Skynet Became Self Aware at 2:14 AM

Christians seldom seem to.

Consumerist Passover

Considering we keep hitting 90+ degrees, you would be forgiven for forgetting that Halloween is this Friday. However you will not be forgiven for thinking a Sarah Palin costume is clever. There is time to think of something better. You will think of something better.

There is also time to make sure you don't do more to damage the already laughable reputation of Christians surrounding their Halloween hum-buggery (that makes me laugh). To that end I offer this:

A Brief Guide to the Best and Worst Treats You Can Give
These are the worst items you could hand out on Halloween. If you think it is an act of generosity or good Halloween cheer to give any of these, you deserve whatever property damage follows throughout the year.
Raisins
Unshelled nuts
Loose change
Bible tracts
Fruit of any kind
These last two are asking for broken windows.

I would describe the following as borderline offerings. They are easily better than the above but may also be seen as a bit lazy so it's a bit of a gamble to give them out. You may avoid a yard full of egg shells and toilet paper, but don't be surprised if morning reveals a path of candy from your door to the sidewalk.
Bazooka Joe gum and that other brand of rock hard wax paper wrapped bubble gum... Empire Bubble or some such
Hershey's Miniatures: Krackle
Generic colorful transparent suckers and hard candies
Packs of gum- specifically, Wrigley brand 5 packs
Neopolitan Chews

Of course there are hundreds, if not thousands, of good candies and treats that can be given out on Halloween so a list of the best could never be definitive nor final. I guess all it can be is a list of candies and treats you should give me if you don't want me to egg your house.
Chocolate and Peanut Butter Taffies
Pixie Stix
Any full-size candy bar (except for those awful awful Zone style diet bars you can buy in bulk at 99 cents stores.)
Reese's Peanut Butter Cups
Pencil Toppers/Erasers (Seriously, kids under 10 go crazy for that kind of junk- so do I)
Balvenie Scotch

Well Sure, Why Didn't You Ask Earlier?

"Pakistan's government summoned the U.S. ambassador today to urge an immediate halt to missile strikes on suspected militant hide-outs near the Afghan border."

LA Times

Are the kind of people that feel it's okay to go around blowing up other people the kind of people you can ask to not blow up other people?

Thanks For Nothing

"A U.S. military judge barred the Pentagon Tuesday from using a Guantanamo prisoner's confession to Afghan authorities as trial evidence, saying it was obtained through torture."

AP News

Once, on a family trip to Mexico, I bought a half dozen or so throwing stars and a butterfly knife. At least once. Anyway, when my dad found out he said it was fine that I bought them, but I couldn't bring them into the car, carry them on my person, take them across the border, or give them to anyone else to do the same.

My indignant response: "Well then why did I even buy them?!"

My Dogs Don't Speak English

Suppose, just for the sake of argument, we had a sense of salvation that said we were freed from guilt and that means we were well-adjusted, self-actualized, happy, positive people who have no reason to feel bad or unduly suffer.

Let's say that's what we say Jesus does for one who is saved, so I am saved from any sense of a negative self. So we have to assume that we believe in a self that can feel negative and so needs to be saved from that self-negativity. Fine, that comes with the territory- as do any number of other metaphysical assumptions and commitments. We're not evaluating or assessing the validity of those metaphysical assumptions- we're just imagining that that is what we say/believe.

So for the sake of time and space, let's say that what we say it means to be a Christian is to be redeemed from that negative sense of self so that what gives a life meaning is self-edifying fulfillment and happiness. Redemption is a matter of being able to love one's self.

So, if that were a description of some Christian person and that person hung out with others- though it would be odd to say that person was a part of a community... or maybe it would just be an odd community... anyway, it's some someones. You, and me, and some generic anyone. Okay. So it's some group of people like that- a church- how would that church confront things that were difficult to confront about themselves? I don't mean how would they deal with crises and difficulties. I mean how would they confront their ugliness, their participation in or affirmation of "bad things"? How would it even be possible?

ed.- Why do I hate grammar?

Think of The Children, Indeed

He Is An Elitist

"Senator Barack Obama will use his prime-time half-hour infomercial on Wednesday night to make what is effectively a closing argument to a national audience of millions. At times he will speak directly into the camera about his 20-month campaign, at others he will highlight everyday voters, their everyday troubles, and his plans to address them."
NY Times

If he thinks people bitterly cling to guns and religion when the abject desperation of their lives is too much to bear... Well, Bill Watterson said it before.

click it for big

She's Tidied Up and I Can't Find Anything

APU has this lecture series or institute, I'm not sure what it is exactly, called CRIS. Creative Research on Institutes and Science, Coloring Rates Infinitely Superior, Can't Really Identify with Science or some such like that. Oh, Center for Research In Science

Anyway, I went to their lecture called "What's So Important About Creation Theology?" and I learned something very important:

I can't hear the word "science" without thinking "Science!"

I Still Wouldn't Say "Convinced"

What is this country coming to?

So a crazy white woman accuses a generic black man of attacking her and it turns out to be false. Forget the electoral elements of this, within living memory this type of accusation- even false- would have been enough to bring about the murder of any number of black men throughout the country, or in more enlightened environs, the arrest and imprisonment of some random innocent soul who made the poor choice of being tall, black, and young in the United States.

But the times they are a'changin'.

And it's these a'changin' times that still have me disagreeing with The Qweenbean over the possibilities of an Obama presidency.

You know people who were raised and taught by good decent upstanding folks who knew as plain as anything that black people... no not people... blacks were just different, in a worse kind of way, than white people. It wasn't about hate. It's not about hate. It's about the banality of racial epithets, the impropriety of mixed marriage, the existence of something you call race, and the sensible wisdom of the Biblical mandate to stick with your own kind. It's why a black* man was never going to be your pastor, your boss, your son in law, or your president.

