Showing posts with label death. Show all posts
Showing posts with label death. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 08, 2009

I Will Be Brief



This week seems a perfect storm of destroying devotion.

What?

This past Saturday was the anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s murder. I know this anniversary was not a decade marker- and Obama is president- so it might not be necessary to remember Martin Luther King Jr. anymore, but whatever the reasons, it didn't carry the same eventfulness as last year's anniversary.

I mean last year was a "commemoration". Last year, we were all remembering what MLK meant to us. And of course by remembering I mean constructing self-congratulatory narratives that let "we" be self congratulating.

Again... what?

Then we had Palm Sunday. I'm always struck by Palm Sunday's conventions. The palms of course. The little bits of object lesson that have us identify with the crowds saying, "Hossana in the highest. Yay, Jesus." But not too much with the crowds saying, "Hossana in the highest. Yay, Jesus."

That's confusing. What're you getting at?

I know it's a lot of material to cover, so we seldom get to the "stuff" between the entry into Jerusalem and the bloody exit, but these crowds saying, "Yay, Jesus," soon say, "His blood be on us and on our children."

Well... we're THE CHURCH. When we say, "Hossana in the highest. Yay, Jesus," that's what we mean.

Somehow, we're different. We don't see ourselves as subject to similarly self-serving motives or the possibility of sin.

Right, we are different. They were Jews. Remember? They had certain expectations of a Messiah that Jesus just wasn't going to fulfill. Didn't you know that? That's why we're different.

Our confident praise is something like, "If we had been living in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partners with them in the blood of the prophets," without realizing what it means to say, "If we had been living in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partners with them in the blood of the prophets."

Uh, you had me then you lost me

So Jesus' dies for our sin (though not because of our sin) and reconciles us to God, a God that justifies us, that we can attach ourselves to wholly and confidently in a way that satisfies our deepest needs.

Oh, okay. Right. I get that.

It's difficult to be wary of our offering praise to a God that satisfies us. It just makes sense to attach ourselves to God, to fix ourselves on this God with intense devotion and say, "Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that comes in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest." It's difficult to find it anything other than proper because we've been washed white.

You said you would be brief. I still don't get what this has to do with Martin Luther King or why it's a storm of devotion destroying.

Oh... right. I guess tomorrow will be a bit of a reveal.

Saturday, March 28, 2009

Objectivity



Said in line at Stater Bros.- Ugh, Valerie Bertinelli beach body at 48? Yeah it's easy when you have a personal trainer, cooks, and get to work out all day...

...

Before purchasing-
Off-Brand Drumsticks
Spaghetti Sauce
Frozen Pizza
Diet Coke
Lay's Potato Chips
2 Healthy Choice Soups

Sunday, March 22, 2009

There are people that make it possible for me to be a Christian.
There is one less in the world.

"We need to understand that no theology can escape the epistemological characteristics of its time, even if it intends to oppose them."

Marcella Althaus-Reid, 1952-2009

Monday, February 23, 2009

Now...?


I just can't stay away.

I tried. Oh how I tried, but nothing could fill the void. Religion, family, booze? Nothing could fill the blog-shaped hole in my heart...

So here my netlog waited. Reliable. Unwavering. Good and faithful little diary. Of course I couldn't leave you forever.

And you, dear, little lambs. Was I gone too long? Had I left you wondering if there was something you had done to keep me away? You might've, but I'm so gracious I won't bring it up now. Let's just savor the sweetness of this reunion and get to what matters, no?

And what matters? You do.

I have something for you. Well, maybe not all of you- those of you for whom my harping about nonsense like torture and war seemed like... harping- I want to share something that will wipe the scales from your eyes.

For some of you it may now seem natural to oppose the occupation of Iraq and escalation in Afghanistan. CIA kidnappings are newly awful to you. Torture is suddenly torture. It is no longer un-American to challenge and question US policy.

Good?

Maybe your conversion is a bit like showing up at AA meetings to get dates*, but who knows where the wind may blow?

