on glass ceilings, high public offices, and internal drive & will

i've been perusing a lot of the local blogs lately, fixated on the discussion that has ensued following Obama's election as the next president of our united states. no, not the political discussions surrounding policy predictions or whatnot; rather, the fact that we now have our first black president. in particular, i'm interested in the language found in these discussions — the talk centered around the meme of "finally... finally my (black) child can strive to actually become president someday."

i've gone round and round about this with close personal friends of mine lately, and it seems like i should start here by making one thing clear - i am not questioning that children may need "proof in the pudding" when it comes to striving for something they want to become later in life. however, what i am taking issue with is the language that seems to be used across-the-board when it comes to this.

allow me to post something from a recent issue of the Quad City Times. It's a quote of a user's post, within a larger article written by friend Melissa Coulter. here it is:

“My guess is that part of the reaction (of African Americans) has to do with seeing that whites actually accept and support a black man as leader in large numbers,” Anne-Marie Hislop wrote. “Why would a black mom have told her son he could do anything when there are plenty of things he was blocked from doing (just as it is still a lie to say that ‘anyone can grow up to be president’ — not women, not yet, not Muslims, Jews, Hispanics, Native Americans, Asian Americans). Again, we are making progress, but ...”

i have a fundamental disagreement with this type of language and outlook. the questions Hislop (and others making this argument) raises about the black mom and her son, and the supposed act of "lying" when saying anyone can grow up to be president seem to validate two things points here - one being Hislop's point (and my own, and others as well), and one being the one this post is about.

first, yes... there are a lot of situations where people of certain non-white, non-straight, non-whatever demographics begin to lose hope, because of the way "things still look" right now, in 2008. social institutions and public offices are disproportionately skewed one way or another, and for whatever fucked up reasoning, some people just don't want everyone to have equal rights when it comes to marriage. i can completely see how that can be disconcerting to some folks, causing a loss of hope, will, and inner drive. but the second point - the one i personally want to make - comes from Hislop's questions too. it seems to show a flaw in our collective view of what's going on, and also stretches a simple flaw in logic into a really insulting world view. that's an awfully unclear sentence, so allow me to elaborate...

as i said, i'm not taking issue with the difficulty of people from these demographics to make very high public office positions, because i don't dismiss the undercurrent of nuanced racism in our country. i am taking issue with the language used by some people - that it is a "lie" to tell a child they can't be or do something simply because that thing hasn't been done before. was it a "lie" for Barack Obama or his family to think he could be the first black president, simply because there had not been one before? No. He's going to be President in january. either i am completely missing anne's point (but the responses i've read since making my point on The Times' site leads me to believe otherwise), or she is making a very bad error in simple logic. not to beat a dead horse. but here's an example in the flaw these folks seem to ardently stand by:

say it's 1977, and you have a little boy that is into baseball, and the season has just begun. you're watching his favorite team on television, and a player hits two home runs in one game. your child is in awe, and he starts saying "when i grow up, i want to be a big league player that hits THREE homeruns in a game." (and, while we're talking hypotheticals, let's give me a break on my analogy here, since i'm quite sure that someone like babe ruth or lou gehrig has already hit three in a game, so... say you and your child didn't know that). now then, you tell your child "i can't lie to you, dear... hitting three homeruns in a game is impossible. no one's that good yet." then, at the end of the season, reggie jackson hits three homers in one game of the world series (and even in back-to-back-to-back at bats).

it's not a "lie" to tell anyone their dream can come true - whether it be hitting three homeruns or becoming president - just because it hasn't been done before. that type of thinking/writing is faulty. but the crux of the matter here is, that logic sells the will and drive of us collectively short. it says "well, you can't be 'the first' in anything," you have to wait until someone else becomes X, then and only then you can strive for X." what the hell is that? stating that by and large, black folks, gay & lesbian folks, or whoever else live this way is awfully insulting. did Jackie Robinson not persevere and rise above, saying "F this, this is America, and I belong." (my words, of course)? Did Rosa Parks not have immense character, taking initiative on her own to change our country? i truly do not understand the implied laziness towards certain demographics that i see coming from folks as liberal as i, nor do i understand why they can't understand my point of view on this, and that's why i wanted to post something on the subject.

