super American thing the way it saved him. The challenge is how not to lose a sufficiently large % of votes when people simply SEE what that Trinity website looks like. I appreciate that it's not that different than a Huckabee or a Romney. Americans have these intense churches with intense sermons that we get a lot from. But in the case of Trinity, it has a militant tone. And black people still scare white people, though the heroes of the 20th century have begun to dismantle that. But Obama offers proof that when white people mix with black people, musically, socially sexually, through fighting or sports, or even if just mixing DNA, black people win. Obama is half and half, but he's black. He is way more white then black, but because black is so much more powerful, he's still "black." America is ready for Bill Cosby, Will Smith, Denzel Washington, Tiger Woods, and Michael Jordan. I doubt we will ever be ready for anger from a black presidential candidate though. So once this story gets circulated, and people feel the anger coming off the page, it will be on Obama big time to somehow let the anger out, and reassert himself as a man of peace. But from all I've seen so far, I think he'll do it.