native soil

Flying home to California tomorrow (hum Joni Mitchell lyric here). My devotion to the idea of a politics of place comes directly from my devotion to the place where I grew up. The topography of California shaped the contours of my own mind; I don't feel truly at home without mountains on the horizon and wide sky overhead.

The first time I went back to California after moving to North Carolina I flew into San Jose. Flying low to land, I could trace the arteries of the highways, knowing which freeway was which, and which to take to get anywhere I wanted to go. In short, I knew where I was. I was located in a larger system of meaning.

I've often felt rather alien in my devotion to home, to a specific place. So much of American life is geared in the opposite direction, towards EveryPlace, towards NoPlace. The nomadic life of most Americans seems not to affect them, or at least, they don't articulate the ways it might affect them. Anywhere we go now, we can get the same food, go to the same stores, buy exactly the same things. And since our identity is conflated with what we consume, we believe that we are the same person wherever we are, since we consume the same things in every place. I've never felt that way. I felt obligated to leave home, since I believed that I would be missing out on some kind of "starting over" experience if I didn't live somewhere else. There's some element of cowboy-into-the-sunset about it, that real adults, actualized men, must always be on the move, can never stay on the ranch.

I think I was mistaken about the way we start over, in our lives. While moving to a new place may, for some, mark the beginning of a new identity and a new belief about life, I think that the opposite happens. Moving to a place where we are uncertain, unlocated, we tend to hold onto that of which we are most sure--our personal identities, which become hardened and concretized as we define ourselves in order, oddly enough, to fit in. Our very motion, which we believe keeps us free, imprisons us in a world without possibilities. Constant motion limits the horizon.

As for me, I look forward to meeting myself again at home.

isn't this life sweet?

can't you taste it melting on your tongue, like liquid sunlight, like wine...

wingnuts.

Tucker Carlson: "Canada is basically like Honduras, only colder and less interesting."
Ann Coulter: "They should consider themselves lucky that we continue to allow them to exist."

thoughts for finals

Sol LeWitt was the mentor of a fantastic sculptor named Eva Hesse. He wrote this to her at a time when she was deeply stuck, in both her life and her art:

"Just stop thinking, worrying, looking over your shoulder, wondering, doubting, fearing, hurting, hoping for some easy way out, struggling, gasping, confusing, itching, scratching, mumbling, bumbling, grumbling, humbling stumbling, rumbling, rambling, gambling, tumbling, scumbling, scrambling, hitching, hanging, bitching, moaning, groaning, honing, boning...searching, grinding grinding away at yourself. Stop it and just DO...Try to tickle something inside you, your 'weird humor.' You belong in the most secret part of you. Don't worry about cool, make your own uncool...If you fear, make it work for you--draw and paint your fear and anxiety. And stop worrying about big, deep things such as 'to decide on a purpose and way of life...' You must practice being stupid, dumb, unthinking, empty. Then you will be able to DO! I have much confidence in you and even though you are tormenting yourself, the work you do is very good. Try to do some BAD work. The worst you an think of and see what happens but mainly relax and let everything go to hell."

on parties and such

You know, I bitch a lot about grad school. And it does often seem to suck up my soul in painful ways, such as when I'm writing my 78th "reading review."

But truly, the people I've met in grad school are just amazing, and I don't know where else I would have met such a collection of strange, intelligent and funny people. Being a recovering shy person, it's such a gift to have so many people I really look forward to seeing. (Plus, several of them are Eagle Scouts, so they can always get us out of tight corners using MacGuyver-esque knots.)

Since I didn't go to meeting today, I just wanted to take time to express gratitude for all that I am fortunate to have, and good friends are at the top of that list.