for one final point on the matter, please check out a good segment that aired on The Daily Show a week or so back. It's titled "black Liberal Guilt" and features comedian/commentator Larry Wilmore. there are a few rim-shot jokes in the beginning, and sure, it's a trumped-up portrayal of the white liberal stereotype, but the latter part ties in with what i'm writing about:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=209423&title=black-liberal-guilthttp://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=209423&title=black-liberal-guilt

A Dream in Doubt

last night, PBS' Independent Lens premiered "A Dream in Doubt." The episode/film tells the story of an extended Sikh family (common thread = 3 brothers) as they deal with extreme hardships during the days immediately after September 11th, 2001. Actually, "hardships" puts the situation lightly... you see, two of the brothers from this Indian immigrant family are murdered basically because of their appearance. Yes, it is a simplification, but two killers — hellbent on an enraged revenge for 9/11 — murdered these two american citizens simply because the socially-loaded turbans and beards worn by the brothers somehow signified "Al-Queda" to the killers. As the film goes on, you learn that more violence came to this group of immigrants — another friend of the family is murdered under similar circumstances, and yet another family friend receives a string of life-threatening phone calls and visits to his home.

i just now typed the words "race relations in america will continue to be very complex and difficult to comprehend for a long time to come," but a more direct comment might be "what the fuck is wrong with our country?"

the worst part for me personally about all this is that i have to deal with this brand of hate and distrust daily. i work with people who frequently use the phrase "towel head" and i've heard a lot of bigotous rhetoric about neighborhood gas station owner/operators. sometimes i feel as if i'm surrounded by a severe lack of intelligence.





links to web sites:

http://www.adreamindoubt.org/

http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/dreamindoubt/


.

Meeting David Wilson

MSNBC premiered the independent documentary film Meeting David Wilson this past Friday, and it was phenomenal. If you haven't heard about the film, it follows one young black man from New Jersey - David Wilson - to meet a middle-aged white man in North Carolina - David Wilson. See, the elder David's ancestors once owned the younger David's ancestors, as slaves on a tobacco plantation.

the meeting and subsequent conversation between the two men is extremely engaging. questions about the past, forgiveness, anger, and reparations are asked and answered honestly and respectfully. during the day spent together, the two become friends, and as i understand it, that bond is still strong after the making of the film. the piece ends with the flashing of a Martin Luther King quote on the screen:

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.


The Here's the trailer:




Throughout the main focus of the film, a deeper, overarching question is asked by the younger, black David Wilson. it is, "What is wrong with black people?"

MSNBC hosted an extremely touching roundtable discussion, that lasted 3 hours, after the airing of the film. on the panel were normal faces like one of my faves - Dr Michael Eric Dyson - but also some people I had not yet heard of.

very, very good.
please, check out the trailer.

"Freedom River"

Freedom River
by Warren H Schmidt, Ph.D.
(Narrated by Orson Welles)
1971



as i've said before, talking and writing about politics is usually somewhat difficult for me. issues that people debate about on television, at the workplace, or even within a circle of friends always seem to be far more complex to me than commonly made out to be. but there is something that's been traversing in and out of my thoughts over the last few years, most often as i read up on a couple religious discussion boards i frequent. i suppose it somewhat relates to the video above — the political issues of xenophobia, greed, etcetera — but i think it's more apt to say it's something more stripped down, pertaining to communication and respect, something more about.. well... "personality," i suppose.

allow me to take a sidestep tangent here for a bit... my wife and I are not church-goers in any sense of the word. i'm an atheist with no belief in an afterlife, and she's someone who is neither here nor there - someone who dislikes the idea of organized religion, but believes in the idea of a creator of everything (that's about as commonly theistic or religious as her mindset gets; it might suffice to say she believes in "The Force," for lack of a better explanation). so... think about us, and about how we will raise our future children. what do you think we'll do? do you think I'll teach them there is no god? think we'll answer questions like "what happens when grandma dies?" with stone-cold answers not fit for a child? conversely, think about a religious couple you know, also in their early 30s. a friend you have that "loves jesus," and is actively involved in his or her church. how do you think they'll raise their children? my guess is that most people would think both my wife and i as well as this other hypothetical couple will both raise their children ardently according to their beliefs, or lack thereof — me, raising my children by telling them belief in god is illogical, and they, raising their children by telling them god created them and everything around them.

