#yourexcusesucks

I just saw a guy say to a non-voter,"So, the good guys won. Wish you’d helped out, but we managed to pull it off without you. You’re welcome!"

Another guy said its not necessary to diss those who chose to abstain - in this case, due to the "killing of brown people". Below is my response to him (it contains profanity):

There has been something of a movement, if it's even worthy of the term, to e

ncourage shaming or just challenging those who conscientiously abstain or fail to give a political fuck. Whichever.

Again, because it's THAT important. Obama barely won four years, ago. I've been bitching about that for four years. The margin was a FRACTION of that, this time. Hell, Romney may as well be honorary vice-president or something.

War isn't just war. There are degrees. Bad economies are not all equal. People's suffering does matter but, no matter how trite it may sound, bad is better than worse. We aren't doing anyone anywhere any favors by saying we care so much about their plight that we are not going to use even our limited power to make things better for them and the rest of us.

#yourexcusesucks

Two Evils

Below is my response to a "Don't vote if you don't want to" (my description) blog post at 4thletter.net. Do you agree?

Re: "“Vote for the lesser of two evils!” is a thing I’ve heard over and over this election, but somehow voting for an evil is more acceptable than rejecting evil outright. We don’t have to compromise if we don’t want to."

Choosing neither of the major options or the less popula

r ones means that everyone else chooses FOR you. But you and those you love, hate, and don't even know will live with those consequences.

With that in-mind, everyone has a stake in what everyone else chooses - especially if they choose not to be bothered.

Life is and always will be about trying to combine imperfect options with imperfect information to form a more perfect union.

Opting out of that is like opting out of life or, more specifically, opting out of the pursuit of that more perfect union. That's not laudable, in my opinion.

The Right Way to Say It

The Trayvon situation is a terrible tragedy but I am loving the nonviolent ways that people are expressing their discontent. It doesn't distract from the crime, the loss, or the injustice. It honors the emotional weight of the situation without sacrificing the moral high ground.

Romney Rap

Source: http://youtu.be/bxch-yi14BE

You're welcome.

It Ain't Over

The election of a Black President of the United States of America means a great deal to a great many people.

All. Around. the World.

But there's a whole lot it does not mean.

I remember discussions about reparations, some years back, in which some non-Blacks said they were so tired of us (re: Black Americans) griping about race and this country's history of racial injustice that it would be WORTH paying the reparations, to which we are not entitled*, if it meant we were contractually obligated to shut the fugg up about this topic. Forever.

In bringing this up now, I'm not trying to rehash the reparations debate. I'm trying to illustrate just how much people in this country think and have long thought that racial inequality was a thing of the past. Ancient history. A long time, ago.

To those people and and their adjacents, handing Barack Obama the keys to the White House confirms that the USoA is A-ok.

Often, though, these are the same people who see a highly paid Black athlete drive by them in a car that costs more than the observer's home and conclude that clearly every Black person is on equal or better footing with every white person. If the logical flaw in that line of thinking isn't obvious I'm not sure I can illuminate it.

Nevermind the fact that it took until 2009 for a Black person to be elected to this country's highest office.
Pay no attention to the fact that it wasn't until this country is or was on a road to an icy depression - the kind you can't pop a pill for - that this country elected a Black person to the Presidency.
Let's not think about the incredibly cavalier attitude the previous administration has shown toward life (foreign or domestic), law (foreign or domestic), and basic logic over a period of 8 year, that created a climate in which people were finally ready for a change.

One might look at that and consider it a "glass half empty" perspective. After all, if the country was in the midst of such crisis conditions and turned to a Black man, doesn't that say something good about their attitude toward the ability and potential of Blacks?

Maybe.

Sure Obama got 364 electoral votes (potentially 376) to McCain's 162, which sounds like a lot but apparently is not considered an actual blow-out. But consider how much of the popular vote (which, as far as I'm concerned, is the REAL VOTE) he received**: 53%.

As far as I'm concerned, that's a pretty even split. I mean, if you TRIED to cut a pie in half simply by inspection and then had someone do a precise mathematical measurement to determine how close you were, a 53 - 47 split would be pretty impressive. The point is, it's still half, no matter how you slice it.

