|
Dissolve into Evergreens
|
||||
|
Obama At House Republican Retreat In Baltimore: FU... AIG Loses Exec, Wins TARP Comp Ruling - Regulatory... Man v. Nature Spicy Predictable Consequences not why, but why not Tea Party Zombies Squishy Mice Pumpkin Star Trek Pumpkin Star Trek Follow Up Justin Oldham - Politics and Patriotism
Wilco The Flaming Lips The New Radicals John Mayer Zero 7 Dream Theater Radiohead Death Cab for Cutie The Notwist O.S.I. Ani Difranco The Shins Elliott Smith Badly Drawn Boy Chroma Key Coheed and Cambria The Streets Andrew Bird Sufjan Stevens Atom Site Feed 
|
3.27.2006
Growing up in Oklahoma, Wyoming seemed like such a long ways away. So it was with some surprise that while driving up to Fort Collins on Saturday to visit the New Belgium Brewery I noticed that it was only another 30-40 miles to get to Cheyenne. "Isn't that in Wyoming?" I thought... Never been there. I've been to: Oklahoma Texas Alabama Georgia Mississippi Lousiana Florida Tennesee New Mexico Arizona California Kansas Missouri Arkansas and.. Colorado But never Wyoming. So, now I've been. To Cheyenne at least. It was dark. With a little luck I will get a chance to make it to Yellowstone National Park this summer. Its been a goal of mine for many years. I hear its beautiful. I want to get a chance to see it for myself. Maybe while I'm in the area I'll get to visit Idaho and...wow... Montana. | 3.24.2006
MSN Money - Financial Times Business News: US pension bill allows big cut in contributions: "Employers will be able to slash their contributions to underfunded pension schemes by tens of billions of dollars over the next five years under proposed legislation before Congress that was expected to have the opposite effect." I guess sometimes I try to imagine that I live in a different world wherein the article above would be considered outrageous instead of perfectly acceptable, where congress, instead of acting in the best interests of their wealthy friends decides to act in the interests of the working people of America. I find it hard to imagine that world, because I've never lived in that world. I look around and see lots of wealth handed out to shareholders. At the same time we read about how the federal government is having to borrow money from worker's retirement funds until they can get their debt limit raised and how congress is wanting to lend a helping hand to companies that are struggling to pay into their pensions. Meanwhile...: The U.S., also thrived, adding 69 new billionaires. The U.S. is now home to an astonishing 341 billionaires, just shy of half the world's billionaire population. Strong stock markets fueled much of this growth: Since the end of January 2003, the S&P 500 is up 38%, and the Nasdaq has gained 56%. How is this not class warfare? The Bush administration is preparing a budget request that would freeze most spending on agriculture, veterans and science, slash or eliminate dozens of federal programs, and force more costs, from Medicaid to housing, onto state and local governments, according to congressional aides and lawmakers. and... war on veterans? Veterans programs are also expected to be pinched, with flat funding, higher deductibles and co-payments for health care and a squeeze on benefit eligibility, aides said. Wise people said that putting republicans in charge would result in huge tax cuts that would lead to deficit spending that would lead to cuts in spending for the poor, middle class, elderly and veterans. They were right. We got what we asked for. Bush is president of the United Shareholders of America. The rest of us...? Too bad. (via eschaton) | 3.21.2006
 So, I work with this young republican type kid. He might be gone in a few months to intern in D.C. - an opportunity he got through a connection. It got me wondering - if I had to sum up republicanism, as it stands today, in just a few words, what would I say? I might say that: "Republicanism is a reactionary political orientation which appeals to a fear of change to maintain those institutions that bestow privilege." It is, essentially, from my point of view, a reactionary political force that attacks anything and anyone that seeks to change the current social, economic and political institutions that currently provide privilege to a relatively small minority of people. It gains and maintains its support by appealing to a general fear of others and change to convince those people that are not directly benefitting from this system to vote republican. So while it might not be explicitly racist, it does appeal to a general fear of hispanics and blacks as a threat to the dominant role of white culture in America. This xenophobia extends to other religions, other sexual orientations and any other point of view that might be considered critical of the status quo. In some material I've read even criticism of republicans/the president is considered dangerous. I can see the appeal. If I were convinced that I would benefit from supporting the current system I might be tempted defend it, that is, if I didn't have a sense of fairness and compassion. I might even start to create elaborate rationales for promoting inequality in the name of righteousness. 