and that is where i think most people are mistaken.

you see, the more i learn about the religious right i happen to be around in my daily life at work and at play (and in family circles), the more i realize they have a very peculiar view of our nation, and in turn, how they live their lives — their personalities. it's not very apt to call anyone "close-minded" anymore. it's a phrase that has almost lost its meaning; it's often anymore just a simple, sophomoric retort from a teenager to a parent, because mom or dad don't like pink hair. but these people are completely shut-in, close-minded to the core. the idea that a gay or lesbian teacher is involved in educating their child frightens them. the idea of a mexican-american family speaking spanish in a grocery store infuriates them. the idea that their faith doesn't have a monopoly in our collective lives causes them much grief. somehow, this all relates to this 6 minute animation from 1971.

in short, these people actively denounce the very freedoms this nation stands for. they have also turned a blind eye to the compassion, love, and grace that their religion has told them to embrace. the "go back to russia, you commie lib!" comments you hear from the most ridiculous of this mindset are completely laughable, but are also quite worrying. what is their ideal america? it's a very frightening question to ponder.


they can go ahead and fill their children's minds with black-and-white dogma, passing on their close-mindedness. we on the opposite side of the aisle will continue to let our children make up their own minds about spirituality, politics, and personality.

Jessica Benjamin: The American Series (at MCAC)

The Rapper (Tragedy)
(composite image of a slave child and Method Man)



This past weekend I took the 2 hour trek down to bloomington-normal to see old friend Jessica Benjamin and an exhibit of some of her new artwork. The highly anticipated show is called The American Series, and it runs at the McClean County Arts Center through February 16th.

First off, Jess has become a bit famous since the days we all were students at ISU. We've kept in touch a small bit after she moved to New York City, and a year or so back she had mentioned that her work had just become known to one of the most celebrated jazz musicians of our time - Wynton Marsalis . Wynton evidently expressed an interest in her paintings, and gave her the music and lyrics to a then-unreleased album. And now - time flying by as it does - the project is finished. Yes, Jess' work is now forever coupled with Wynton's music on his newest album, From the Plantation to the Penitentiary. Her paintings adorn the entire CD booklet, including the cover, and play an integral part in the theme of the album. Very nice.

So... back to the show... the gallery was packed with visitors. PACKED. There were probably about a dozen paintings from this new series of work, and I genuinely liked what I saw. Back in school, Jessica and I (among other artists that took print classes) made a lot of quiet, meditative landscape work; but to her credit, Jess always branched out more than the rest of us and did other things - including a lot of figure drawing and painting. The American Series is solely comprised of portrait paintings, sans one painting that stood out because it was a different size than the rest (much larger) and a different type of image (street scene of a march). That said, I got the sense from Jessica that the portrait paintings are the heart of the matter, so I'll focus on those.

Physically, the series is comprised of smaller-than-I-anticipated oils on paper, involving somewhere around a 12 x 12 inch actual image area. Content-wise, I walked away feeling like I saw a very eloquent, honest, and quiet critique of America, and as I edit this before posting, it's proving really difficult to accurately explain what I mean by that. The work doesn't hit you over the head with burning flags or graphic mockeries of "Dubya," rather, it takes a much more heartfelt approach by presenting portraits of our people. However, simply describing the work as "portraits" would sell it short... each of these "portraits" are uniquely interesting because of a tactic employed by the artist. I'll use an example to explain. Say you're looking at the painting in the show called "The Politician."





















Upon first glance, you undoubtedly notice the title and begin to search your memory, wondering who exactly is pictured. I did this with many of the pieces and wound up somewhat perplexed until I talked with jessica some more. Upon closer inspection of the artist statement, you realize you're seeing amalgamations of several key figures in each of the paintings. "The Politician" is actually a composite image of both Vice President Cheney and former FEMA director Michael Brown ("heckuva job, Brownie!"). This type of approach to making to portraits was taken with all the paintings on display. To some it might seem gimmicky at first, but I found it very purposeful and well thought-out. See, the act of combining two or more real people —sometimes famous, sometimes not — brings to form an all-encompassing surrogate figure. The power of the pieces isn't found within the boundaries of Jessica's execution/talent/skill; the power is found in the act of viewing this surrogate figure, the visceral reaction one has to the meaning evoked through it as a signifier. And sometimes that meaning is power or anger; sometimes the meaning is loss, or love.





