But that world is ending and an apocalypse is seldom a welcome thing. It's difficult to see one's sense of everything come crumbling down. Who, except for those willing to accept the call to be the church**, can confront that? And even for those who have accepted the role of sojourner, it's not easy. It's with that dis-ease I am concerned.

There is a rationale to the craziness exhibited by someone whose foundations are failing. This "Everything is Dying and I Have to Make You See It" so I'll scratch a "B" on my face makes sense. It's a desperate and crazy sense- but still a sense. Her world is ending, nature and reason themselves are threatened, what else would you have her do?

The threatened and dying have a limited palette but can be inordinately loud; that's my concern.

If things are changing, if we are living through the death of one world and the birth of another in a significant way, there will be zombies. And we all know how awful zombies can be.

* And pay attention- black isn't a reference to skin color.
** Not THE CHURCH

Cue Shelves Being Knocked Over and the Elderly Storekeep Being Punched in The Gut

Youze gots yourself a nice little shop here. It would be a shame if anything wuz to happen to it.

Only I Like Girls May Watch This

I Have Built You an Exalted House, A Place for You to Dwell in Forever

Being a jerk is part of my vocation.

There.

Now that that's out of the way we can proceed and you needn't wonder if I know that what I've said is kind of jerky.

I recently received a number of email forwards lauding the outbreak of revival at Barclay College in Kansas. The broad strokes are a missionary on furlough visited the college and many students did things like confess their use of drugs, share that they felt their parents didn't love them, agree to become involved in some sort of ministry, stay in school, etc...

That's cool. I don't think any of it is necessarily a bad thing. In fact, if someone is addicted to drugs, finding a way to end that addiction would be a good thing. Or if someone is estranged from their parents, they should work towards reconciliation. Good things those. I say, "Hooray for you."

But revival? M'eh.

I suppose there are different types of revival, so I guess I am open to the possibility that experiences similar to what happens on Dr. Phil could be a type of revival. I'm sure in the lives of those people, it is a big difference, it is a reinvigoration of life, so I guess a revival of sorts, maybe.

Okay.

No.

I don't know that it is all that revival-y to suddenly overflow with what one has kept bottled-up or to finally come to a decision on a matter, even a deeply troubling or significant matter. I mean, "I was so sad, and couldn't tell anyone" and "I was going to leave school but now I'm not" moments may be significant scenes in the movie of one's life but I wouldn't call it revival. I don't call it revival. I can't.

It seems so individualistic, so self-centered, such a part of the life-crushing way of the world that I am reticent to use revival in regard to the occasion. Other people saying it's revival? Fine, call it revival. What am I going to do, say you're wrong that it seems like revival to you? Whatever. All I can say is I don't think it is, and I certainly don't want to pray or fast or do any of the voodoo that we say would encourage this kind of behavior because it seems like trying to cure a disease with more of the disease.

I am not saying it's bad to get something off of one's chest, or to make some kind of public declaration about a commitment to something or other, but if we're going to set aside the term revival, I think it ought not be for moments of self-understanding and revelation akin to what finds on a reality show cast reunion.

Do we sometimes need to do things like this? Sure. But it just seems par for the course for a "Be a Better You" kind of Christianity which seems like any other Modern, Western sense of self-understanding that's all about you and if that's all you're after rent Pay It Forward or read M. Scott Peck.

If we're going to say revival is a consequence of the Word of God confronting and changing us, then it seems silly at best, and maybe blasphemous at worst to liken it to "An Oprah Event to Remember".

So it is something I would like to see. It is something that better practices of silence anticipate and so maybe something Friends might appreciate. But given what we presently say passes for revival, we'd likely try to put an end to revival rightly called.

There's probably a parable or something about that.

If You Give a Man a Fish...

Null Set- How would I find a book on Luke's audience for Jesus?
skybalon the librarian- Do you mean the community that would've first read the Gospel of Luke or more the sociological and cultural context of Jesus' life suggested in Luke?
Null Set- ...
skybalon the librarian- Or... do you mean the literary audience in Luke, the people the author has receive Jesus' message in the text itself?
Null Set- blink... Okay...
skybalon the librarian- Which...?
Null Set- The audience...
skybalon the librarian- Right then...

It's not a strange thing that many of us in the western Christian world feel perfectly at ease carrying Bibles around in these happy nylon cases and telling ourselves that it tells us what to do, who to be, and all else. And that is a strange thing.

Having Eyes, Do You Not See?

"The latest newsletter by an Inland Republican women's group depicts Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama surrounded by a watermelon, ribs and a bucket of fried chicken, prompting outrage in political circles."

...

"I absolutely apologize to anyone who was offended. That clearly wasn't my attempt."

The PE



Clearly.

I love these apologies. "If I offended anyone..."

Of course the "attempt" wasn't to offend. It was to solidify, insulate, demark, unify, assure, cohere, and defend.

I believe her. I believe she had no "intention" of offending. I think she was intending to create a sense of us, to mark off the people who get it, to create a type of boundary for her community. Within that community, for that sense of the world, these would not be offensive images or ideas. How could they be? (She just miscalculated who her audience was).

Think the images are awful. Understand why you think so. Say there is no place for them in democratic discourse. But don't mistake your ability to say so (if you say so) as a universal sense of decency or good that would allow anyone to say so.

If we assume there is some general sense of decency or good (and in sending this email/mailer she knew she was violating that) we are assuming our way of seeing the world is THE WAY to see the world. We tend to do that. It seems we want to do that.