| 3.18.2006
 We had a nice day out, went to Red Rocks. It started snowing a bit and that made it very beautiful as well. I look forward to going and seeing a concert there soon. | 3.16.2006
 I used to be pretty reserved when it came to confronting Bush Republicans in real life. But these days I feel less inclined to be so nice. I mean, sheesh, its such an easier thing to do now than it was a few years ago when they could count on people's paranoia to at least give their reactionary idealogy some play. But now, there's a nice clean record to refer to. The tired ol' republican game of blaming the democrats for everything seems, well, absurd (more absurd?) now that they've held all three branches of government for a fairly decent chunk of time. The republican political apparatus, while very effective at winning elections and driving debates, cannot govern worth a hoot. The problem, from my point of view, is that competant people are being shut out of the game by both parties. The republicans are deliberately trying to forsake practical solutions in its bid to become the party of the idealogically blinded, while the democrats are acutely aware that they will never be allowed to govern unless they appease the corporate money-givers. The democrats will find this hard to do if they ever try to fix what is so horribly wrong with our foreign and domestic policy, namely that we are driven by corporate special interests to pursue bad long term policy decisions. Hence the republican's winning strategy, to pander to people's fear, bigotry and sense of tribal superiority while giving the powerful what they want. I feel I shouldn't have to mention that this is ultimately really really bad for us as a nation.
| 3.11.2006
 Which is the bigger geek? Someone who has attended five Star Trek conventions, dressing up in a Star Trek costume for one of those times... Or.. Someone who has played Magic: The Gathering and Dungeons and Dragons? | 3.08.2006
 Sometimes I think that each of us have one thing that we use to make ourselves feel superior to others. Its a defense mechanism that we turn to when someone comes along and makes us feel small. Its at that point that we think: "Well, at least I'm....." better looking more moral smarter more educated wealthier more famous ...and the list can go on and on. This one thing is our point of pride; the thing that keeps our ego going despite the obstacles we must face in our daily lives. Because if we stop to think about it long enough, in a world with billions of people we really are quite insignificant. That can be a difficult blow to our fragile sense of self-importance. "But, at least I'm better than the person next to me that doesn't have the nice house, the morals, the good looks, the brains, or the education I have." Its true that we all have things that we focus on in our lives. Its how the church-goer, actor, activist, professional, acedemic, etc.. can feel worthwhile. We can't expect everyone to excel in all aspects of life, its just impossible. Where I think it all goes wrong is when we confuse our own priorities with that of others; when we start to think that everyone should value beauty, or money or education, or success, etc... as much as we do, and decide that if they don't then they are worthy of our scorn.
| 3.07.2006
 When I think about our economic system I think of it as like an equation; you put in variables and out pops a result. This is different from thinking of our economic system in terms of ideals. Too often the debate boils down to a two-sided "if not this then that" debate. Too often talk about economic matters descends into a pro-capitalism or an anti-capitalism debate. Our system hardly represents the ideal capitalist system as envisaged long ago. Like it or not we have a system where the government plays a very active role. My beef is with the way that we pretend it doesn't, then we reward one class of people while punishing the other. In many ways I think capitalism has something worthwhile to offer. Its just that in matters of necessities; food, shelter, health care and transportation, we accept a high level of anguish for the sake of sticking to an ideal. Its about choice. Without money I can't eat, I can't have a place to live, and I can't get health care if I get sick. Without money I can't buy games for my XBox, I can't get new cd's to listen to, and I can't get high speed internet access. Do you see the difference? I need some things, I want others. Both depend on having an income. I can live without XBox games, I cannot live without food. To get money I have to go ask for a job. I have to make myself useful for the purpose of making money for another person or company. Working is an act of survival. I tend to think that we should still incentivize people to seek work, but not by holding the threat of death over their heads. Defenders will argue that only by threatening people with homelessness or humiliation can we get people to work. I disagree. I think we can have a humane society where we offer people the chance to gain more material comfort by working without threatening their lives to get them to take jobs that we know will mean nothing more that survival.