The Katrina Victim
(a composite of several people affected by the New Orleans flood)
























The Queen
(composite of a New York socialite and the queen of spades from a standard deck of cards)





This type of social realism is pretty tricky to pull off nowadays in the art world, or in other modes of communication and expression. As each side of the political isle outspins the other's attacks at a seeming hyper-speed, our nation's collective eyes glaze over with a frustration that quickly leads to an uninterest. The subjects' faces in jessica's work, however, boil everything down to a most simple matter — a singular identity that is easy to become interested in and easy to care about.

I left the show thinking about some ties the work had to other artists' work throughout the ages. To continue with the discussion of contrasting an underhanded social critique to a more overt political art, let me draw upon two printmaker/painters from an earlier time - Honore Daumier and Kathe Kollwitz. Both artists created work that I would argue fell on both sides of this coin. Here are two works by Daumier that illustrate the differences in approach I speak of:
















Honore Daumier
Gargantua
1831



















Honore Daumier
Third Class carriage
1860




...and two pieces by Kollwitz showing the same difference in approach/intent:




















Kathe Kollwitz
Outbreak
1903





















Kathe Kollwitz
Widows and Orphans
1919





Do you see what I mean? How does one best get people to pay attention to social issues when using art as the medium? There are the direct, in your face, "fuck you"s found in political art, punk rock music, and poetry slam-ish writings, and there are the more underhanded routes that present information in a less raucous, savage manner. Both are equally powerful, necessary, and legitimate, but after Jess' show I started to think the latter tends to get people to pay attention in a more sincere way.


















Jessica Benjamin working with local children at the McLean County Arts Center, 2008







.

Romney. Huckabee. Religion. America.

i'm not a skilled writer of politics. forgive me for writing only a tad on this personally, and then linking to a bunch of other sites, where far more intelligent words were typed.

so... Romney gave his speech yesterday. and the extremely religious right of america continues to scare the shit out of me. Mitt - a 2008 presidential candidate - said ""Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone." here is the entire transcript of the speech if you'd like to read more.

here's another quote: "The founders proscribed the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square. We are a nation 'Under God' and in God, we do indeed trust."

and another: "Americans acknowledge that liberty is a gift of God, not an indulgence of government.

you get the point. it's the same ol' rhetoric that makes you humorously think about the moronic "go back to Russia, you commie, atheist pinko!" or "there are no atheists in foxholes!" but there is a obviously less funny side to this type of mindset. these types of right-wingers use this nuanced theocratric-speak quite often, and it's listened to en masse. (tis' the season for hearing talking heads go on and on about a fabricated "war on christmas" by the "liberal god-haters." who cares if the reality is that "Happy Holidays” isn’t about eliminating Jesus from public ears, and is simply the all-encompassing greeting during the season when more than one religious holiday is celebrated... the thing is, people EAT THAT STUFF UP. "let's hate some nonbelievers!")

day in, day out, i hear and read news items that show a segment of america creeping closer and closer to a complete distrust and sometimes disgust at agnostics, doubters, and atheists. sometimes it's subtle and comes from sleek politicians, and other times it's in crudely spelled out by some backwards rube; but it always scares me, because i smell a very slippery slope.

so anyways, i'm going to interject other authors' words here, to say some things more eloquently than i can at this moment.
have a good weekend.


Joe Conason, from salon dot com, December 7, 2007:

Phonies like Huckabee and Romney complain constantly about the supposed religious intolerance of secular liberals. But the truth is that liberals -- including agnostics and atheists -- have long been far more tolerant of religious believers in office than the other way around. They helped elect a Southern Baptist named Jimmy Carter to the presidency in 1976, and today they support a Mormon named Harry Reid who is the Senate majority leader -- which makes him the highest-ranking Mormon officeholder in American history. Nobody in the Democratic Party has displayed the slightest prejudice about Reid's religion.