So basically, we immersed in debt, our businesses are failing, we're embroiled in at least one unnecessary conflict, we're torturing people, we're outing our federal agents, and soiling our international reputation (just off the top of my head)... and we're just about HALF-WAY fed-up with it and ready for a change!

Or the prospect of that change being realized in the form of this Black man was only enough to get HALF of the country to vote for him. In THESE conditions, after the disgusting campaign run by John McCain and Sarah Palin, about half of us are ready to let a Black person lead us to better days.

Except it's still not half because it's not like 100% of registered voters cast their ballot. So, about half of a fraction of the adult citizens of this country voted for a Black man***.

That truly is amazing. And I mean that in every sense of the word.





* - from their perspective
** - assuming the quote from Yahoo! Answers is accurate
*** - or, as some might consider him, a biracial man, raised by a white family

How Bizarre

Let me start out by saying I'm no mumbler. When I'm relaxed, I'm sure my pronunciation and projection fall short of perfection but I'm far from one of those people who chews up his words and upchucks gibberish.

So.

Today, I biked to a grocery store and, as so often happens, found that I'd crossed the threshold... to the Twilight Zone - apparently marked in the real world by motion detectors and automatic, glass doors.

I saw a large, young, Black male who I suppose was a greeter or sample offerer. Since I was hoping to find a left-over newspaper to mark last night's historic events, I walked over to him prepared for bad news, but not expecting a negative encounter.

I asked, "If you had any newspapers left, where would they be?"
"Oh, you didn't hear what happened, last night?" Heh. Okay, he's got a quick wit (or he's been wearing that one-liner out, all day); that's cool.

He began walking to my left and gave me the impression that I should follow.
"Boy I don't know what this world is comin' to..." I looked at him. "But you're probably just as disappointed as I am," he continued.

I figured he, like most, was talking about the election and, although I know darned well there are young, Black conservatives and Republicans, I didn't expect him to be a card-carrying member of either club.

I couldn't help prompting him for clarification, "What do you mea..."
"Oh. We don't have none left," he offered, with a redundancy that dwarfed the very large, very empty newspaper rack we'd been approaching.
"Oh well. I figured I was out of luck."

"But yeah, this world is going down the tubes."
Ahh, we're back on-track now. "Howso?"

"Huh?"
"What's wrong with the world?"

"What?"
"Nevermind."

"Yeah, this world, y'know, it's a mess."
"Yes, you said that. Why?"

"Huh?"

It was the kind of "huh?" with which I'd become far too familiar. It was the default response used by a subset of the population whose habits were the conversational equivalent of salting one's food before tasting it. It was the cart before the horse - a request for clarification that preceded confusion.

This is usually followed by a statement that quickly reveals that the listener indeed heard what was said... right around the time the speaker has begun repeating himself.

Patience may not be my greatest virtue, but I felt I'd given this young man too many irreplaceable seconds of my life and in-return I'd gotten nothing but pissed.

As a parting gift, I gave him a look that even a dog can communicate to someone who does something so stupid or confusing that one figures it would HAVE to make more sense when viewed sideways:

"R u stoopid?"

It Has Begun

Barack Obama won the Presidency of the United States of America.

And Florida went Blue*.

I couldn't be happier. Actually, I could. I should have been elated, last night, instead of just happy. I would have been, too, except that I too busy not being heartbroken and depressed. I guess that was my version of exultation because if John McCain had won, I'd have been a blubbering mess.

And then there was the concern that, on one side or the other, unhappy people would do unhappy things to other people. So far, I've seen none of that here... but I worried and wondered, for a while.

I wasn't going to stay up late to see the final result because (and here's another reason for my limited emotional response) we've already seen the networks call one opponent, then reverse it. I wasn't interested in riding that rollercoaster, again.

Anyway, my girlfriend was watching which effectively meant that I was watching. Besides, I was still amped-up from spending most of the day volunteering for the Tallahassee branch of the campaign that erased Senator Obama but gave birth to President-Elect Barack Obama. More on that another time.