If one is a Christian, though, or more to the point, if one is confronted by the offensively transcendent (that's silly), one ought to see that as a subtle trap. It's a trap in that it lures us with a hope for certainty and security but it's the security of a prison- sometimes thoughtfully crafted, but a prison all the same.

What we do and who we are is understood in communities wherein what we do and who we are makes sense. That's as it can only be. Abstract concepts take on real meaning as we live them. Love, justice, freedom, salvation, etc. are meaningless, or worse are ideological, when we simply relate to them as a concept or ideal- or when we pretend that the concept or ideal is real. For good and ill, we show what we understand love to mean when we show what we understand love to mean. The same for any other concept: justice, freedom, salvation, sin, etc... What does it mean to show justice right now given our present conditions? Free to be what? Salvation, from, to and for what? Sin against what, in what way, why? All of that is done within some cultural boundary, maybe permeable, but still bound.

That's what we do, what we are doing. It's a human thing to do, a human work, if you will. And as such, it, as far as some Christian narrative may be concerned, is a bit deadly (as if death comes in bits), except of course, in so far as it allows us to be some type of reflection of divine love. So you know, that's something.

But in creating this world of meaning and understanding, we are creating a world of meaning and understanding (duh). And we are no less prone than anyone else to making it a prison just because we think what we have to say is very special. Perhaps we are at even greater risk because we think what we have to say is so stinkin' special. Maybe we pretend our stink is somehow unique from everyone else's stink. Maybe we are convinced that our stink comes from God rather than us. That's fine, but we need know, even if we receive divine stink, we have to speak it from our own stinking holes.

The point is, we build so we can make these ideas known as more than ideas. We make sense of the world so we can make sense of the world, but we easily fix these expressions in stone. We fix a safe and secure world where it is clear what we mean by "we" that never means to offend, in which we cannot even know if it would offend, but also in turn wherein we lock out what is offensive. Our prisons secure us from everything, but worst of all, isolate us from what is ultimately scandalizing and offensive about the Word of God (for any idolators out there, I don't mean The Bible).

I would say it is a part of our being made holy to be better and better able to catch this, to be made brave enough to be drawn out of that prison, but it's possible, actually it's quite likely, that Sunday after Sunday, Bible study after Bible study, whatever it is we do necessarily as Christians, we craft the culture to build the walls of our Christianity higher and thicker. We solidify the boundaries of who we are. We confuse being made holy, sanctified, set apart from the world, with being more and more enmeshed with and adapted to a particular sense of the world.

"If I offended anyone..." is the other side of "Well, I never..." Both could be a promising starting point, but we try to avoid them or seldom mean them as we should.

What Is That All Over The Walls and Floor?

Liberation theology was an absolute necessity if the establishment was going to continue to control the minds of minorities. If a person of a minority group had not invented it, the liberal establishment most certainly would have created it.

Vine Deloria Jr. in For This Land

It's my mind, man, 'cos it's totally been blown.

What Are You Gonna Do, Vote for Someone Else?

I know people, dyed in the wool, Limbaugh-loving, don't care about policy just the R after the name, if the GOP says "up is down" then up is down, Republican people, who despite their ideological loyalty still have to exist, and in their existence have had to face choices that McCain dismissed last night with scorn and air quotes.

Maybe I can assume they are no longer watching debates, but if they were, I wonder how this played.

Oh, and eloquence is a bad thing?

If You Watch This, You're a Terrorist

Until we have a gigantic- GIGANTIC- meteor hurtling toward earth, or spaceships hovering over DC, or a nuclear suitcase bomb hidden somewhere in the country, I remain unconvinced.

Build Zion With Blood and Jerusalem With Wrong

Last night at our Quaker Peace Fellowship meeting we watched Taxi to the Dark Side.

Infuriating.

But as I was preparing for it, writing up the curriculum, as it were, I was struck by the difficulty of describing a dependence on torture as anything other than a kind of faith.

I offered this as part of the discussion material:

Relying on or accepting torture requires a kind of faith- a trust in something unprovable and unknowable and often contrary to given evidence: that torture will provide useful information. It becomes a system that takes human life in the name of that faith making that human life a sacrifice. In Christian theological terms this is idolatry....

The issue of faith goes further. It preserves our way of life. It keeps us safe. It is ultimately a good. That all seems to be part of the faith and hope in a system that uses torture (even as it wants to call it something else). Torture becomes an act of devotion to the god of that system. I could really drag out the metaphor, only I don't think it's a metaphor.

In any case, faith or hope seem like the wrong word, but in their inappropriateness, each seems like the perfect word. Others may want to call it something else. A negative faith. Sin. Despair.

Sure.

But I think faith has to be the first word to use so there is some dissonance, so we are confronted with our idolatrous relation to a system. (That is, if we are a people who have a sense of what faith might be.) If we have a misplaced faith, it ought to be called out as such. Only after we see that it is possible for it to be misplaced faith could something like sin or despair make sense. No?

The Times They Are a'Changin'
Well, Replace "Times" with "Old Racists" and "a'Changin'" With "a'Thankfully Dyin'-Off"

Or it could alternately be called

How Cute

“I’ve always been against the blacks,” said Mr. Rowell, who is in his 70s, recalling how he was arrested for throwing firecrackers in the black section of town. But now that he has three biracial grandchildren — “it was really rough on me” — he said he had “found out they were human beings, too.”

Same NY Times article.

If only we could get every white supremacist to become the grandparent of a biracial child. The world could be a better place.

Impenetrability! That's What I Say

“I would think of him as I would of another of mixed race,” said Glenn Reynolds, 74, a retired textile worker in Martinsville, Va., and a former supervisor at a Goodyear plant. “God taught the children of Israel not to intermarry. You should be proud of what you are, and not intermarry.”