Liberals and progressives have no apologies to make, or at least no more than libertarians and conservatives do. Cherishing the freedoms protected by a secular society need not imply any disrespect for religion. But when candidates like Romney and Huckabee press the boundaries of the Constitution to promote themselves as candidates of faith, it is time to push back.
entire article is here



Kevin Drum, from Washington Monthly, December 6th, 2007:

I can't tell you how much this pisses me off. I'm well aware that this is par for the course among Republican politicians these days, and Romney is doing nothing more than engaging in what's become routine conservative disparagement of those of us who aren't religious. But the cowardice and pandering here is just phenomenal. Not only does Romney not have the guts to toss in even a single passing phrase about the nonreligious, as JFK did, he went out of his way to insist that "freedom requires religion," that no movement of conscience is possible without religion, and that judges had better respect our "foundation of faith" lest our country's entire greatness disappear. And that was just the warmup.

I know, I know. He's just doing what he has to do. Evangelical base and all that. But I'm not religious, and yet, mirabile dictu, I still manage to support freedom, have a conscience, and understand the law. I'm tired of people implying otherwise.
(entire article is here )




and one last one - Joan Walsh, from Salon dot com, December 6, 2007:

I'm with Walter Shapiro on this one: The big headline on Mitt Romney's momentous speech Thursday morning has to be "Freedom requires religion, just as religion requires freedom ... Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone." I happen to be a believer, and I found those words appalling.

Everyone knew Romney couldn't give a "John F. Kennedy speech" because Kennedy made a passionate, historic argument that the separation of church and state should be "absolute." No one quite knew that Romney's speech would represent an "obliteration of the separation of church and state," in the words of the Washington Post's Sally Quinn on MSNBC afterward (a remarkably critical statement from Quinn, given that she's a driving force behind the paper's "On Faith" project). As she noted, Romney's speech laid out a vision of America with no place for atheists, doubters or nonbelievers, and it chilled me.
(entire article is here )

Lumo

I caught this special on PBS last night:



it was very, very powerful and moving. i'd highly recommend watching it if you catch a rerun; it's beautiful and horrific at the same time. the bond these shunned women form at the Unicef hospital in southern Congo is amazing to watch unfold. the songs they sing, the way they overcome their horrific rapes, the way the interact with newborn children. my mind was going a million miles a minute as i watched.

...men with guns... fuck this world of men and guns.

Anti-Racist Action in Knoxville + Fugazi video

This is pretty funny. I originally saw the news on Digby, but she heard it through the grapevine. I'm not sure of the original source. Here's some of Digby's post:



White Flour!
by digby

(Via Perlstein, here's a hilarious story about a Klan rally. For real.)

Saturday May 26th the VNN Vanguard Nazi/KKK group attempted to host a hate rally to try to take advantage of the brutal murder of a white couple for media and recruitment purposes.
Unfortunately for them the 100th ARA (Anti Racist Action) clown block came and handed them their asses by making them appear like the asses they were.
Alex Linder the founder of VNN and the lead organizer of the rally kicked off events by rushing the clowns in a fit of rage, and was promptly arrested by 4 Knoxville police officers who dropped him to the ground when he resisted and dragged him off past the red shiny shoes of the clowns.
“White Power!” the Nazi’s shouted, “White Flour?” the clowns yelled back running in circles throwing flour in the air and raising separate letters which spelt “White Flour”.
“White Power!” the Nazi’s angrily shouted once more, “White flowers?” the clowns cheers and threw white flowers in the air and danced about merrily.
“White Power!” the Nazi’s tried once again in a doomed and somewhat funny attempt to clarify their message, “ohhhhhh!” the clowns yelled “Tight Shower!” and held a solar shower in the air and all tried to crowd under to get clean as per the Klan’s directions.


Like I said, here is the whole link, with some pictures.
Hilarious, ¿no?
The punk band AVAIL was the first means I ever heard about ARA. That was wayyyyy back in the day. Sounds like a decent group.



Now, here's some Fugazi. "Facet Squared." Why do a ton of the Youtube videographers who are into Fugazi focus on Ian al the time? The guy is the least interesting member of the band. Ah well. Enjoy. One of my favorite-of-all-time songs by them.