For others though, some vestigial principle stands in the way. After securing your salvation with secret prisons all over the globe, torture, and the sacrificial murders of Afghan taxi drivers you're too committed to your dhimmitude. Perhaps, you've surrendered so much of your soul to make sense of euphemisms like "enhanced interrogation", "extraordinary rendition", and "detainee", you're unsure how to proceed in a world where those are nonsense.

I am here for you. Actually, this is here for you:
"The Bush White House vehemently objected to provisions of the law dealing with rape by instrumentality. When House negotiators pressed to know why, they were met first with silence and then an embarrassed acknowledgement that a key part of the Bush program included invasion of the bodies of prisoners in a way that might be deemed rape by instrumentality under existing federal and state criminal statutes."

In case you missed it "the Bush program included invasion of the bodies of prisoners in a way that might be deemed rape by instrumentality". That means sticking things in people's butts.

No I know you're one not likely to make sharp distinctions about homosexual practices. In fact, you're probably someone for whom the phrase "homosexual practices" means something and as such distinctions aren't a part of the calculus. The upshot is this probably counts as gay.

There you go. You can augment your commitment to torture with the fear of the love that dare not speak its name. Never mind that it's not love- it's probably gay enough for you.

Now, with news that the Obama administration is maintaining Bush administration practices and that Binyam Mohammed was tortured in Guantanamo as recently as a month ago you can shake the dust from your outrage (out of practice outrage is still outrage, little lamb) and put it to use.

Apply sexual assault and violence and I'm sure whatever truth or sense of decency has been hindering you will magically melt away.

You're welcome.

* See? I could have written "laid". I am so kind to your delicate sensibilities.

Friday, November 21, 2008

They Can Have My Gold When They Pull It From My Cold Dead Teeth


I've noticed the reemergence of a golden thread running through the various paranoid media outlets I visit. (I hate myself.) If you're a certain type of paranoid, now is the time to invest in gold.

Well... I suppose you don't have to be paranoid to turn to gold to offset currency instability, but I'm sure this ad is meant to appeal to a specific someone:

Someone not necessarily concerned with inflation or currency exchange. Someone that still has foodstuffs left in their Y2K stockpile. Someone who generally feels haunted by some vague fear but who is also much more terrified now than they were of even Y2K.

I've said before that we have experienced a kind of apocalypse, and now we see it is a zombie apocalypse- Obama seems to be raising the Clinton dead for his administration. So sure, I can see why you'd be afraid. But gold?

I've never understood why gold is so valuable generally, but it seems especially worthless if things are about to go horribly wrong.

Like so much of contemporary Conservatism, I think hyping gold is a move to squeeze a little more blood from REAL AMERICANS (thick-skulled rubes) who are only too happy to dig their own graves if they think it means they're taking the next guy's plot. (I should think of a more artful way to construct that image- it seems like a good one.) The fear on which selling gold depends seems not only a scam but also a misdirection. When there's a run on gasoline and bullets... and football pads, S&M gear, mohawks, dune buggies, and Tina Turner anthems- then we'll know it's all over. But by then it'll be too late, and who's going to want your shiny yellow rocks then?

Monday, November 10, 2008

The Really Good Parts of Heaven Are Reserved for Male Virgins


We don't buy into this do we?
If you see a lady you like among your enemy, bring her home, rape her, and she's yours. If you later decide you don't like her after all, you can get rid of her, but you can't sell her because you made her dirty. (Deut. 21:10-14)

If a man rapes an unengaged young woman, he must compensate her father and then marry her. (Deut. 22:28)

If a young engaged women is raped in town and she doesn't cry out loudly enough to get help, she should be killed. (Deut. 22:23-24)

Men should not "go to worship" with damaged genitalia. (Deut. 23:1)

As you're speaking with your child, telling her about the ins and outs of physical intimacy, teaching her about what love means to us, what she should do, what she ought not do, what she might expect, how to treat others, you teach her this don't you? Of course if you do, you're already violating the sense of the law since it was written for men. See you in hell, dummy (from heaven).

But your son, you tell your son to keep his penis intact so that he can go to church, right? You tell him to make sure he only rapes a woman he can afford, don't you? Of course you... oh you don't? Oh well, see you in hell, too.