Mr. Reynolds, standing outside a Kroger grocery store, described Mr. Obama as a “real charismatic person, in that he’s the type of person you can’t really hate, but you don’t really trust.”

NY Times

This is just how THE LIBERAL MEDIA work... works? That's a tough one. Media is plural, but I think when it's used in that ideological sense it should become singular. Right. Like Jews as actual people is a plural, but THE JEWS would be a single mass, so singular...

Anyway. This is how it is done. You go to some Wal-Mart parking lot in Mobile, Alabama and let people talk about their insane racial prejudices just so you can make it look like people in a Wal-Mart parking lot in Mobile, Alabama have insane racial prejudices.

THE LIBERAL MEDIA. Hmph.

This is just like their making a big deal about the McPalin supporters who yell out "Kill him!" and "Terrorist*", or carry an Obama monkey at campaign rallies but no mention is made of how people call the president a war criminal.

Sure, the president did actually authorize war crimes, but hey, that's his right as MY PRESIDENT.

And I'd bet there are a number of Obama supporters who would yell out nasty things at an Obama rally- I've heard "boos" in fact.

I'd even bet, if asked "Do you think someone who bombs civilians could be considered a terrorist?" Obama supporters might say "Yes." There. See? They'd call John McCain a terrorist.

Are you hearing about that? No. Oh, but some random people in Alabama say Obama's another breed of human, or “He’s going to tear up the rose bushes and plant a watermelon patch,” and it's front page news. Well, not literally front page. But it's news.

And we keep hearing about how Palin keeps saying Obama pals around with terrorists and that he's too different to be the president of REAL AMERICA, and McCain keeps suggesting Obama is too mysterious, too unknown and it's all portrayed as racist nationalism and jingoism just because people are receiving it as racist nationalism and jingoism.

Where's the balance?

* I actually have a hard time getting upset about that one. It reminds me so much of GOB it makes me laugh.

This Makes Sense

Where Would You Even Begin?

"If Obama were a white Democratic nominee named Barry O'Malley, the GOP would be going after him twice as hard. But many liberals would still caterwaul about fomenting hatred and racism, because that's what they always do."

LA Times

Hey... I'm an idiot, too. Why don't I have an LA Times column?

We Could Just Leave

"With time running out for the conclusion of an agreement governing American forces in Iraq, nervous negotiators have begun examining alternatives that would allow U.S. troops to stay beyond the Dec. 31 deadline, according to U.S. and Iraqi officials."

Washington Post

So do we say nothing, apply no pressure, because this has no impact on our 401(K)s? Except that it does. Do we remain silent on this because there are people in love that want to marry against your wishes and you have to devote energy to that? Overall, you're not sure what to say or do because this somehow makes you free?

A house guest that acted like us would clearly be seen as the boorish ass they were. You don't want to be a boorish ass.

Why Doesn't He Just Start His Own Church?

"A week ago, Father Geoffrey Farrow stood before his Roman Catholic parishioners in Fresno and delivered a sermon that placed him squarely at odds with his church over gay marriage.

With Proposition 8 on the November ballot, and his own bishop urging Central Valley priests to support its definition of traditional marriage, Farrow told congregants he felt obligated to break 'a numbing silence' about church prejudice against homosexuals."

LA Times

First we should say, "What a fool, putting his livelihood on the line for the sake of conscience?"

That's the think thing about being Catholic, you kinda' have to live as if your theological convictions matter.

Crazy, no?

Also kind of sits in a weird opposition to the previous post.

ed.-Idiot. Thing! Thing!

Whether It's Hindu, Buddha, Allah

Just so you know, God, uh Hindu, has been saying some pretty crazy stuff about you.
Hindu.
No, Hindu, you know... the god with the dancey arms and the elephant head.
Oh.
Really? I always thought his name was Hindu.
Okay.
Well you know he's pulling for Obama and if he wins, well, I don't know if I should repeat what he's been saying, but it's not pretty...



I had a refreshingly honest conversation with someone this past weekend. Come to think of it, I had two refreshingly honest conversations with someone in the past week. But this post will be only about one of them.

Someone was telling me that he basically couldn't stand John McCain, was beating himself up for having to vote for him, didn't look forward to it, but because he was a Republican he was going to support his guy and vote Republican. It's just what he had to do.

For him, it was a matter of commitments and loyalty. There was no special anointing on John McCain, he didn't pretend John McCain is "such a Godly man" and so deserves his vote, he didn't try to fit McCain's narrative into a consistent type of conservatism, nor did he pretend that a McCain presidency would be best for his class interests. It was all about labels and he said so. It was a kind of reluctant critical consciousness. "Ugh, I'm so attached to labels- why am I so attached to labels?"

He was willing to talk and think through his actions and commitments to the point of revealing why he did what he did- or to see what his actions said about his commitments and loyalties.

Say what you will about "I'm a Republican so I have to vote Republican" ultimately being a shallow reason then watch that video above again.

Anyway. I suppose one could say that there is a scriptural warrant for this type of conversation with God- "God, if you don't want to look bad, you'd better help out your people."

So, there you go. Here we have a latter day Moses, asking God, on our behalf, to stick with the program, do what he said he was going to do, be the better God and show those foreigners- their Gods... sorry- gods, show those foreign gods who's boss.

It's baloney, but it is nonetheless important. Maybe all the more important. I can never get that right. Whatever the case, it is an honest articulation of the faith inherent in one's presuppositions and loyalties, and as such, when starkly stated mostly laughable.