Pride no longer has definition
Everybody wears it, it always fits
A state invoked for the lack of position

Strength is the bait that keeps us so busy
If it's perforated, then I tear it to bits
All sense lost in the frenzy

They should never touch the ground

Irony is the refuge of the educated
Always complaining but they never quit
Cool's eternal, but it always dated

They should never touch the ground

It's not worth, it's the investment
That keeps us tied up in all these strings
We draw lines and stand behind them
That's why flags are such ugly things

They should never touch the ground

Coexistence

The world-traveling public art exhibition Coexistence opened up in Davenport this past Thursday night. Many people I've spoke with are considering it a special honor - we're the smallest metro area the show has gone to since its inception 6 years ago. Think about it - Jerusalem... Sarajevo... Cape Town... Quad Cities. Pretty cool. I was particularly looking forward to seeing it because I have a huge interest in peoples' shyness towards modern and contemporary art. If you didn't know, there is a bit of local apprehension about the show. Try as we might, the "cultural barometer" of this area means some aren't always ready for stuff like this. Even if the exhibit is not dangerously graphic or provocative, it still seems to have intimidated some people and caused a bit of fear or anger due to differing opinions or a lack of understanding. Or... well, hell, I suppose I'll go off here... or some people are just being moronic about it. Some local commentators in our online newspapers wrote acerbic rants about "liberal, elitist so-called 'art'" this-and-that. I can understand opinionated commentary on the artwork, or even talking about an over-the-top idealism, but frankly, I think some of these comments come from chicken shit knee-jerk reactions from close minded naysayers. If you have a problem with the "politics" of this show, come on... you've gotta write more eloquently about your stance.

So, enough about that. My wife and I checked the panels out this morning. I actually had a small part in setting up the signs, so I had seen all of them before the official unveiling, but wanted to really take my time looking at things while together, with her, on a non-work day. We both came away with the same thoughts... some panels' artwork was quite poor, some was quite strong. Same thing with the text panels beneath the art - some strong, some poor, and some seemingly placed without any contextual tie to the artwork. So, sometimes things paired up nicely, sometimes poorly. Regardless, we both had a strong emotional reaction to the show as a whole. The people with power around the world have to start understanding we all come from a variety of backgrounds and experiences, and not everyone worships your god, likes your economic model, agrees with your stance on abortion, etcetera.

Here's some pictures and a few of the quotes from the text panels below the art. Enjoy. Click on images for a larger view. And I have a feeling not many local bloggers read this, but if you come across this via a comment of mine on QCI or Cruiser or somewhere else, please feel free to drop your $.02.


































"You know what the trouble with peace is? No organization. And when do you get organization? In a war. Peace is one big waste of equipment. Anything goes, no one gives a damn … I've been in places where they haven't had a war for seventy years and you know what? The people haven't even been given names. They don't know who they are! It takes a war to fix that. In a war, everyone registers."
- Bertold Brecht







































"If the heart could think, it would stand still."
-Fernando Pessoa





































"The time will come when the sun will shine only upon a world of free men who recognize no master except their reason; when tyrants and slaves, priests, and their stupid or hypocritical tools, will no longer exist except in works of history or on the stage"
- Condorcet

Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds

I caught a very interesting show on PBS tonight. It was called The Anti-Americans and it showcased British, Polish, and French peoples' (from a wide range of backgrounds) opinions of America — their thoughts on our leaders and our common folk. From some pretty spot-on critiques to a charming story about a Polish cowboy in love with John Wayne-ish americana, it was quite good.

But instead of sitting and fumbling over a half-assed post about my thoughts, I figured I'd link to yet more music. It's not quite unrelated, however...


Nick Cave. "God is in the House."

Tongue-in-cheek brilliance:



"...Homos roaming the streets in packs
Queer bashers with tire-jacks
Lesbian counter-attacks
That stuff is for the big cities
Our town is very pretty
We have a pretty little square
We have a woman for a mayor
Our policy is firm but fair
Now that God is in the house
God is in the house
God is in the house
Any day now He'll come out
God is in the house

Well-meaning little therapists
Goose-stepping twelve-stepping Tetotalitarianists
The tipsy, the reeling and the drop down pissed
We got no time for that stuff here
Zero crime and no fear
We've bred all our kittens white
So you can see them in the night
And at night we're on our knees
As quiet as a mouse
Since the word got out
From the North down to the South
For no-one's left in doubt
There's no fear about
If we all hold hands and very quietly shout
Hallelujah
God is in the house
God is in the house
Oh I wish He would come out
God is in the house"

More video

Maybe the last of Propagandhi's new stuff that I've liked. It's damn good though, even if the music was beginning to sound like radio rock. 2001, Congress Theater Chicago.









