Category Archives: The Man is bringing me down

Hussein is not an epithet

Posted on by

True story:

I had a student one semester, in his second year at the college. He was a great guy who worked hard in my class. He mentioned to me once that another professor had made fun of him for his name, asked him if anyone in his family was a terrorist, and told him that maybe he should change his name so he could get along better in the U.S. This student, the professor never bothered to find out, was third generation American. He was raised in the States, as were his parents.

His middle name happened to be Hussein. And until about the mid-nineties, he was pretty proud of it. Now he hid his name because of reactions like this other teacher’s. I told him, without a beat, that hundreds of thousands of people with his name throughout the world and throughout history had been fine, decent, honorable people. That one really famous a–hole and his family couldn’t erase all the other history of the name. That there are probably thousands of kind, loving, thoughtful people named McVay and Nichols and Bundy and Manson. That it’s not fair to judge people by their name any more than it’s okay to judge them by their skin or sexuality or political affiliation.

Then I told him to report the professor who acted so unprofessionally.

His look told me I had no idea what it was like to be judged by a racist, narrow minded society. Reporting it might not have hurt his opportunities at the college, but then again it might have. And it clearly had before.

End of true story. Beginning of rant:

Barack Hussein Obama is President of these United States. He’s not a terrorist, he’s not a fundamentalist, he is not a bad person. He’s fine and decent person who might just help us come together to make this country what we believe it can be. And he is not the only fine and decent person with this name. Those of you who say that we should focus on the name Hussein instead of on his actions, shame on you. You’re giving your own family a bad name.

F—ing Sony copy protection

Posted on by

So sony wants so desperately for me not to copy their DVDs (as if…I can barely get them into the drive slot in my computer and I barely have time to watch them let alone copy them) that they’ve made newer discs unplayable in my computer.

Somene who knows more than I do, and who has a better system (like a television and a DVD player made by…you guessed it…sony) explains their dick move here. And here.

I was all happy that I got my draft novel to KDT and Netflix delivered Stranger than Fiction the same day. So Spouse and I got Peanut to bed and loaded then crashed then loaded then crashed then loaded then crashed the f—ing copy protected DVD.

But for people who know better, this was news in 2007. It’s 2009 and Netflix is still sending me this. Today.

With whom shall I be more angry? (hint: the answer is not me, for having a seven year old computer and DVD player therein.)

Now I have to go back to my tape flags, damnit!

FDA-approved formula—now with added melamine!

Posted on by

Boy, oh boy does the government have good public relations. Today they announced that they found melamine in U.S. infant formula, but that it’s safe. (Hey. It’s safe. The FDA says so. You believe the government, don’t you? I know they said in October that no melamine in formula is okay, but now they think traces should be fine. Don’t worry.)

“Traces of the industrial chemical melamine have been detected in samples of top-selling U.S. infant formula, but federal regulators insist the products are safe.”

Sure it’s fine to feed your baby formula with some melamine. It’s not like it’s a LOT of melamine. Just a little. Like how much lead we can have in toys (which is okay, because a midnight regulation just pushed through by Bush ensures there will extra lead in the air. Mmmmm. Tasty.)

I like how the FDA will only say that it found melamine in leading brands. Won’t tell you which brand, how much, or how many tests they performed. The AP article linked above say it’s Nestle, Abbott, and Mead Johnson. How very “some of the meat sold somewhere has been killing people because it’s full of toxic bacteria” of the FDA to leave that out. But it’s only melamine. And it’s only killed a few babies in China and only hurt tens of thousands more, and killed dozens of dogs. But some got better, much like the peasant returned from his newt-like state in Monty Python, right? So let’s not do anything rash, like breastfeed, or anything.

What would happen, do you think, if we started calling “formula” artificial breastmilk? That’s what is it. It’s artificial. Not bad, but not natural, either. So if you have to call imitation almond flavoring and imitation butter by their names, why not call the powdered stuff that babies sometimes drink in place of breastmilk “artificial breastmilk”? “Imitation breastmilk”? Maybe we would have enough parents question the wholesomeness of an artificial, imitation milk in their babies that we could actually cultivate a culture that educates and supports breastfeeding moms, so we wouldn’t have so many drop out of the game who are, metaphorically and literally, breastfeeding in the dark (and in bathrooms and in the car because some people find it offensive to make your baby the best meal possible, instead of feeding it melamine.)