Take this one as another example:

According to this neo-liberal logic, the pursuit of self-interest of the market would be the best and most efficient way to generate the common good; and in this way the contradiction between self-interest and common good would be solved... The best way to live the love for one's neighbor, the poor, would be to overcome the temptation to do good and continue being selfish in the market, seeking one's self-interest in a more efficient way. This way, conquering the temptation to do good through economic and social policies turns out to be the main spiritual task in the social field."

Ha ha. Get it?

Anyway, back to Moses Come-Lately. I guess we could say that making John McCain president is part of the same redeeming history. In that case, bugging God in this way makes sense. An Obama presidency would be like dying in the wilderness and God shouldn't let that happen so... We could say that, and if we say that, I guess this fits.

But it sounds like this guy is saying something different. I think this guy thinks God is an idiot and is trying to talk "him" into a fight: I don't know if you realize this God, but those other Gods are trying to make you look like a chump.

It's easy to mock it (see above), but it is very revealing. What we say and do reveals underlying spiritual commitments. It doesn't get much clearer than this. Now I don't know that he speaks for anyone other than himself in this, but how many of us, when we get down to it think in these terms?

That's all. Anything more would be getting preachy.

And the Lord repented of the evil which he though to do to his people.
Go to the Mirror Boy- The Who
Rhiannon- Fleetwood mac
Uncle John's Band- Grateful Dead
Intergalactic- Beastie Boys
Watch That Man- David Bowie
Nowhere at All - Lou Reed

History Is Caged*

A completely irrelevant man once said:

"Is this true Christian religion to see so much preaching, praying, sermons, lectures and to see so many blind and lame, poor men and women, and children up and down the streets, and at the steeple-house doors, is not this an ill savour among you and in you, and the high profession ye profess? "

George Fox, in To All The Magistrates in London

*Ugh- what a downer title. What happened to the light-hearted references to movie titles, dialogue, and song lyrics

It's About Heritage, Not Hate

So some students at a Quaker university in Oregon hung an image of Barack Obama from a tree. Really. I know that sounds bad on the surface but we should remember that hanging a black man from a tree is an age-old form of American protest.

And if you look at the situation in context you can understand the act. There was a note attached indicating that the demonstrators were protesting a university outreach program targeting minorities. From what I hear, a good number of the kids at George Fox had their Harvard and Yale spots taken from them by less qualified minority students. So, you know.

A Quaker school. In Oregon.

Anybody want to talk me down?

So How Do We Tell If She's Made of Wood?

I get it.

I just want to put that out there at the beginning so that if, when reading this, you think, "You just don't get it," you will know that I, in fact, do get it.

The McCain-Palin campaign can't possibly believe that the intense fear and white resentment they are stoking will not hit a ceiling. Granted, Republicanism of the past 40 years or so has been very successful in its adroit use of fear and racism, but everything has a shelf-life, no? No. Maybe?

Who knows?

Anyway, this intense push to identify Obama as the embodiment of terrorism, a different America, the scary "other" we don't know, could work, but if it does, it won't work in the way it has in the past.

Background please- Okay, when Bush I used racial fear and resentment against Michael Dukakis, the people you feared remained a faceless swarthy mass. Scary to be sure, but scary without a body or name. Scary because it was without a body and name. It wasn't the black kid behind the counter at McDonald's. You like him. And it wasn't the Mexicans mowing your lawn (probably Guatemalan, actually, but brown south of the border is all Mexican, right? ). Those guys are okay. Quiet, unassuming, hard-working, deferent. You weren't scared of them, but that wasn't the object of your fear. You were scared of the composite sketch, the unidentified welfare queen, the Latino male 17-23 y.o. with a slight build. Eesh, that is scary. That's the Southern strategy and it worked, especially as a form of white on white violence.

It got all kinds of people to forget about politics as it actually affects their lives as humans and worry about matters of identity wrapped up in things like Flags, Gods, and Sex, so they became perfectly willing to wage war against themselves.

Whatever.

But Barack Obama has a face. His face. He's got a name. Sure it's a weird name, but you see him and you're not actually afraid. You realize he's not so bad. Sure you still hate BLACK PEOPLE, but Barack isn't BLACK PEOPLE. He's Barack. He's like the Mexican that married your daughter versus the ILLEGAL ALIENS that are stealing your country. The faceless other can't be faceless when it actually has a face.

So it won't work like that, but like I said, it could work.

Intensifying the fear and anger will do just that- intensify the fear and anger. And even though it won't break through the lunatic 20-30% that you can see on the YouTubes, it will give that minority a momentum disproportionate to its mass.

Only lunatics were calling Bill Clinton a terrorist or radical leftist, but the fear and resentment of that era sprung up in a federal building in Oklahoma City. Now, our mainstream candidates are only steps away from calling the opposition a terrorist. (That's mainstream, folks... Volks.)

If McCain and Palin were not the Republican ticket, they could probably still fill beer halls by offering the rhetoric that they have resorted to. It wouldn't be hard to find plenty of people "mad as hell" or a bunch of frustrated white guys who are desperate for someone to affirm their belief that Obama is a secret Muslim terrorist. We would probably be able to see it for what it is though- crazy.

But maybe that crazy will strike fear into enough people that they don't want to risk an Obama presidency, not because of Obama, but because of the crazies who could not accept their secret Muslim, radical Christian, gangster elitist, terrorist president.

It is perhaps a much more brilliant ploy than it appears on the surface. Or maybe it's the only thing McCain has left since he's faced with the unsavory prospect of running as a Republican in a post Atwater-Rovian context.

Whatever the case, 30% could sometimes be enough. Historically, 40% has been*.

It may actually be a fear of white people that keeps Obama from the presidency. Ironic, no?