What I am not fortunate enough to have is a completed paper on some aspect of welfare states. So I'm off to do that. In the odd chance that someone who reads this blog is going to be up late writing, reading or studying, and could bear company in that activity, let me know. There may be some Laurel's Kitchen banana bread in it for you. (As a side note, why does everything in Laurel's Kitchen have wheat germ in it? Salad: wheat germ. Pudding: wheat germ.)

the macro-micro problem

In the social sciences, we have a macro-micro problem. This problem crops up in all kinds of places and studies, and it's basically this: why do society-wide phenomenon cause only a few actors to shift behavior? For example, consider the problem of suicide bombers. We can look for macro-level phenomena to explain their behavior, relying upon cultural or economic explanations. These explanations often do have some weight to them. The problem is that not everyone in a given culture or economic class becomes a suicide bomber. In fact, the percentage of those who do is really quite small, almost infinitesimal in terms of probability. Thus, our macro causes can't be linked definitively to micro, or individual, behavior. We can explain either, but we can't really explain both. (In some ways this is, of course, a comfort, since we would probably prefer that our behavior be somewhat unpredictable, at least if we would like to avoid totalitarianism altogether.)
I was thinking about this issue this morning because I was reading an article on string theory. It struck me that social scientists are facing a similar problem as physicists have since Einstein. The puzzler has been how to reconcile quantum mechanics, which explains the behavior of atoms, with Einstein's theory of relativity, which describes the behavior of the universe. See? A micro-macro chasm.

Now, string theory may bridge that gap, or at least, that is it's much vaunted promise. The idea of string theory, very, very generally, is that the universe is not made up of individual points (atoms) but rather of strings. It seems to me that these are strings of probability or potentiality, so individual particles such as electrons or quarks are actually only different ways for strings to vibrate. (Posts on string theory should be written after coffee, but I wanted to get this down). This would explain why, for example, no quark is found by itself. A string cannot have only one end.

What if our human societies behave much like this? What if we need an explanation like string theory, which evolved in order to explain the strong force that binds and holds quarks together? What are our human strings? What is the force that binds us? And on what order do we vibrate? And, if, as string theorists believe, there are many more dimensions to the universe than are apparent to us, what dimensions of human society are we not registering, as observers of it?

As an aside, this is my favorite quote from the article, because I'd love someone to take the word "strings" out and replace it with my name: "Strings seduced many physicists with their mathematical elegance, but they had some problems, like requiring 26 dimensions and a plethora of mysterious particles that did not seem to have anything to do with quarks or the strong force." Yes, she was a lovely girl, but she had some problems, like requiring 26 dimensions...

if you must

do the whole christmas thing, here's a handy list from Alan Abramowitz, over at Donkey Rising:


With the holidays upon us, some of us might wish to be mindful of who we patronize relative to their Election Cycle political donations, as reported by the Center for Responsive Politics.

WITH US:
* Price Club/Costco donated $225K, of which 99% went to democrats;
* Rite Aid, $517K, 60% to democrats;
* Magla Products (Stanley tools, Mr. Clean), $22K, 100% to democrats;
* Warnaco (undergarments), $55K, 73% to democrats;
* Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, $153K, 99% to democrats;
* Estee Lauder, $448K, 95% to democrats;
* Guess ? Inc., $145K, 98% to democrats;
* Calvin Klein, $78K, 100% to democrats;
* Liz Claiborne, Inc., $34K, 97% to democrats;
* Levi Straus, $26K, 97% to democrats;
* Olan Mills, $175K, 99% to democrats.
* Gallo Winery, $337K, 95% to democrats;
* Southern Wine & Spirits, $213K, 73% to democrats;
* Joseph E. Seagrams & Sons (includes beverage business, plus considerable media interests), $2M+, 67% democrats.
* Sonic Corporation, $83K, 98% democrat;
* Triarc Companies (Arby's, T.J. Cinnamon's, Pasta Connections), $112K, 96% Democrats;
* Hyatt Corporation, $187K, 80% to democrats;


AGAINST US:
WalMart, $467K, 97% to republicans;
K-Mart, $524K, 86% to republicans;
Home Depot, $298K, 89% to republicans;
Target, $226K, 70% to republicans;
Circuit City Stores, $261K, 95% to republicans;
3M Co., $281K, 87% to republicans;
Hallmark Cards, $319K, 92% to republicans;
Amway, $391K, 100% republican;
Kohler Co. (plumbing fixtures), $283K, 100% republicans;
B.F. Goodrich (tires), $215K, 97% to republicans;
Proctor & Gamble, $243K, 79% to republicans;
Coors, $174K, 92% to republicans; (also Budweiser - sd)
Brown-Forman Corp. (Southern Comfort, Jack Daniels, Bushmills, Korbel wines - as well as Lennox China, Dansk, Gorham Silver), $644, 80% to republicans;
Pilgrim's Pride Corp. (chicken), $366K, 100% republican;
Outback Steakhouse, $641K, 95% republican;
Tricon Global Restaurants (KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell), $133K, 87% republican;
Brinker International (Maggiano's, Brinker Cafe, Chili's, On the
Border, Macaroni Grill, Crazymel's, Corner Baker, EatZis), $242K, 83% republican;
Waffle House, $279K, 100% republican;
McDonald's Corp., $197K, 86% republican;
Darden Restaurants (Red Lobster, Olive Garden, Smokey Bones, Bahama Breeze), $121K, 89% republican;
Mariott International, $323K, 81% to republicans;
Holiday Inns, $38K, 71% to republicans