So dioxin is fine. And some mad cow is okay. And lead and arsenic and pesticides in our water are okay. And all those drugs that will be pulled from shelves in a few months for killing too many people are fine for now because they’ve only killed a few people.

Damn. I’d really like to have the clout of the FDA. Because they’ve been endangering lives for decades with their blatant disregard for science. Yay for distrusting science. Yay for greenwashing the harmful effects of chemicals and plastics and bleach and lead-based paint. Yay for maimed and dead children all over the world because we don’t believe in real food anymore. But we do believe in corporate profits. It’s the American way.

Read the pr industry expose Toxic Sludge is Good for You.  And then you’ll realize why I quit working in advertising.

Facebook-Starbucks quandry

Posted on by

Some of my facebook friends are part of a group getting all in a dither about going to Starbucks on December 1, 2008 and ordering one of the company’s RED coffee drinks so that 5 cents goes to AIDS research, relief, and humanitarian aid.

Fine, good, and lovely. But am I the only one who thinks it’s a better idea to vow off expensive coffee for, say, a week, and send the proceeds, whole cloth, to AIDS research, relief, and humanitarian aid? Say, if I went out of my way to get overpriced coffee on December 1, 2008, and spent $4 on a chocolately espresso thing, they’d give 5 cents. Nice. If I sent that $4 to one of the charities at charitywatch.org, maybe most of that $4 would help. Five cents is a lot. Four dollars is eighty times more.

I think I’ll stay out of Starbucks on Monday. Not because I have taken to heart Ilene’s rejection of their business model (though I’ve always respected her view, and my frustration of their early assertion that the company was named after the firstmate in Moby Dick, whose alleged love of coffee is not supported by the text).

I’m not making a political statement here. I’m making a mathematical decision. And I’m sending at least $4 to AIDS relief on Monday, when I will be making coffee at home.

Please, no auto bailout.

Posted on by

Yes, I’m telling my lawmakers the same thing–no automaker bailout. Why? Because bankruptcy is a time to reorganize and get your act together, and maybe forge ahead. So we shouldn’t be as afraid of automaker bankruptcy as Congress seems to be. Bankruptcy doesn’t mean closed doors and going out of business. It may eventually mean that, but so could a bailout. But bailouts reward companies who have been stuck thinking, producing, and structuring the way they always have, without planning for the future.

I know that lots of families, from the autoworkers to the restaurants to the retailers in Michigan depend on the money American car companies bring to the area. But you know what? I’d rather see the government hand money directly to the people who work at these firms than give corporate welfare. The workers shouldn’t have to pay for the (formerly) Big Three mistakes. But they should get work in another industry. And there aren’t any jobs right now.

So why not make Michigan the heart of America’s big wind-farm industry? Oh, yeah, we don’t have one. Well, let’s use the federal money for that, instead. Factory-build parts for wind farms need these skilled workers, and the former carworkers can have a job, new skillset, and important role in the next century, rather than being stuck in the nineteenth century industrial revolution.

Or, why not make Michigan the heart of America’s big infrastructure regeneration? Oh, yeah, we don’t have one. We’ll, let’s use the federal money for that, instead.

Or, why not make autoworkers, white-collar and blue-collar, part of America’s next big wave of domestic jobs and revenue. Oh, yeah. We don’t have that, either.

Maybe we have bigger problems than the financial well being of three outdated, outmoded, out-of-touch companies who couldn’t see the writing on the wall, as Japanese automakers did.

I don’t know. It’s going to hurt a lot of people if those automakers go into bankruptcy and renegotiate all their contracts. But it’s going to hurt more people  if we bail them out, and they come back for more money in a few months, then come back again, then go out of business anyway.

I’m tired of corporate handouts. Why do corporations get welfare, when the fiscal conservatives who backed their unfettered growth believed nobody should share the profits? When people who work hard come upon tough times, I say help them. When companies come upon hard times, I just feel the help should go to starting something new. Use the bailout money for building infrastructure and eco-friendly energy. That creates jobs and uses taxpayer money for growth not bandages on bullet wounds.