***
I should offer a tip of the hat to students with whom I first shared these verses, who remind us these "translations" have me read "seizing a woman" as rape rather than something a man gets to do to a woman by virtue of his being a man. That is, my use of "rape" may not be appropriate since it carries with it a meaning for us that may not be present for the audience who could not imagine certain types of forced sexual intercourse as something wrong. But that remains a part of my point, which is, we generally* don't say this has a direct "do and do not do" bearing on our lives even though we say the Bible has a direct "do and do not do" bearing on our lives.

We can say that because there is something that comes before the do and do not do (and it's not the "New Covenant"), though it's not likely that we see it. It's hard, if not disorienting, to see the things through which we see. Imagine if you were aware that you see your eyeball lens as you see through it.

Cosmic, man.

No wonder we don't question the Late Capitalist Agenda, or even know to look for its influence on how we imagine and approach everything. (Sure, but we can imagine something like the Gay Agenda can exist- as if people excluded from the "mainstream" have the type of position in the world to create an agenda). No wonder it seems silly for me to identify something called Late Capitalism and suggest it has an influence on us. Did I say influence? That's not nearly strong enough. What would you call the activity of a power that completely dominates your being, binds you to itself so the whole of your life is determined to serve it? Maybe in-fluence is the perfect word.

I only mention this because we reject the Gospel for our lives, so we are determined to imagine something we call homosexuality is treated by the Bible. Yeah that's what I'm saying: if you think the Bible addresses what we call homosexuality and from that you say something like "It's wrong for a man to be physically attracted to a man, blah blah blah", you need Jesus to save you from that. But don't feel bad, we all need Jesus. So, you know, whatever.

*I say generally because I am sure there are those who would love for this to be the basis of social order. I'm looking at you, "Yes On 8" financial backers.

When I Hear Gay Agenda, I Think of This
Waiting for The Bus- Violent Femmes
It's Oh So Quiet- Björk
Novacane- Beck
Jumpin' at the Woodside- Duke Ellington
Myxomatosis- Radiohead
Tangled Up In Blue- Bob Dylan
When The Levee Breaks- Led Zeppelin
Livin' Thing- ELO

Monday, October 27, 2008

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

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

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.

Saturday, October 18, 2008

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.

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

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?

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

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.

Monday, October 13, 2008

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

Thursday, October 02, 2008

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?

Monday, September 22, 2008

No War But Class War



This post is not for babies

There.

In a previous post I made passing mention that we are the kind of people that would be up in arms (figuratively) if half of the money used to kill Iraqis were offered as reparations or used to build Iraqi infrastructure (legitimately and competently). I think a similar phenomenon is at work with the presently debated Wall Street hand out.

So there's some debate about compensation limits, the degree and nature of oversight, how or whether to address housing issues, and just how we will own what we are about to own. But that's it. We have, "Give us a blank check," on one side, and, "No, no blank check for you," on the other. For many of us, these are legitimate points of debate. This is what we must hammer out in order to pass this legislation. They are legitimate points of debate because we are idiots.

You've probably heard the $700 billion price tag- that's an imaginary number. Imaginary because it's 700,000,000,000 but also because it's only meant to address the outstanding moneys owed at a single time- ("The Secretary’s authority to purchase mortgage-related assets under this Act shall be limited to $700,000,000,000 outstanding at any one time") It is not how much this will all cost us in total related expenditures. That limit is fixed (on paper anyway) in the trillions. But let's pretend that is the number. Let's pretend that $700,000,000,000 is how much money we will ultimately shell out, give or take a million. That's how much we say would give to these companies, and when I say companies I mean the people that created these "hybrid instruments" and insurance schemes that deliberately and predictably orchestrated this meltdown.

You've got that, right? This wasn't an accident.

This was not the result of Free Market capitalism. You must put out of your head the idea that anything called "The Market" exists anywhere but in high school economics texts. This was the result of actual people seeking the legal allowances and avenues for systems of mergers and lending machinations to make themselves and their cronies very rich. There is nothing "Free Market" about lending out $1000 when you only have $10 in hand. That is an artifice, it is a created possibility. We built the world that allowed this to happen.