*This line is a cray historical allusion. You can disregard it.

Irony Can Be So Ironic
Wishlist- Pearl Jam
Come as You Are- Nirvana
86- Green Day
Soozy- The Briefs
America Is- Violent Femmes
Lover Man- Sarah Vaughan
The Function- Talib Kweli
3 Speed- Eels

Laugh Now Cry Later

skybalon- Hey look what finally came-
Qweenbean- What?
skybalon- My Obama buttons
Qweenbean- Ooohhhh, those are gonna be worth a lot of money when he's assassinated.


Too soon?

Jesus, In Your Heart You Know He's Right

We, like many other congregations, have a sign on our church property that offers passersby some clever church saying or other. Right now it says something like "Real Change Comes From Jesus". Although on one side of it there is a "typo". A couple of character tiles were left up so it says "Real Change Comes From Jesus N,?"

Really.

I think to demonstrate how well tapped into the zeitgeist Glendora Friends is, our next sign ought to say: "Jesus; The Real Maverick".

I'm avoiding grading papers.

Wait a Second!

I just realized something. If Barack Obama becomes president, then that means we've opened the door to all kinds of people being president.

Now I get what people are so worried about.

See, The System Works

For the first time, a federal judge has ordered the Bush administration to release prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay, ordering 17 Chinese Muslims to be brought to his courtroom on Friday.

LA Times

Take that, hippies.

Six years later, four years after being cleared of any wrong-doing, these 17 prisoners have been ordered released. Of course they haven't been released yet, and if the DOJ has its way, they won't be, but that misses the point- the The System works.
They have been ordered freed. We can breathe a collective sigh of relief and go about our business, get things back to normal, as if nothing ever happened because they are free.

Well, Now I'm Convinced

Space Rock Found on Collision Course With Earth
ABC News

There you go.

Alien invasion, an asteroid hitting the earth, zombies, or some other apocalyptic scenario requires we have a black president.

True Dat

This is presently my favorite line in the world...

The Republican Party used to specialize in gimlet-eyed, steel-rim, crepe-soled common sense and then it was taken over by crooked preachers who demand Americans trust them because they're packing a Bible and God sent them on a mission to enact lower taxes, less government. Except when things crash, and then government has to pick up the pieces.

I hear it as a sermon.

ed.- I forgot this. It's Garrison Keillor.

And a Pony

So The Blonde Buddha feels pretty confident that Obama is going to be the next president. Polls are putting him in the 50% neighborhood right now but to my mind that's evidence of why he could very well not be. That anywhere around 40% of polled voters could have been paying any kind of attention, I mean any kind, even the most accidental glance at a local news teaser, and still support the intemperate, erratic, incoherent McCain (let alone McCain-Palin) speaks volumes. If it's not closer to 70-30 in the next week, I will remain unconvinced about Obama's prospects.

Call me cynical, or aware of the intense racial bigotry, fear, and political machinations that rule, I just don't think such a small margin indicates a victory for Obama. Oh sure, if all you white devils want to surprise me, I'll take it. But it will be a surprise.

That said, if Obama is the next president it will symbolize quite a victory and milestone for the US but that should in no way let anyone feel like they are off the hook. Especially don't feel that Obama is a liberal in any significant sense of the term, or that his election will be the dawn of the worker's paradise. He seems a good, willing to listen to smart people, judicious, and fair-minded guy but he's no leftist and the people that got him here (and maybe there) will have to push for at least five things in an Obama presidency. (Five possible things- not like "everyone gets jetpants!" or"nationalize the oil companies"). In no particular order:
With the bailout passing, the next administration will have its economic work cut out for it to address the mortgage issues this bill (and administration) doesn't.
Take advantage of the opening in a health care discussion to push hard to bypass insurance companies and stop employers from being responsible for providing coverage,
Withdraw from Iraq without a stopover in Afghanistan (this really should be number 1, but I said in no particular order, didn't I?)
Stop torture. Plain as that. (and kudos to McCain for being willing to utter the word at the debate).
Get a Federal energy plan with thresholds and goals at least as good as California's (at least)

That's not that tall an order. And it is an order.

The Difference Between A Pitbull and a Hackey Mom

Okay I'm a big lame so more debate stuff.

Watching the DNC, I was taken by Joe Biden's biography.* So again, last night, when Biden peeled back a layer of sexism and retold how his experience and concerns as someone who has lost loved ones and as a single parent are no less real because he has a penis, I was again struck by the story and moved by his connecting it to matters of policy.

Of course it could be boiler plate. Maybe it is a go-to line for him and people who know him better see right through it. It's not like I don't know people who make up for any lack of substance by pretending to tear up when speaking. But it seemed relevant and sincere last night and not at all like a canned line to mention his wife and child's deaths.

G'uh, I guess 'cos my wife and baby make me a baby- just thinking about his experience makes me all babified again. But maybe with time, if it turns out Joe Biden mentions his dead wife and kid as a catchall response- "Hey, Joe, how many houses do you have?" "However many it is, my dead wife doesn't get to share any of them with me"- something like that- it'll make me angry rather than empathize.

So, that said, I believed his hesitation and emotion in the answer was real, it seemed like one of those deep moments wherein personal experience/pathos is confronted with the broader world and makes one feel with and for other people. It's good that there are politicians who can do that. But it was an awful moment on the C-Span split screen, just awful. Ronald McDonald couldn't respond at all like a human. That's the "real" people are attracted to? Your wife died, but John McCain's a maverick.

At least she didn't say John McCain was a POW.