When we got the "projected" results, I was still reserved. And it didn't help that CNN apparently kept "projected" up much, much too long. I talked to my grandmother, who voted for the first time that *I've* ever heard of. I talked to my mom, who told me how much it meant for her to risk her life to go to school amidst race riots but grow up to see a Black man gain the keys to the White House. I also talked to my father, who yelled at me and called me someone else's name. But it was meant in love.

I know. I know. Trust me.

Eventually, we took a chance, grabbed the camcorder, and hit the road to see how Tallahassee was reacting to the news.

Dead silence.

Apparently, though, this was just because so many were at the election party. So we headed over there, recorded some speech material, observed the celebration, shed some tears (well, she did anyway), and interviewed some folks to find out how they were feeling and what this moment meant to them.

One thing is represents, to me, is a chance to vote FOR, not just AGAINST someone. As I said... a year and a half, ago... I would be PROUD to have Barack Obama be the President of these United States of America.

It feels like the world started over. Continuity rebooted. We got a green mushroom, an extra life.

Now, let's see how we use it.

It has begun.






* - And Tallahassee did its part.

Where Credit's Due

I may not have voted for him, but I respect Florida's Republican governor, Charlie Crist. Today, he gave me another reason to do so.

http://www.flgov.com/release/10320

He extended the early voting hours in our state to give every registered voter a greater chance to find the time and make a way cast a ballot in this election. That could work out in Republicans' favor* ... but it might not.

I think he did it because it was the right thing to do, not because he was so desperate to increase his own or his party's power that he'd compromise his values and our rights in a hot minute.

Everyone can't say that. Not truthfully, anyway.

So here's to a lil credit where credit's due. *raises glass of Kool-Aid to Governor Crist*

Early Voting

I'm pleased to say that I voted in the Presidential election, yesterday.

And I wasn't alone.

If it took about a half hour for me to vote, on a weekday afternoon, during the early voting period, I'd hate to imagine what the lines will be like in a couple of weeks.

At least they didn't (seem to) try any funny stuff. All I can do now is cross my fingers and hope that my vote counts, in the end.*



EDIT: Oh yeah. And I'm embarrassed to say that there was a marriage issue on the ballot. Florida doesn't give a damn about gays, unfortunately. "We" would rather see an orphaned child raised by the system than by one or two loving parents who happen to be gay. But that wasn't enough, I guess. Now they want to make sure those two parents can't marry each other, either.

That saddens me.

Well, the homophobes may win this one, but not with my help.



* nevermind the Electoral College

Voting Rules

I'm concerned about Florida voting, this year.* There seem to have been some changes in the voting rules.

I heard that we have to have photo identification and proof of signature (and some other unconfirmed items). To use your driver's license, the address must match your voter registration address information. It must also have a sample of your signature. If not, as I understand it, you will be issued a provisional ballot which will only be counted if you return within two days with the appropriate information/identification.

What bothers me most about this is that 1) I doubt this information is getting to everyone, 2) those it reaches by word-of-mouth may get inaccurate information and, perhaps, be dissuaded from voting, and 3) it's too close to the election for the rules to change.

And, of course, I'm concerned that those the qualified voters this is most likely to affect will probably be minority members and Democrats, but I don't want ANYone to be disenfranchised. There's been enough of that... and enough of the PERCEPTION of that, already.

I'd like to find a way to help get the word out (of what to expect at the polls) to more people.





* - For those who don't know, I live in Florida.

The Other Foot

About a month, ago, my girlfriend and I were driving down the street and stopped for some gas. When I finished pumping the gas, I walked back to the door to find my girlfriend to a 45- to 55-year-old, disheveled, white male through her window. The window was about half-way down, so he had plenty of clearance to reach through and grab her in some way.

When he saw me, he said, "How you doin', man?"

"I'm good, but I'm gonna need you to step back a little."

My initial impression was that he was asking for money. When I saw the clipboard, I was reminded of a time when a previous girlfriend opened the door to someone asking for census information. She gave him all sorts of information, which concerned me, but not as much as the fact that she stood there in the doorway talking to this stranger while I was away. He could've pushed her inside and done anything to her.