Orwell, Part 942

In gutting federal protections for salmon, the Administration claimed that the four (useless) dams on the Snake River are "immutable parts of the landscape." That's right, those immutable, untouchable, ancient 40-year old dams. They have specified that the dams won't be removed even if it means that salmon go extinct. Which they will. They also want to count hatchery raised salmon as part of the population, thus removing salmon from the list of endangered species. These would be the same salmon that have to be injected with red dye in order for their flesh not to appear grey, since that is the color of fish who do not swim in the wild and who live their lives in rancid, pollution-producing pens.

This would all be bad news except for this: last night I was watching the Discovery Channel (now subtitled: God--Investigated!) and many Biblical scholars assured me of the accuracy of the Bible code, which "predicted" (in much the same way we social scientist "predict" things, by looking at them after the fact and concluding that they were inevitable) WWI and WWII, the fall of communism, the assasination of Kennedy, and God Knows what else. The point here is this: the Bible Code says that the Earth will be destroyed in 2012 by a meteor. (It remains unclear whether Jesus comes down immediately before the meteor, or in it's chaotic aftermath, but I guess some things need to remain a Blessed Mystery.)

So now you don't have to worry. Enjoy the next seven years.

at Quaker meeting

in subversive silence
my mind turns to water
and runs full of everyday detrius
picking up and putting down
as it goes along
small whimsies
quick violence
soft hopes
i sit, and soon
my breath sounds to me
like consciousness
flowing over rocked
riverbed of reason.

abstinence only education--sort of like not teaching your kid how to drive, and then handing him the keys

Today the Times reported on a recently released study that found--and I know you'll be shocked, shocked! to hear this--widespread misinformation (or, if you prefer non-Orwellian language, lies) in "abstinence-only" (girls-this-means-you, boys-nudge-nudge-wink-wink) textbooks. Charming little tidbits such as: Condoms fail to prevent HIV 31% of the time. Abortions cause breast cancer. And so on.

Now, this would normally be cause for re-evaluation. However, the philosophy of the Bush Administration is: this doesn't work! Let's do more of it! So, in the usual manner, they have doubled their abstinence only education budget for next year to 170 million dollars. Luckily, that's now only worth about 5 euros in today's money.

and in other news, jesus has quit

luckily, the daily show hasn't.

flipping rationality

I've been grumpy for a while about this whole "academic freedom" thing. For those of you not in the academy, there's a push, led by the Usual Suspects, to increase "diversity" in the academy. By "diversity" they mean, not subjugated minorities, but those poor, beleaguered straight white males. They're just so misunderstood! When they call someone a "fag" in a classroom, it's not because they hate the sinner! They're just expressing their commitment to free speech and encouraging "diverse perspectives" in the classroom! (This and other nonsense can be seen on the Students for Academic Freedom website, which categorizes such complaints as "I took a women's studies course and it was totally biased towards feminism." (that's a quote.) So it has gotten me to think about the ways in which our hard won victories are being used against us. This isn't a happy line of thought, so I wouldn't recommend it. Today, however, a little victory, a little table-turning.

The Administration had sought to deny federal funds to universitites that barred military recruiters from campus (in this case, law schools who found that the military's anti-gay policy was discriminatory). A U.S. Court of Appeals (PA--5th Circuit, I think) ruled against the government, using the Boy Scouts case as precedent. Yes, that was the case that gave the Boy Scouts the right to discriminate against gay scout leaders. So, in a neat twist, the judge (Judge Ambro) wrote: "Just as the Boy Scouts believed that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the Scout oath, the law schools believe that employment discrimination is inconsistent with their commitment to fairness and justice."