The tangled webs they weave span from Pine to Ruby Ridge,
way back from Shay's defeat on up to Gustafsen
(now cue the ass parade of ditto-heads and commissars and pricks
to drown out this faintest threat of commie faggot heretics).

Conclusion: the nail that sticks up gets hammered down
and the master's finest tools are found
slack-jawed and placid amidst the cacophony
of screaming billboards and Disney-fied history.

Sometimes the ties that bind are strange:
no justice shines upon the cemetery plots marked Hampton, Weaver or Anna-Mae where
Federal Bureaus and Fraternal Orders
have cast their shadows; permanent features built into these borders.

But undercover of the customary gap we find between History and Truth, the Founding Fathers bask in the rocket's blinding red glare. The bombs bursting in air. One nation, Indivisible?

The truth is when the back-country learned of ratification the People had a coffin painted black and solemnly borne in funeral procession, they buried it deep in the earth as an emblem of the dissolution and internment of their Publick Liberty.

Someday, somewhere,
today's empires... tomorrow's ashes.

Independence Day

Last night - July 3rd - my wife and I went down the hill to the downtown Davenport riverfront for the annual fireworks show. For those that don't know, The downtowns of both Rock Island, Illinois and Davenport, Iowa, sit across the muddy Mississippi from each other, and the cities' crowds have little "who can scream louder on the count of 3" contests before the show begins. All this goes on while kids are eating corn dogs, people are having a game of catch, and everyone simpy relaxes and is nice to each other for a day, while enjoying being outside with family. Americana at its best.

Every year on this holiday - well, every year since maybe my first years in college - I have found myself sitting and pondering the atmosphere of patriotism that surrounds. Taking pride in something such as the overarching "meaning" of the country I happened to be born in seems kind of strange to me, but at the same time, hey - I can't help it - I am fond of the Fourth of July.

There was a band of elderly veterans playing patriotic tunes before the show, and it seemed to be like I was stuck in a scene from a 1950s pleasantville - somewhat adorable, somewhat of an anachronism - but all in all, it started off as a very quaint, fun time for me. The band leader would stand between songs and address the large crowd via a PA system, introducing each new tune, its historical significance, a personal story, whathaveyou.

And then it started - that thing I can never quite put my finger on. After a few songs, we were all asked to stand and observe a reading from the Declaration of Independence, then we were asked to stand again for the pledge of allegiance, and then after this, we were asked to remain standing for another 5 minutes or so, as the emcee read off the names of the branches of our military, and asked for cheers and applause for our enlisted ones - like a pep rally for one really large, nationwide high school.

At first, with the Declaration of Independence reading, I felt somewhat proud. It's a strong piece of writing, and tells much about the essential human condition of yearning for freedom. But like always, I quickly felt a little out of place during the other items. I've seen countless programs that feautre snippets about WWII vets - amazing souls with their amazing stories, and how the looking at, saluting, and flying of the American flag brings forth an indescribable visceral reaction to them. And I completely respect that and find a sense of awe in it, but... I just don't have that. I wasn't "born" with that sense. And to be honest, I'm not even sure that if I were a veteran of that age, I would have it. To me, our flag is just a symbol, and a vague one at that. If it's a symbol of America, what is "America?" It's a concept that differs widely throughout each of its citizens. And we say a pledge of *allegiance* to this symbol. We say that this nation is "indivisible," and "under god," and that there is "justice for all."

Why make a solemn promise to these principals that do not include everyone's religious values? - Whose god?

Why make a pledge to an inaccurate indivisibility? - We are a country that often goes through periods where its citizens experience no gut feeling of a unified front, similar to the current years that have passed since autumn of 2001.

Why speak proudly of a "justice for all," especially with the recent news of our President's commutation of Scooter Libby's sentenced time in prison?

My writing here sounds sophomoric, but do you get my point?

So there we were, in the middle of a huge crowd, each and every one of us expected to go through this... "choreography" of patriotism. I felt like I was in church, and that is not good. Pride and patriotism do not come through mass ceremony.