Prop. 8

Posted on by

Okay, I can’t let go of this constitutional amendment declaring some people unequal. Thankfully, neither can the rest of the No on 8 people.

So, historically, in a democracy such as ours, people vote for representatives and for laws. But there is a check on the hateful, ignorant, or misguided attempts of one group to hurt another. When the people enact a law that goes against the principles of the Constitution, the judiciary backs us up and makes us take back the law and start over again.

So the people pass a law. The Supreme Court says, um, you can’t do that. It’s not constitutional. And the people are supposed to say, damn. I wish I could have it my way, but I respect the constitution. But now, in the era of executive dictatorship, the people write a Constitutional Amendment to make their unConstitutional law into an unchecked and unassailable law?

There was a time that Americans wrote laws saying it wasn’t okay for blacks to marry whites. And the Supreme Court said, um, you can’t do that because all people are equal.

And we are.

So now people write laws saying one man can’t marry another man and one woman can’t marry another woman. And the Supreme Court said, um, you can’t do that because all people are equal. And instead of saying, aw shucks, it sucks to live in a country where all people are equal but I guess I’ll have to, people then write a Constitutional Amendment and say all people are equal except people who love similarly gendered people?

How did 52% of Californians say that people aren’t equal if I don’t like who they are?

How did 52% of Californians say, if this law is un-Constitutional, let’s change the Constitution?

Some Americans used to say that blacks were not equal and shouldn’t have equal rights, and they were wrong. And now they say it about gays, and they’re wrong again.

Know what totally sucks? By percentages, in California it was overwhelmingly African Americans who voted that some people aren’t equal and shouldn’t get to marry.

That’s at least Alanis Morisette ironic, even if not literary ironic.

I mean, it’s not surprising that the Church is willing to be on the wrong side of a civil rights issue again. Religion has been the excuse for oppressing women and for enslaving human beings. So I’m not shocked that the church groups are pouring their tithed dollars into making their rules seem like the only rules that are acceptable. But African Americans turning around after having the civil right to marry whomever they want, and take that away from another group? Tsk tsk, Californians. Tsk tsk.

Don’t hold your breath on your high horse, there, Utah. We’ll undo this miscarriage of justice soon.

Rantlets, little rants of the day (iv)

Posted on by

Hey, people who believe things: stop using your kids to campaign for you. It’s disgusting to have children who can’t form their own opinions holding signs for anything, let alone for hatred, discrimination, and bigotry.

Oh, and companies who make kids’ toys? So help me, if one more toy hollers out after being abandoned for 30 seconds, I’m gonna boycott your whole freaking company. Peanut actually has a toy that clears its throat and bellows, “Excuse me!” to get him to come back and play with it. Newsflash: you piss me off, I won’t buy your toys. Newsflash ii: toys that don’t know when it’s time to move on piss me off. Newsflash iii: when my kid’s falling asleep in the car, a toy that wakes him up to demand that he play some more really pisses me off. Newsflash iv: You know who you are, LeapFrog bastards. Unless you change your ways and announce your contrition publically, I’ll make sure you’re on the entertainment non grata list this Chrismakkah.

By the way, country: way to go on that election thing. I’m not totally pleased, vis a vis California ballot initiatives. But overall, you done good, nation. It’s nice to share this country with you.

Go vote

Posted on by

Not sure where to vote?

govote.org

Not sure what ID you need?

www.govote.org

In a swing state and not convinced you want either candidate? Please, please, please consider following your gut rather than your party affiliation. Test what really matters to you at selectsmart.com and smartvoter.org

And if you live in a swing state and happen to be Peanut’s grandparent, I can tell you that, without discussing politics with him at all, he has a very clear preference for one of the candidates by appearance (from newspapers, magazines, and campaign posters) and for the same candidate by voice (listened to the podcast of the debates). He doesn’t even know their names, but he really wants one to be the boss and make the rules (he keeps telling me that B.M.D. voted for him as the boss of me. I reject this form of toddler democracy.)