UPDATE: on Daily Kos, a great, and extremely disturbing, read on this:
"[T]his is a massive and dangerous expansion of the principles underlying the Boy Scouts decision. In that earlier decision, it was held that the government could not force a completely private organization to accept as a leader a person who's public views were at odds with the organizational principles. It's not even clear that the Boy Scouts under that decision are allowed to exclude gays who keep their views quiet, so it could be a limited precedent. However, this Third Circuit decision is far more expansive. Not only can a university refuse to hire peoples whose views they disagree with, they can exclude them altogether from their physical property. And the government is REQUIRED to fund such exclusionary organizations.
By the logic of the case, if the Klu Klux Klan sets up a university to teach hate speech, they would be within their organizational free speech rights to exclude blacks and the government would be required to fully fund that university in the same way as all other colleges."

Shit.

60% of Americans Support Roe

A Yahoo! News/AP story reports that most Americans want a pro-choice Supreme Court nominee.

"The preference for Supreme Court nominees who would uphold Roe v. Wade could be found among both men and women, most age groups, most income groups and people living in urban, suburban and rural areas. Fewer than half of Republicans, evangelicals and those over 65 said they favored a nominee who would uphold the abortion ruling."

This is the most interesting part of the story to me--that this belief cuts across normal political divides and is expressed by members of widely disparate groups. We'll see what impact, if any, this has on Bush's selection.

poesis

W.H. Auden (from friend A.'s blog):

Faces along the bar
Cling to their average day:
The lights must never go out,
The music must always play,
All the conventions conspire
To make this fort assume
The furniture of home;
Lest we should see where we are,
Lost in a haunted wood,
Children afraid of the night
Who have never been happy or good

I've been reading so much more poetry lately--even memorizing pieces of it, that I repeat to myself, mantra-like, at odd times. Something about poetic consciousness feels undomesticated, unclaimed and unrepentant.

on elitism

I've been reading a friend's blog lately and have realized that rather than post scathing comments which would probably damage our relationship in the long run, I'd come over here and rant to myself, where no one (except A. ;) can hear me.

I am an elitist. And this is why: I've earned it. I have spent the better part of my adult life in classrooms and libraries. I have read hundreds of thousands of pages on topics ranging from astronomy to physics to quantum mechanics to buddhism to postmodernism to marxism to feminism. I have studied the Holocaust, Western European politics, revolutions, nationalism, globalization, social movements, welfare states, and ancient, classical, modern, postmodern and recent political theory. I have talked with better minds than mine about these topics, and I have tested and refined my ideas in the company of others. I have changed or modified my position when presented with better evidence. I have also, it must be said, refused to change my position on certain issues: on the fundamental interconnection between humans and the Earth, on the need for justice, on the need for compassion, on the need for beauty and truth and community. On any given day I spend up to 2 hours reading from a variety of news sources about the state of the world. Unlike Our Glorious Leader, I have travelled outside this country and have an insatiable curiosity about other cultures. I write my representatives. I march. I chant. I rant. And all of these things distinguish me from the much glorified, long lamented, "Average American."

It is possible for me to recognize that I have greater and wider knowledge of the world than 90% of the people in this country and to refrain from being condescending. Indeed, my belief in compassion as part of a life of integrity and justice commands me to do as much. I don't run around, for God's sakes, telling people what dumbshits they are. I don't walk up to any one of my students (or, for that matter, my Republican relatives) and tell them that they don't know what the fuck they're talking about, even when they clearly don't.

I am, I admit, very, very, very angry about this election, and it has shaken my belief in the goodness of Americans to the core (and it was one of my central beliefs, long defended in the face of some other 'liberal elitists' that my friend likes to decry so frequently). Because voting for Bush meant, to me, voting for Abu Gharib. Voting for ongoing, neverending war. Voting to cut young men and women's lives short. Voting to get rid of women's rights and roll back the clock on civil rights. People DIED for those rights, and Bush, Cheney, Scalia et.al. could give exactly one rat's ass (as long as Halliburton gets the profit from the rat's ass). It's a vote for rabid Christianity and the end to the separation of church and state. And it's a final Fuck Off to the entire world, who will not be forgiving us any time soon.