Okay, so maybe she was overcoached and couldn't get over the need to stay on message. Maybe her journalistic background took over- just look at the camera and smile. Maybe she didn't hear anything anyone said all night, she just knew to go to the cards. Those may be good excuses for seeming cold and uncaring. They don't bode well for arguing that she's a competent leader.

* Please note- That doesn't mean I think he is a Regular Joe. No one in the Senate is. (Except for Russ Feingold, PBUH.) It simply means I'm human- not "the boy who couldn't cry".

ed.- I couldn't find the split-screen version... but I guess I didn't look too hard for a C-Span take on the moment. Trust me, it's worse when you see her grinning through the whole thing and then jumping right into her Maverick notes.

When Students Do It It's Called Cheating

Did you know that Augustine's thoughts on sexuality were nuts? No? That's okay, a lot of people don't know what Augustine wrote about matters of sex. Even a lot of Christians, who assume certain things about the history of their tradition don't know what Augustine wrote about matters of sex. That's not a big deal, why should they know?

I mean I could think of good reasons to know what Augustine wrote- actual good theological reasons to be familiar with his writings. Even though he said stuff like an erection "rises up against the soul's decision in disorderly and ugly movements," and that men and women cannot have sex without lust (therefore sin) entering the picture, stuff that just doesn't make sense, his work as a testimony of the transformative power of God in a person's actual existence is amazing. The submission of his intellect to the Word (not word) of God is humbling and inspiring. His intense personal struggle to conform his life to what he understood as a divine measure is beyond... Well it's just beyond.

His disregard for women and sex is a problem but whatever, he was a 4th century Western man, give him a break.

You know what doesn't deserve a break? Our misappropriating his work. How dare we take what he said and use it as an ideological club? Who do we think we are? I mean pretending we can universally apply his historically localized and specific thoughts, that's absurd.

Ah- I'm just kidding, that's what his work is for. I mean what else would we do with it? And so it's perfect that we don't familiarize ourselves with what he actually wrote. It's easier to misapply what was never said in the first place.

It's easier to misapply what was never said in the first place... ?

I just blew my mind man.

Of course it doesn't really make sense to take some 4th century North African Latin dude's thoughts and pretend that they exist as a matter of fact or universal application. I mean that would be like finding the rules to Hungry Hungry Hippos and imagining you could use them to understand and play some other game you came across.

It doesn't make sense but let's do it anyway. And again, when we do it, let's not do it in a well-informed manner. Let's try to be mostly ignorant of what he, and others, let's include others too, let's be mostly ignorant of what they all said and wrote, but pretend it's all part of some cohesive whole, so that when we try to craft some statement about this or that, we can invoke their names, and since their real old, it'll carry their weight.

Maybe.

During my Recording process I suggested that our Faith & Practice's counsel on the issue of sexuality left a lot to be desired. It is generally unclear and buys into some categories and concepts that I think we ought not buy into if we are the people we like to say we are- namely the church.

I still think it is problematic, but at least, it was our statement. I mean, as unclear as it is, one can make the case that it came from our Yearly Meeting, so even if it is unclear and mistaken- it is our lack of clarity and mistake to own. I'm only being a little silly with that last bit. It really is a good thing to make your own mistakes.

But, now we might as well be a subsidiary of the Family Research Council or Exodus International. I mean, judging by the information that keeps finding its way to my inbox and the Gay Panic I've seen, I'd put money on the next F&P counsel on sexuality ('cos I'm sure we'll insist it be there) being a copy and paste job from some Focus on the Family pamphlets.

Is there a "World of At Leasts" part of this? No, or it's hard to see it right now if there is. I mean, I've recently had people try to toss Augustine in my face as a demonstration of the church's consistent teaching on the Dos and Do Not Dos of sex, and I've been told Exodus International is a ministerial resource we ought to use... like it's all one big pile of proof or authority.

I guess I'd just like us to be faithful enough to make our own mistakes.

Or Sometimes Pretending To Be Prepared
Myxomatosis- Radiohead
Gigantic- Pixies
Army of Me- Bjork
All I Ever Wanted- POE Soundtrack
La Danza De Los Viejitos- Mariachi Folklorico
Pure Denizen of the Citizens Band- Frank Black
La Costilla Michoacana- Mariachi Nuevo de Mexico
Won't Get Fooled Again- The Who
Mean Mr. Mustard- The Beatles
This Is The New Shit- Marilyn Manson

M'eh

Fine, everyone gets to be middle class.

Government is the problem so we'll address it with more oversight... so Main Street doesn't hurt Wall Street... and we're a team of mavericks

It would be four more years of "nukular", folks. Just saying.

And Great. Because it wasn't a repeat of her Couric performance, I'm going to have to listen to people who suddenly feel justified in their still irrational adoration of Ronald McDonald. Ah who am I kidding? Her irrational supporters didn't watch this.

But in all, here's what matters: I got something in my eye and I had a burrito.

Duty Indeed

Oh except for that last one, okay, that can't stand. Paying taxes isn't a matter of duty or patriotism? Going for the ownership society, this time with healthcare? The present financing crisis is a result of that "ownership society".

She's essentially saying we're a bunch of rubes and morons that can't run a country, remember how we screw things up? Doncha' hate the Federal government? But vote for us so you can keep yer money 'cos we don't ask anything of you- except to send your children to kill and die in the Middle East.

Lay it out- your benefits will be taxed so you can pay for your health insurance, though there's no guarantee that you can get coverage, and there's no cap as to how much insurance will cost, and if you were John McCain with all those health conditions, you could not get coverage in your own plan (you should've added that last one)

Oh Bridge to Nowhere- zing-

Ugh

So John Mccain meant the fundamentals of the economy are the American workers... Hmmm do we address the high unemployment or the high worker productivity rewarded with lower wages and income disparity. That's strong?