Please, swing state grandparents, vote for the person Peanut wants because Peanut will be here longer than all of us and has to pay for our choices. And his parents’ votes don’t count because we’re in California. And we might all have to move to Canada if one of the candidates wins, and Peanut’s winter clothes are all in a POD somewhere while we try to find a place to live. So vote for his guy because otherwise he’ll freeze wearing just sandals and shorts in Quebec this winter.

And I’m not here to threaten Peanut’s love or anything, because that would be wrong, but we might not come visit certain states this winter if certain states screw up another election. Tell your neighbors. Their grandkids might not visit, either. Maybe.

East coast, left coast, and “wonderful little pockets” in between

Posted on by

According to Sarah Palin,

We believe that the best of America is in the small towns that we get to visit, and in the wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard-working, very patriotic, very pro-America areas of this great nation.

You know what? I’m tired of this your-America versus our-America bullshit. Every single citizen is part of the real America–part of the dichotomy between rich and poor, left and right, liberal and conservative, creative and analytical, educated and ignorant, entertained and bored, thoughtful and thoughtless.

Intentionally, superficially divisive politics fit into the latter category.

The real America is also the economic centers of the country. The farms, the factories, the skyscrapers, the theaters, the film backlots, the offices, the aerospace compounds, the retail centers, the universities, the tourist attractions. Cities are just as American as small towns. Small towns are just as American as cities. People are not more American because of their job, their background, their lack of education, or their residence in a swing state.

As Sarah Vowell said on The Daily Show the other day, if New York was American enough for the terrorists, it’s American enough for the rest of us.

I hope that after this election the nonsense about them versus us stops. Because every time politicians stoke that fire (every two years, just often enough to make it a permaflame) instead of focusing on the legitimate disagreements between their ideas, we all lose. Can’t we just have a civil discussion about how really bright minds come up with completely opposite ideas?

Stop pandering and realize that we all contribute. Some a lot more than others. But we’re all still citizens and every single vote should count.

activist judges

Posted on by

So if a court, especially the Supreme Court, makes a ruling you disagree with, it’s activism? It’s legislating from the bench? Just because you disagree? Ever consider that those judges are professional legal scholars and you aren’t, and it’s their job to decide if what we do is legal? If a majority of Americans come together and vote for a law that goes against the Constitution, against everything the country was founded upon (say, for instance, Jim Crow separate but equal, or modern, homophobic separate but equal), then it’s the Court’s fault when they strike down that law? By judging a law unconstitutional, the judiciary does not create laws. They are not legislating. They are judging. It’s their job. And if you don’t like what they decide, you can’t just raise the specter of out of control judges by saying they are legislating. It’s simply not true. Declaring a law unconstitutional says that the people are simply not allowed to make the law they made. It’s judges’ job to decide if what we do is legal.

But if you say that’s activist judges at work, whatever. I mean, I’ve disagreed with the Court’s findings before, and will again. But I don’t consider their decisions activism. I consider their logic flawed and their opinions wrongheaded. But I know they vote exactly the way we could have predicted them to, since their logic is usually the same throughout their career, and their wrongheadedness consistent. That’s why Presidents choose the justices they do.

It seems more than a little ignorant to say that voters can pass laws in favor of slavery, or bigotry, or inequality and expect that Justices will uphold those laws.

btw, Prop 8 has nothing to do with religious freedom. Prop 8 amends the California State Constitution to take away a right that all Californians have. It uses the will of the many to exclude a few. And that’s unAmerican. Not religious or free. That’s ignorant hatred of people who are different than you are. There is no separate set of rules for the majority or for the minority. We all get the same treatment. That’s the point.

Here’s a little secret. If you open your mind to new ideas, it’s not as though your brains will fall out of your head, or that your old opinions will go away. Consider the new ideas. And if you don’t like them, discard them. But for heaven’s sake, just try the ideas out for a little while. You might be surprised at what you find.

Thanks, federal bailout, for a dismal future

Posted on by

Gee, thanks federal government, for writing blank checks to make things easy for you in the short term. All that does, really, is teach the whole country to keep living on credit, and saddle my kid with even more debt than your bullshit policies and wars have spiraled.