| ... and give to the bondholders. Higher Debt Ceiling Sought - CBS News A summary: Until we raise the debt ceiling the United States government will borrow money out of various federal pensions to keep us under that limit. We'll be putting that money back, of course, after the limit is raised. Funny, Bush is still pushing the bad policies that got us into this mess in the first place. Never mind that we'll be using worker's pensions to finance tax cuts for people with high incomes? Never mind that we'll be pumping money into this bad war for the foreseeable future. Never mind that the rising cost of gasoline has made everyone just a little bit poorer? | 3.05.2006
In activist circles, and when I hear people talk about issues such as racism, sexism, homophobia and the like, I can't help but think that segregating such issues isolates them from a common source. They all stem from a basic human impulse; to associate and then to elevate one's own tribe above all others. However, its useful to separate issues. In doing so we can ignore the source and we can pretend that they are all independent of common cause. Today I took a drive to the Taco Bell up the street. As I looked through the drive-thru window at the mostly black and hispanic people I couldn't help but think about the people walking about, heading to Starbucks, or to the grocery store who are the privileged. I started thinking about how even the "liberals" and the "progressives", the people buying organic produce to help the environment, or who joke with the hispanic lady ringing out their groceries, shy away from the bigger issues. It's one thing to rid one's heart of hatred and discrimination, to look at a person different from yourself and see another human being that deserves respect, its another to give up your own special unique privileges for a chance to make the world a little better. Are we willing to give up that security, that chance to send our kids to a "good school", or to built that dream home theater system, or to own a car that hugs the road, or to see the world? This is a line most people are unwilling to cross but its one we seem perfectly willing to let people stay behind. I tend to think of most "social ills" as symptoms rather than as their own unique problem. The disease is oppression and too often we look past the causes, which are mostly sectarian and economic. Reaching that conclusion can induce despair. Would it not be easier to focus on the symptoms and make those better rather than try to tackle a beast that seems unbeatable? You start to realize the structure of the problem is complex and hidden. We hardly talk about economic factors beyond surface issues. Why is there poverty? Why are some people homeless? Why are people starving? The answer is simple: because it is an essential component of our economic system. Human suffering is considered an indisposable part of an economic order than many have come to think of as natural. Too many people have come to accept that disparity is necessary, that questioning "what works" is heretical. But is it really working? Are we really willing to look at a society where people can work their asses off and still live in fear of homelessness and say "Yeah, it doesn't get any better than this"? We've stopped thinking about alternatives. We've stopped looking for better solutions because there are too many voices, invested in the current system, who are all too willing to warn us that the consequences will be dire if we even think about change. And I guess that it seems so very easy to accept that version of the "truth" if you live in a world of comfort, if you live in a world of plenty, where desire is the determining factor. And its the people in power that will allow change to take place. But first they have to realize that its in their best interests to do so. But lately I've been so dismayed to hear the voices resisting change grow so strong even as we near a point where realization might occur. How is it that we can acknowledge that human suffering is a direct result of a system and then not desire to change that system? Its because we become so invested in what has worked for us, and we can't imagine giving that up. We'd rather just place little bandages here and there while we maintain the source of the wound. The problem, you see, are the bleeding knife wounds, not as it might seem, the knife wielding maniac. Our problems are systemic and I doubt we can make any progress until we can start acknowledging this. | |
About Me
Any Box 
|
||
|
Dissolve into Evergreens
|
||||