Hey... Don't live outside your means. That actually is good advice- any time, not just tough times. That's the advice Carter gave the country and Reagan said "Screw That, we're America, no one tells us there's a limit to our freedom to have stuff." And we said "USA USA USA"

I wonder how it'll play coming from Ronald McDonald.

Hey mean man, don't challenge her with facts or "actual events in history."

All right. This is enough hipness for me.

I'm going to listen to the debate like a boring old adult. No more Live-Blogging! for me.

You Betcha!

So it makes sense that Joe would be able to talk about regulation... (Big Government Demeecrat that he is)

Ah shucks... Golly...

She's looking down and blinking a lot isn't she?

Well I'm glad somebody explained what John McCain meant about the fundamentals of the economy being strong.

Hi, Gwen

What would an untoward outburst be?
"Sarah, tell me about dinosaurs and cave men."

She asked, "Can I call you Joe?" That sounds like some sort of vooddoo secret. Don't let her do it Joe, she knows spiritual warfare techniques.

Democracy

Did you know that the debate is in St. Louis because Aunheiser-Busch (sp) are/is a huge donor to the Commisison on Presidential Debates? True.
And they decide with the candidates in secret the format of the debates.

LiveBlogging Rulz!!!

The back of Gwen Ifill's head...

That's funny. When I picture Gwen Ifill in my head, she's wearing blue.

C-Span it's like you exist to make our government lame.

Yo, Kidz This is Straight Up Sick

So I listened to the presidential debate on the radio, to fully swing the pendulum, and make voting and a type of politcal awareness hip, I will be watching the vice-presidential debate on the computer through C-span.

Hmm... Maybe I shouldn't have written C-Span if I want to be hip...

Seriously? 90 second answers? This should be great

I am totally liveblogging, dudes.

The Invisible Hand is Strangling You

How do you determine the value of something for which there is no market?

What are you, some kind of jerk? Why would you even think a question like that in this day and age?

Stop thinking like that and think like this:
There could be anything in this envelope- winning scratch-off lottery tickets, a lovely bit of string, the pink slip to a broken car, art work, keys to a safe deposit box, cash, an IOU for a large sum of money, RAM, cigarettes, the deed to a house, nothing. Who knows?

I know, but other than me who knows? Point is, you don't know, but that shouldn't stop you from offering me money for it. Offer me something reasonable. $100. And don't think of your offer as a purchase, rather think of it as an investment. Invest $100 in this mystery envelope. Now it doesn't matter what is in the envelope because it is worth at least $100 once you give me $100 for it- but wait, in that instant that you gave me $100, you took the first step in this envelope's potentially infinite increase in value. If you're willing to give me $100, how much more would the next person be willing to give you? We don't know. So you just got this envelope for a steal. This envelope could go for $10,000, $100,000, $1,000,000,000- whatever. You got it for $100?! You're a financial genius.

Now I feel a little bad for letting it go for $100, but I am a man of my word. It's yours for $100.

Hey, Kool-Aid

As pathetic and difficult to watch as Sarah Palin's public performances have been since the convention (since she's had to rely on her own words rather than read someone else's crafted zingers), I think she's doing exactly what she's supposed to do.

I was reading an article that is essentially a collection of quotes from Sarah Palin supporters explaining why they are Sarah Palin supporters.

"'She's real. Everyone can identify with her,' said Karen Rinehart, from Pinkerton, a suburb of Columbus, who praised her clarity. 'She has five kids. I have six.'"

"'She came from a middle-class family. She did it with conviction and grit,' Plessinger concluded. 'God's in charge. I'm voting for God first.'"

"'It's her integrity,' Smalley said, 'what she has done for her state, and yet she is able to have a family, a career, a husband. It just gives woman hope that we can do it. She is sassy and we like sassy.'"

Seriously?

Yes.

Whatever.

I really can see why people like her.
She's a bit of a hole. People can project whatever they want on to her and support her for that.
She is the perfect American candidate, she feeds our narcissism that requires our leaders be some type of "just like us" though there is no single "us" and the "us" that Palin is is actually a small minority of the country. It's the next manifestation of "who would you rather have a beer with?" That is completely irrelevant, but that's how enough of us think.
She's a religious nut of the type that thinks there is an essential value to being that type of religious nut that overrides any other concern. Believing the Flinstones is plausible history is a good thing. Trying to find out how to ban books with the word "Gay" in the title is exactly what she should be doing.

In fact, I think the worse she does in the public eye, the more REAL AMERICANS will support her. She's that perfect naught or place holder for a people terrified of the necessary difference and messiness of democracy.* Whatever you feel you are up against, Sarah's going to overcome it, and since she's just like you, you are going to overcome it. Take that Elitists, and that Liberal Media, here's a poke in the eye Evolutionists, knee to the groin for you Secular Humanism, Economic Insecurity, Swarthy Masses, Condoms in School...

But that's for our imbecilic selves. I think she also has a very important ideological role. I mean she doesn't just exist because of our insipid narcissism, she also serves the destroyer.

She's Ronald McDonald.

She is a mascot, a clown meant to make it easier for us to swallow poison, to want the poison. That's exactly what she was at the RNC, a good-looking package communicating someone else's words to make venom palatable. Read about what she's done to Wasilla. Don't think of how little experience she has or what she hasn't done. Think of what she did do, what she would want to do. Imagine her ideology writ large in the US.

If you're not scared of that... Well... I'd say turn off the TV and go read a book but you'd probably pick your Bible (Oh snap!)

*Isn't it ironic how the idea of REAL AMERICANS is incredibly Anti-American, if America is an ongoing democratic experiment that is. Don't ya' think?