So I am an elitist, and I'm goddamned tired of apologizing for it. Recognizing that I am one of the Fortunate Ones does not mean that I think all Americans should be stripped of their right to vote. I am not claiming moral superiority over these people (honesty moment: well, okay, occasionally) but I am comfortable with asserting that I know more about politics than they do, and am probably more capable of making an informed decision. 70% of the people who voted for Bush believe (as of November 2nd) that we found WMDs in Iraq. Come on, now.

no sunshine patriots

We're going to stay and fight. As my friend D. said the other night, "They'll get their Second Coming over my dead body."

That's pretty much how I feel about it. And, to be fair, probably how the "Christian" "Right" feels about it as well.

I haven't recommended them before, but check out wonkette! (wonkette.com) and Bob Harris (bobharris.com). My linking doodad isn't working at the moment, but I know you're capable people who can type an address into a search engine.

What else to report? I mean, besides the end of the world, that shit gets old. Apparently Vincent D'onofrio has made life such hell on his set (of whatever spin off it is--CSI? Law and Order? Who can keep track? And why are we so fascinated with lab work when we hate scientists?) because of his "crazy liberal" views that they've forbidden political discussion on set. Kind of like Christmas with my Orange County relatives.

Yasser Arafat? Still dead.
Middle East peace process? Still dead.

U.S. Marine shoots unarmed, wounded Iraqi on national TV? Not to worry, according to Our Moral Guardians, such as Rush, Ann, and Rommel, he was "under a lot of pressure." Certainly he won't be coming home to beat his wife!

Lots of people getting kicked to the curb. Colin Powell can leave unencumbered by integrity or legacy. Come to think of it, so can everyone else, though that supposes that they're leaving it in the White House, which is clearly not the case.

And, finally, White House orders "purges" of "disloyal" CIA agents. Compassionate conservativism means that you send insubordinate underlings to Cuba, instead of Siberia; you're still in a cage, but the weather is better.

jesus christ!

Seriously, he has got some explaning to do. A letter from Bob Jones III (the "third" Bob Jones is part of what needs to be explained; surely one was enough):

"In your re-election, God has graciously granted America—though she doesn't deserve it" [ed.: because she's one uppity bitch]"—a reprieve from the agenda of paganism" [ed: which will continue as long as we rev up the Inquisition again]. "You have been given a mandate" [ed: who would have thought there would be so many references to MANdates. Suggestive, for a bunch of homophobes]. "We the people expect your voice to be like the clear and certain sound of a trumpet" [ed: that's not the noise that comes to my mind when I think of Bush's voice]. "Because you seek the Lord daily, we who know the Lord will follow that kind of voice eagerly." [ed: excuse me, but in my Catholic confirmation classes I was told that the Lord doesn't really "follow" any human, no matter how "clear and certain" his voice is. But, as we all know, Catholics aren't "really" Christians.]

"Don't equivocate. Put your agenda on the front burner and let it boil. You owe the liberals nothing. They despise you because they despise your Christ." [ed: too fucking angry to speak...teeth grinding...jaw popping...then something comes to mind...what was it...oh, yes, "Judge not, that ye not also be judged." Who said that again? I think there was something about forgiveness, too, and charity, and love...damn, any minute now I'll think of it...]

you don't think they'll stop at abortion, do you?

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

specter's head on a platter

or...overturning filibuster rules in the Senate Judiciary. Or both.

NY Times today:
"As they ['conservatives,' a word that will always appear in quotes on this blog from now on] try to keep Mr. Specter, a centrist PA representative who supports abortion rights [not for long! I feel the winds of Jesus blowing toward Mr. Specter] from heading the Senate judiciary committee, they are demanding a steep concession: support for changing a century-old Senate rule that permits judicial nominations to be blocked by filibuster."

Ponder THAT stroke of genius for a while. Go ahead, start pondering...

P.S. If Mr. Near Miss pats me on the head ONE more FUCKING time, he may not be able to produce Little Near Miss-es.