A few words for you: if you’re pro free market, act like it. I’m not, so I say: if you want to save someone, save people not companies. And if you spend like a drunken sailor on shore leave, don’t expect my kid to pay for it. Tighten your belts, ask those who make a lot to put in their share, and start means-testing every damn handout you give both corporate and private citizens.

And by the way, McCain, you were all for deregulating and eliminating financial firewalls for decades. Don’t run to the media with your pro-regulation sheep’s clothing now.

Update 9/28/08:

Nina Easton, of Money magazine reports that many are saying exactly the same thing: don’t preach free markets, then throw our nest eggs at them when they do something way beyond stupid. (The article is three pages; click on the arrow at the bottom of the text for the next page.)
http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/26/news/economy/easton_backlash.fortune/

Excuse me, Mr. Giuliani, sir?

Posted on by

About your speech:

Interviewing 101 includes the aphorism that you talk about what makes you good, not what makes the other guy bad. And aren’t you arguing this election is a job interview?

Maybe bitter and spiteful is why nobody voted for you in the primaries. Just a guess, watching the convention keynote speech wherein you were particularly venomous.

I think the American people, in general, figure that the GOP has to prove that they’re not just entitled politicians who have demolished, over the past 14 years, our economy, our international standing, and our Constitution. Maybe bilious speeches make sense for a likeminded audience, but hope for the future just sells better than sniping at people who, like you, want to make this a better place to live, work, and succeed.

I know you’ve done some lovely things in your life. But yesterday you just came off as mean.

And mean is icky.

GOP, if you’re all mean and nasty, keep it up. If you’re not monolithically bilious, please change your tone. This could be a really great opportunity to talk about issues and priorities. Please commence.

Palin and Obama and teen pregnancy

Posted on by

I think the most relevant piece of Sarah Palin‘s press release about her daughter’s pregnancy is this:

“Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family.” Finally, a birth announcement that includes the recognition that this job is damned hard.

Bristol Palin is very lucky to have her family’s support in an unfortunate situation. One benefit, clearly, to having women in policy-making positions, is that they know how hard it is to be a parent. (As usual, I refer you to the very well researched and cited The Mask of Motherhood.)

Barack Obama responded graciously to the pregnancy announcement (the whole affair gives a cadre of nasty bloggers a bad name because they hounded a family into revealing something that’s none of our business). (Note that most media are blaming the ugliness on “liberals,” as though most liberals are amoral jerks who seek only to torment Republicans. Most liberals are downright decent folk. Let’s stop the name-calling. It’s always evidence that you don’t have a good argument if all you can do is call names.) Obama’s response included this empathetic observation:

“You know, my mother had me when she was 18. And how families deal with issues and teenage children — that shouldn’t be the topic of our politics.”

Hopefully, instead of judging the families involved, we can talk about teaching children more than just abstinence, which is 100% effective as a method and abyssmally ineffective as an educational policy. Teen pregnancy is on the rise since Republicans have silenced science in our classrooms. And now, with Bush trying to classify birth control as abortion, we have a whole generation of girls and boys who will wind up young parents and young STD statistics because they don’t know they have options for keeping themselves safe and healthy.

In addition to opening a dialogue about the failures of abstinence only as a policy, this announcement should shift the discussion away from Palin’s family and toward this country’s need to improve quality of life for mothers and infants. We should be talking about exactly that which Sarah Palin will offer her daughter and grandchild: support. Since this country ranks near the bottom of industrialized countries for support for young mothers, working mothers, mothers in school, and breastfeeding mothers, we should all talk more about what we can do to prevent unwanted pregnancies, and to support those who decide to have babies.

*  “Babies born to teen mothers are more likely to receive poor health care and live in poverty,” notes a cnn.com article.

Luckily for Bristol Palin, her baby will probably get good health care and not live in poverty. Let’s make sure that’s true of every child in the United States, and eventually the world, starting now.

Renewed hope in America

Posted on by

Though I have been actively engaged in, and attentive to, politics for longer than I’ve been old enough to vote, it’s been a long time since I felt like I had a voice in American politics. Loud and passionate, Baby Boomers and Republicans have been talking so loudly, and at cross-purposes to the things that are important to me for a long time.