He complied and my girlfriend explained that he had some kind of election-related petition. While walking away, he said, "Sorry, man. I just wanted to know if you were registered voters.

I wasn't askin' fer money or nuthin'."

He sounded so damned pitiful. And his general demeanor suggested that plenty of people had similarly misjudged him in the past... and that he'd more or less learned "his place."


Plenty of times on this blog, I've gone on about how unfair it is that people see me and grab their purses, cross the street, follow me around the stores, etc. Basically, taking a look at me and assuming the worst said more about them than it did about me... but it still made me feel like shit.

Well, now I'd done the same thing to someone else... and, once again, I felt like shit.

That's all.

The New Chad

So yeah, I voted... for all the good it did.

For those who may not know, I live in Florida and Florida moved up our voting day (a measly week, I think) to yesterday. As a result, ... Well, I'll let CNN tell you:

"Florida has often played an over-sized role in presidential politics -- for proof you need not look further than the 2000 presidential race.

But the Florida Democratic primary has been relegated to a "beauty contest" because the Democratic party stripped the state of its delegates. Thus, Florida Democrats may have little impact on who eventually becomes the Democratic nominee."

Ain't dat a #&$?!

Republican voters warmed-up and resurrected John McCain, whose political rigor mortis was in its final stages, a short while, ago. Still, McCain got a surprise victory, however many delegates we have to offer, and a sweet, sweet burst of momentum. Oh, and Rudy Juliani's backing.

Democratic voters sent our phantom ballots mostly in Hillary Clinton's direction, despite the fact that neither she, nor her Democratic opponents, campaigned within an inch of our state border. So, she got her boost and momentum, but not the delegates. Still, Clinton celebrated, Obama shrugged, and Edwards quit.

I dislike the idea that my vote doesn't count. I dislike the fact that it' s numerically inconsequential. I dislike the fact that the all-or-nothing electoral college makes it nearly irrelevant.

And I really dislike the fact that it really 1) definitely DOESN'T count, this time*, but 2) people are treating it like the results mean so much. We don't know if Obama voters in Florida stayed home, since their vote wouldn't count anyway. We don't know if Edwards would've had a better showing. We don't know if Clinton would've had reason to celebrate.

I guess it's like salt on the wound - a wound that was just healing from the 2000 election.



* except for the local issue on the ballot

Separated At-Birth

For some time, I've been amazed at the resemblance between Leelee Sobiesky and Helen Hunt. I'd never heard anyone else point this out before, so I thought I'd be breaking new ground. Apparently not.

There was another "separated at-birth" example I wanted to drop in your collective laps, but this last birthday (a couple weeks, ago) gifted me with a nice, big case of senility. Well, to be honest, that gift has been in my closet for years, with wrapping slowly fraying and falling off.

So, my cheap lil trifecta gets stripped down to a one-fecta. Ladies n gentlemen, I give you the Monday's most fantastic, awesome, politically relevant "separated at birth:"

Harry J. Lennix & Barack Hussein Obama!

Okay, so they're not exactly twins, but if ever WHENever they make a movie about Obama's life, I think Lennix is a shoe-in, as they say.

Shoe-in. What the hell does that mean, anyway?






















EDIT: Michael K. Williams who plays "Omar" on the series, The Wire, would make a cool-ass DMX.

Gonzalez & U.S. Attorney Firings

U.S. Attorney General, Alberto Gonzalez, has been catching hell for the fact of and his role in the firings of eight U.S. Attorneys. His critics seem to be both, those who say firing the attorneys for political reasons is immoral and illegal and those who feel Gonzalez repeatedly misrepresented his role in the firings.

I've heard countless news reports which reiterate the point that new Administrations regularly "clean house" and bring in their own people. The point being that U.S. Attorneys (and Attorneys General) serve at the pleasure of the President of these United States, so they can be fired at any time, for any reason. However, others say that this type of thing is typically (and properly) done at the beginning of a new administration - not halfway through the term- and that politics should not play a part in the decision to hire or fire U.S. Attorneys.