As my wife and I looked around during the calling out of our branches of military, I had noticed that by this time, about 2/3 of the large audience was sitting back down, not paying attention. People were back with their families, smiling, eating corn dogs and cotton candy, playing catch, and waiting for the fireworks to begin. This is what happens when a seemingly endless war looms over the collective "head" of all of us. This is what happens when over and over, and over... and OVER again, our President acts more and more like a despot king. People tune out and lose faith, and get back to the things that really matter - not our nationalism, but our families and friends. Our inter-relationships with each other, not an us-versus-them mentality of viewing the world.

Really quickly, two photos...

I am actually planning on writing a long post today about my 4th of July holiday, but first, I wanted to quickly throw on 2 photos from the Quad City Times...

number one:


.
Steve Martens/QUAD-CITY TIMES Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee speaks with John Franzen, accountant at Genesis Medical Center-DeWitt, during a campaign visit Tuesday.



and number two:


.
(Larry Fisher/Quad-City Times) Former President Clintonl and U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., address the crowd during the Ready for Change Event in Davenport at the corner of 2nd and Main Streets


In a way, this has to do with what I want to write about today. Stay tuned.

the "evil" atheist email

i work for a small business, and the owner of this business is very openly "all about jesus." of course i have no problem with this, save a few uncomfortable instances where the subject comes up in corporate meetings (uncomfortable more because the rantings make no sense - not solely due to the god factor). but throughout the last few weeks, i've had a feeling that this boss is trying to feel me out. she's saying such things as "so... i have no idea where you stand on issues like this... (long pause) but as you can tell, god is very important in my life. of course, it's none of my business where you're coming from... (another long pause) but..." etcetera. the conversations seem very proselytizing and baited, and i've never taken the worm more than replying back with a simple "i don't discuss religion or politics much in the workplace." there have been a few days where this type of situation has unfolded, and it's sometimes not so easy to let slide.

now let's fast forward to yesterday...

yesterday, i received a forwarded email from this owner/boss. it was one of those ridiculous chain letters that is really a joke for rush limbaugh's in-crowd, but you get a sense some people read it as if it's a true story. it was an infamous email that actually began being circulated some time ago, possibly even a couple years ago. let me know if you've heard this before:

- - - - -

THE ATHEIST AND THE MARINE
( [Renee Puryear] This doesn't get any better)

A United States Marine was attending some college courses between
assignments. He had completed missions in Iraq and Afghanistan . One of
the courses had a professor who was a vowed atheist and a member of the
ACLU.

One day the professor shocked the class when he came in. He looked to
the ceiling and flatly stated, "God, if you are real, then I want you
to knock me off this platform. I'll give you exactly 15 minutes."

The lecture room fell silent. You could hear a pin drop. Ten minutes
went by and the professor proclaimed, "Here I am God. I'm still
waiting." It got down to the last couple of minutes when the Marine got
out of his Chair, went up to the professor, an d cold-cocked him;
knocking him off the plat form. The professor was out cold.

The Marine went back to his seat and sat there, silently. The ot her
students were shocked and stunned and sat there looking on in silence.
The professor eventually came to, noticeably shaken, looked at the
Marine and asked, "What the hell is the matter with you? Why did you do
that?" The Marine calmly replied, "God was too busy today
protecting America 's soldiers who are protecting your right to say
stupid shit and act like an asshole. So, He sent me."

THIS IS GOOD, KEEP IT GOING

- - - - -

there you go. that's what the owner of this company - my jesus-loving boss - sent me, her atheist employee. an email where the punchline of the joke is that someone with my (lack of) beliefs is a stupid and an asshole. huzzah!

i get a little bothered when the p.c. mentality goes a too far, but you have to agree with me - this is unprofessional and rude. can you imagine if i had sent a joke to coworkers where the tag line were a punching out and lambasting of a christian? ...and what is it with this stereotype that our service men and women are jesus warriors (what about Pat Tillman?)? ...and what is it with this mentality that has painted our college and university professors as ranting, ACLA badge-wearing, atheistic, liberals – the pejorative "cultural elite"??? So much for asking questions about the world, and thinking philosophically once in a while.

but i digress... my feelings aren't the subject of this post - i know this will sound funny, but i did get over the email just about right away. what's really important to me here is what most people think about someone like me - an atheist. what say you - those of faith, or those without? does the word "atheist" strike a reaction at all? what do you think about the work situation i just spoke of?