Further Insanity

Scott Petersen's jury might be hung. Apparently, someone on the jury actually BELIEVES this scenario: a homeless man/ruffian/black person wandered into/deliberately stalked Laci Petersen, waiting until she was nine months pregnant to abduct her. He then killed her, waited for the police to announce Scott Petersen's "alibi" then drove to San Francisco and dropped off Laci's body at that exact spot in order to frame Scott Petersen ("you have to believe me! I look like Ben Affleck! Celebrities are never bad!). Uh-huh, that's plausible.
As opposed to this scenario: Scott Petersen is cheating on his wife, who is pregnant with a baby he allegedly didn't want. His business is in the crapper and he's borrowed a ton of money to maintain that prosperous-All-American look. He claims to have gone fishing, in winter, on the Bay, with the wrong kind of equipment for the kind of fish he wanted to catch. He has a receipt from the dock near where Laci's body was found. Now, while this is a strange conceit, to use the receipt from possibly dumping your wife's body, and then use it as an alibi, it is not unheard of in the annals of mystery fiction.

Am I missing something here? I mean, besides why the media is so fucking fascinated with a man who in all likelihood killed his wife and son and dumped them in the bay so he could carry on with his bottle-blond girlfriend? And, further, why doesn't the media ever connect the dots on this story? Why not give some fascinating statistical information, such as this: "Men often become violent after their wives become pregnant, and the leading cause of death among pregnant women is homicide."

honestly, people: our incompetent citizens, part 2

Part 1 happened last week. Here's this, from the AP:

WASHINGTON - As President Bush mulls what to do after winning re-election, voters say his first priority should be resolving the situation in Iraq, where the fighting is growing more intense. They also want Bush to cut the deficit, which ballooned under his watch, rather than pushing for more tax cuts, according to an Associated Press poll taken right after the election.

Well, if wishes were nickels...we'd all be benefitting from the Bush tax cut.

A Prayerful Nation

Interesting piece in the Sunday Magazine (of the NY Times, naturally--I have my liberal elitist bona fides) about a nation at prayer: Eight out of 10 Americans say they pray daily, or at least weekly. I can't tell if that average is skewed by the thousands of prayers I prayed before the election, all of them some variation of "God Help Us." Apparently their God IS bigger than my God, as General Boykin so memorably asserted. My God must be an ambiguous fellow with a taste for obscure stories--your classic lefty pushover. Why, he doesn't even seem to be a good capitalist--he exhorts people to be like lillies of the field, unaware that people must toil and spin in order to buy stuff at Wal-Mart. And then, he encourages people to love one another, and to take care of children, and to cast the beam from their own eye: yep, the Republican party certainly embodies those ideals. The 100,000 Iraqis we've killed since the invasion, and the 1000 Americans who will never come home again, should certainly be feeling righteous about now. They may be dead, but they too had God On Their Side.

And Here We Are

A quote from Tennyson that has gotten me through the days:

"Tho' much is taken, much abides; and tho'
We are not now that strength which in the old days
Moved earth and heaven; that which we are, we are;
One equal-temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
- Tennyson, "Ulysses

Planets Align for Kerry

So we needn't worry:

The Planets Have Made Up Their Mind: Kerry Wins


NEW DELHI (Reuters) - Surveys in the United States may be showing the race for president as too close to call but top Indian astrologers say the planets have clearly made up their mind: John Kerry will win.

Planets governing President Bush are eclipsed and in an uncomfortable position, making his tenure controversial and his re-election bid unsuccessful, the soothsayers said on Friday, four days before the vote.

On the other hand, the planets of Democratic challenger Senator John Kerry were in the ascendant, ensuring him success in competitions.

"Saturn, which is the lord of health and fortune for President Bush, has been eclipsed by the Sun, which is unfortunate and gives him a clear defeat," Lachhman Das Madan, editor of a popular astrology magazine, told Reuters.

"Kerry will win," said Madan, who is also known as "the emperor of astrologers." "It is cosmic writ that George W. Bush cannot become president of United States again."

Ajai Bhambi, a senior astrologer and author of several books on the science of predictions, agreed.

"Kerry is likely to beat Bush in the final verdict," he told the New Indian Express newspaper.

Bejan Daruwalla, another top astrologer, told Reuters he had yet to calculate who would win Tuesday's election. But Bush, even if he won, would not be allowed by his planets to complete a full term, he said.