Huh?

To me, this seems like an artificial and somewhat useless distinction. Keep in-mind that I'm not an attorney and certainly am not as well-versed in governmental practices as some. Still, it seems to me that, if U.S. attorneys can be fired simply because "there's a new sheriff in town," (and especially if the new boss is from a different party) then politics are already a factor in the equation.

So, really, this comes down to Gonzalez's reportedly contradictory statements about the firings. But even then, I wonder about the point of Congressional Hearings on the subject. I mean, I like the idea of finding out what's what, but it seems that as long as President Bush continues to support him (as he's done throughout this controversy), Mr. Gonzalez will remain in the position of United States Attorney General, regardless.

So, really, I guess I'm saying that, while I find this whole Justice Department debacle distasteful (especially the lying), I don't really see what all the official fuss is about. If it's improper to fire U.S. Attorneys for political reasons at the halfway point, why isn't it improper to do so from the get-go?

As long as the latter is allowed, why get so incensed about the former?

I Ain't That Simple

On a recent NPR broadcast of News and Notes, Tony Cox interviewed Geraldine Ferraro about her bid for the office of Vice-President, in the 1980's. During the interview, Mr. Cox said that most women voters chose the other ticket. He wondered how Ms. Ferraro felt about the fact that women voters didn't support her. The implication, as I saw it, was that even women weren't on her side, as if they should have been - or perhaps more fairly, as they may have been expected to be.

I thought it was interesting that women who voted for or against a female candidate were assumed to have done so due to that candidate's gender, as opposed to her ability. I can understand the temptation to frame the discussion in these terms, but as far as I'm concerned, it ain't that simple. Not everyone votes for a woman because she's a woman and not everyone who votes against her did so for the same reason.


Another episode of News and Notes mentioned a poll that suggested many or most employees, including women, preferred having a male boss. It was assumed that this was because employees expected cattiness and bitchiness from female management.

This was seen as an example of the stereotyping of women... even by women. To some degree, I agree, but it ain't that simple. Folks are too quick to assume WHY someone doesn't want a female boss. Not everyone's management preference has to do whether the boss stands up or sits down to pee.

Personally, I prefer female co-workers overall, but I do prefer male supervisors. Why? I often find that female managers tend to communicate less-effectively, often making my job more difficult.


And then, there's Barack Obama. If the above is any indication, I'm confident of the following:

* If most Black voters pick Obama, it will be assumed that we did so because we'll vote for any Black candidate - regardless of his or her qualities or qualifications.
* If most Black voters don't vote for Obama, it will be assumed that was because we didn't think he was Black enough.

Again, I acknowledge that some people WILL vote for or against the color of his skin, but this is not true of everyone. Sure, I'd like to see a Black person in the Oval Office, but mostly, I like the idea of "President Obama" because of what he's shown me. He seems intelligent, articulate, wise, compassionate, and authoritative. He seems the kind of person I'd be proud* to have as my President - not just as a Black man, but as an American.


Unfortunately, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and others will largely be judged as the Black candidate, the female candidate, the Mormon candidate, etc. and anyone who votes for them will be seen as one-dimensional supporter.

Sorry, folks. It ain't always that simple - and dammit, neither am I.





* - It's sad that pride in one's leadership seems like such a foreign concept, to me, these days. I hope that changes soon, regardless of which person or which party takes the Presidency in 2008.

Colin & Condi

About a year ago, I asked some folks if they thought Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice have gotten a pass when it comes to criticizing The Administration's policies and statements.

I think they have - particularly from the Black community.

I've heard a ton of people criticizing Bush and Cheney. I've heard plenty of calls for Rumsfeld's resignation. There seems to be plenty of blame to go around. Yet somehow, I've hardly heard a word of criticism directed at "Colin & Condi" - relatively speaking, anyway.

I'll say it right out. I think it's because they're Black.

I think that a lot of US had high hopes for such high profile, high ranking Black government officials. We wanted them to succeed. We wanted them to be noble. We wanted them to be shining examples of US doing right.