Tonight, beginning with Susan Eisenhower (and Michael McDonald, really), I began to feel hope for what this country should be, can be, and might again be.

I feel like my America found its voice tonight, and I hope to the core of my faith in what America stands for that that voice keeps booming across our consciousness for a long, long time.

It’s not about the person. It’s about the priorities. And I think we might actually realign from the morass of distinctly un-American things this country has been doing and saying lately.

I finally hope and believe that we can come back.

Yay USA.

War on terror clarification

Posted on by

Last week or so I alleged that the U.S.’s broadly named war on terror is a religious war, and I want to clarify.
Our declared war on terror is not just a fight with extremist muslims–it’s with anyone who might in some way threaten our way of life. A noble cause, I guess, but the killing that has ensued, and decimation of American civil liberties that followed sort of erode the nobility a bit.

I agree with stopping terrorists. Let me get that right out there. I believe we have the right and duty to protect our citizens. But not from pretend attacks or attacks that are not physically threatening. Anyone who hurts, maims, or kills other people because of some twisted interpretation of what god is and what it wants from them is an insane, horrible animal and I don’t think it’s wrong to stop them using any means necessary. (This applies to extreme, violent Muslim extremists who want to kill people and identically to people and governments who engage in genocide of “sectarian” others just because those people worship in a different way [e.g., Bosnia, Armenia, Rwanda, and Christian Nazi Germany). People who kill other people for their beliefs rather than their actions are bad people. And that’s where we get in trouble in the whole war on terror thing, and where some argue the U.S. government is acting like a terrorist. We’re bombing people who believe something different than we do, particularly Iraqis who want us out of their country.)

This war on terror, when it protects real Americans from real physical harm, is a justified, acceptable use of power. But when this war’s broad scope reaches beyond people who represent imminent harm to Americans to people who want us to leave them alone, it is a religious war, just as every other war fought in the name of a god has been. We are killing people who worship a different idea than we do. Our god, in this war, just happens to be Democracy (and demogoguery).
Our so-called war on terror is a religious war in that we are killing people during our demand that they believe what we believe. Just because we believe in democracy does not make it inherently right or supreme, and the rhetoric surrounding our insistence that everyone in the world worship our idea of democracy is, to me, the same as killing people to believe in our god.

(That doesn’t mean Russia needs to murder people in Georgia just to show us that they resent our heavy-handed “support” of democracy. And it doesn’t mean we can’t think democracy is the absolute best system going. I think it is. But I wouldn’t foster a civil war so that the like-minded could stay in power against national dissent just to get them to agree with me.)
The war on terror is much bigger than the world versus violent extremists (including 44 groups from half the major religions in various countries around the world we’ve declared terrorist organizations). This sweeping and cleverly encompassing war on terror deifies The Oval Office, because in declaring an undefined and interminable war, it gives Presidential powers an exponential boost. In time of war our President reigns supreme. And it’s smacking an awful lot of the divine right of kings, wherein, to modify a line from Real Genius, “it goes from God to Cheney to me.” The powers this Administration has grabbed for itself are Constitution-rending and society-threatening. The balance of powers on which our government functions has been eroded to the point that we have one branch of government and a bunch of bicameral and judicial ants scurrying around trying to build one iota of check-and-balance authority. We have allowed one part of our government to hijack the whole country for the belief that one President should get to do whatever he wants since we are, according to him, at war with ideas. That is a kind of deification that seeks to make worship of The White House into a religion to rival the six major world religions. And The National Standard, a politically conservative publication, made the point years ago that the right-wing of this country would be horrified if they stopped to think that all the powers Bush has decreed for himself could be transferred to President Hillary Clinton (this was well before the primaries began).

That’s what I meant by saying, as it is currently, broadly defined, the war on terror is a religious war. We’re killing some people who are terrorists, we’re killing LOTS people who live near terrorists, and we’re killing people because they don’t believe in democracy at the behest of our self-deified Leader.

Thank goodness it’s almost election time, and we can elect a President instead of a God.