In EVERY State

An October AP analysis of the most up-to-date figures from across the country found that, in every state where complete data is available, the Democrats have registered more new voters than Republicans

Here's My Call

Kerry in a landslide.

I first heard that at a moveOn conference in May, and I believed it for two weeks until the Swift Boat Veterans for "Truth" ads came out and got so much play, after a fairly lame (let's face it) Democratic convention. Then, like the rest of the left, I spent my time hyperactively watching polls and discussing polling methodology with my equally wonky, lefty friends (who bear sole credit--and possibly responsibility--for my current, mostly sane state). But I think we can do it. Then we have to remember the lessons of this election and not back down; stay organized and focused, building the spine of the Democratic party, one vertebrae at a time.

Anyway, I can't bear to think of the alternative. All I could do in that case is stockpile pharmaceuticals.

I Voted Today

And it felt triumphant.

I waited in line for over an hour; there were so many people there at 1 p.m. on a Thursday afternoon. I didn't see anyone turn away because of the lines. People just determinedly took their place and held it. There was remarkably little discussion of politics, probably because everyone thought that everyone else was on the "other side," but we did strike up a conversation with a nice older woman behind us who told us that "my mother must be spinning in her grave that I'm not voting Republican." This was the first time she had switched and voted for the Democratic candidate. "This has gone too far" she said.

We agreed. Let's hope a majority of Americans do, too.

Eminem for President

This justifies my secret love of Eminem, which I have not admitted publicly until now. Watch it. Watch it again. Go buy a black sweatshirt.

Bush Cousins for Kerry

"Because blood is thinner than oil."

More Happy Pics

Here. Scroll down.

I Try to Be Cynical, But it's Hard to Keep Up

This one is actually beyond cynicism. This one is into Holy Fucking Shit Territory, down Jesus Fucking Christ Lane, turn left at FUBAR. The New York Times today (yes, yes, all a part of a liberal ploy to damage Bush before the election, with help of the Iraqis and the IAEA, which my conservative students think is actually a socialist company owned by Sweden) reports that some 380 TONS of explosives were looted in the early days of the 'liberation,' probably while Bush was on that damn aircraft carrier in San Diego spouting "Crusade (excuse me: Mission) Accomplished!" The Administration claims that it did not report the missing plastic explosives because it didn't want the insurgency to know they were missing. ?*^&%@*@#&^#*? They have the explosives, people! They're not actually missing to them! It's not news to them! (Those of you who know me know that I only use exclamation points under extreme duress. Expect more in the coming week.)

And in other horrifying above-the-fold news, 50 Iraqi solidiers were ambushed by people dressed as policeman and shot, executed. In the picture on the Times front page, they are a ragged lot, in various kinds of clothing. All of them, presumably, wished to do something for their country and their people. All of them, at least, wanted to provide for their family by signing up for one of the only paying jobs around (how's that reconstruction effort going, Rummy?) And how did it end for them? On a dusty, hot and lonely road, killed by their own countrymen.

We must get out. We must get out. We must get out.

Happy Picture

Check out this picture from a rally in PA with John Kerry and the Big Dog himself...though it's being reported as "hundreds" of supporters, as per usual corporate-media method of counting (multiply Bush supporters and crazy anti-choice people by 3, discount Dems and Lefties by half).

Why, is that your M.A. thesis you're not writing today? Why, yes, it is, thank you.

Damn Reality! Damn Facts! Imaginary Moral Vaccuum Good!

From Ron Suskind, New York Times Magazine (10/17/2004):

"In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn't like about Bush's former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend -- but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

The aide said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. 'We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'

what is this glass between us?

Saw I [Heart] Huckabee's last night, a great film. There's a scene where Jude Law's obnoxious corporate character (appropriately named Brad) is confronted with a recording of a story that he tells all the time: June 21st, in the car, August 8th, in the boardroom, etc. And as most of us would do when confronted with our story line, he disintegrates. He is forced to be present with himself without his storyline, without the ongoing narrative that we all carry in our heads that tells us who we are, and why we are Important. He stares into the abyss, and the abyss stares back at him, and it's a testament to Jude Law as an actor that he no longer looks like a stunningly beautiful man, but just a human, looking in the mirror for the first time and not liking what he sees very much.