What *I* think we actually got were a couple of people who were too blind to see or unwilling to expose the hypocrisy of this Administration and how many of their actions contradict so-called American values and philosophies.

Instead of admitting this, I believe many of US were in denial and kept making excuses for them.

"Well, Bush must not be listening to them."
"Well, they don't really have anything to do with what's going on."
". . ." (silence)

Or sometimes, we're deafeningly silent. And, to me, that's among Colin & Condi's most obvious offenses. They didn't stand up, break ranks, and say to this country and this world, "This is wrong!"

People act like voices of dissent provide the lion's share of our enemies fuel and fire. No. They've got plenty of motivation. They don't need our help and they certainly won't dry up and blow away if every U.S. citizen, official, and media representative pretended to get behind a single policy or plan-of-action.

I'd like to conclude this little rant by addressing that last element: the media.

In a recent News & Notes podcast, I heard the host, once again, referring to Secretary Rice as "Condi." Interestingly enough, I never hear people referring to Bush, Cheney, or Rove as George, Dick, and Carl. To be fair, they also don't have four-syllable names, but it seems obvious, to me, that there's something particularly familiar about "Condi."

"Condi" sounds like one of your sorors, co-workers, or family members. It sounds like someone you like and respect. It does not sound like someone you would skewer with the same fiery criticism that we direct at others who support and encourage Administration policy.

I think it's a small, admittedly inconclusive sign of the broader issue.

So, the way I see it, we're all (including me) complicit in this disappointing display of discrimination. It's time to take the blinders off and recognize that bias, then deal with it appropriately in all areas.

Powell may be gone (though occasionally publicly critical of Administration Policy) but Rice is still there.

If we want to fuss about the different treatment that Obama gets from the media and the masses, then we need to rise above such political hypocrisy, ourselves.

Obama and Powell

Here are some comments I recently left on E.R. Shipp's blog. The post was called "Obama's Blackness" and talked about how he's apparently not "Black" (or Black enough) for some Black people.

Quoting the article (emphasis-mine):

"And at the Shepherd Park Barber Shop here, where the hair clippers hummed and the television blared, Calvin Lanier summed up the simmering ambivalence. Mr. Lanier pointed to Mr. Obama’s heritage — he is the American-born son of a black father from Kenya and a white mother from Kansas — and the fact that he did not embody the experiences of most African-Americans whose ancestors endured slavery, segregation and the bitter struggle for civil rights."

"West said...

wow

I had no idea there were people who were (more or less) questioning Obama's Blackness.

[...]
February 3, 2007 11:43 AM"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tangentially...
After checking out the New York Times article as E.R. suggested, I stumbled upon some statements Colin Powell made about himself (and Blacks as a whole) years, ago:

"Discussing his appeal to white voters at the time, Mr. Powell, the light-skinned son of Jamaican parents, noted that he spoke English well and was not confrontational. He concluded by saying, “I ain’t that black.”"

"West said...

I had to step away from this, for a while, after I read that article and saw the quote from Powell that ended with "I ain't Black."

I didn't remember the statement or any controversy surrounding them, so it was something of a shock - delayed or not.

Maybe it shouldn't have, but that quote and the one that preceded it really overshadowed the rest of the article, for me - at least until I could step away from it and process the information a bit more.
February 5, 2007 10:05 AM "

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'm still kinda blown away by all of this and can hardly get my thoughts together to comment further.

I can't believe Obama's "Blackness" is in-question and I can't believe I don't remember those strange statements from Colin Powell (whose statements and actions have bothered me for some time) about his own Blackness.

I don't really know what else to say. Maybe I'll be able to put something coherent together later.

NEWS - Southern secession?

source: White Atlanta suburbs push for secession - Yahoo! News

I could see people, regardless of race, feeling that they ought to gain more benefit from their contributions. I'm not sure if the racial allegations are fair.

The use of "secession" in the title is certainly going to influence reader perceptions and interpretations.

What do you think? Is this simple economics or is this racism?

Personally, I have a hard time discounting the former since these people will be just as close to Blacks, geographically, as they already were. History and human behavior makes it hard to discount the latter, as well.

Thanks for m'lady for the link.