And we say we don't believe in magic anymore. Pfft.

And now? Now we are willing to give at least hundreds of billions of dollars to this "emergency".

This should echo. We should have in our memories the USA PATRIOT Act and the congressional authorization to wage a war on terror. Both were legislative moves we had to make else we would meet certain ruin. Both were sold as necessary for our protection, necessary for our safety- just like the notmurder and nottorture done for our protection.

So we will let it happen. We want it to happen. And it says a lot about who and what we are.

Idiots.

Just as we'd be upset if we considered giving $250,000,000,000 to Iraq to rebuild their country, I'm sure we would consider it out of the question to devote even half of the proposed bail out one time limit ($350,000,000,000 to give it a name) to a single payer health care system, as an investment in educational infrastructure and resources, as a housing subsidy disbursement, or to even fix our screwed-up roads.

But this is happening. It will happen. We can efficiently and quickly create the means for a successful and well orchestrated bail out. Rich people, you don't know, are too rich to be left hanging. But people you do know with medical debts, people you know who are a paycheck away from foreclosure, people you know who are squeezed out of the housing market, people you know that have to forego college?

Fuck them. Perhaps you should tell your neighbor next time you see them.

I'm sure we could cynically say, "This is simply the nature of power, and there it goes looking out for itself." Or we could look at our national financial priorities and rationalize it as a matter of "personal responsibility" that we don't take care of each other. Sometimes we get a glimpse behind the veil and see someone's turning the screws. That's an eye-opening moment, and we feel our cynicism is justified. But this isn't that. There's also nothing exceptionally revelatory to say we don't care much for poor people however we rationalize it. No, here we are confronted with something far worse than those things; here we realize we have been cowed into participating in our own destruction. I'm sure we call it something else, though.

Our hands are not clean in this. We are not ignorant. We see exactly what's happening. We're eager for it to happen, to borrow a metaphor, like asses in heat, sniffing the wind. We are damned idiots. Really idiots; it's strong enough and perfectly appropriate.

Look it up.

Anyway...

Goddamn #1:
Pretty much all of Section 2, b. but especially:
(2) entering into contracts, including contracts for services authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, without regard to any other provision of law regarding public contracts;

Goddamn #2:
In exercising the authorities granted in this Act, the Secretary shall take into consideration means for--

(1) providing stability or preventing disruption to the financial markets or banking system; and

(2) protecting the taxpayer.
[I'm sure this is put here as a joke at our expense]

Goddamn #3:
Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.
[This makes actions outside of the law within the law. That's magic for you- the kind of magic that makes torture nottorture. Hooray.]

Hopeless.
These are the strangers we love.
It's after them we will go.

You could call the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 to contact your representatives, but what could you say about this? I guess you could at least ask them to [redacted 'cos I'm a baby too sometimes] and say your name before it's over.

So what's the phenomenon at work? I think we call it freedom.

Sighs all around.

Friday, September 12, 2008

Indian-White argument over genitals leaves three killed


Three men were shot dead and two left injured after an argument between a group of Indian and white visitors to a bar here, allegedly over the size of genitals.

NRI News

I bet there was an easier way to resolve this argument.

Thursday, September 04, 2008

Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran Hooray


So Obama is hardly the pacifist I would like as a president (in my humanity I know that is not possible, but in my hopefulness, well I hope) and on that mark may only be better than John McCain because he doesn't incessantly joke about killing people. Seriously, Barack, I know you read this, escalation in Afghanistan and occupation are not the answer, but thank you for not constantly making light of the deaths of others.

Anyway we already know my thoughts on the war hero trope/tripe and tonight's speech sold more of the same but what really got me was the crowd's reaction when John McCain said he was a warrior who hated war so knew what to do to keep the peace.

That was an applause line, folks.

Granted, it wasn't a crickets chirping moment, but they cheered more for lower taxes.

That was troubling. The 13 year old curators of the YouTube haven't put that bit up yet- so if you missed it, you missed a lot.

This is a segue.

Soon after the CA Supreme Court ruled it was unconstitutional to prevent same sex couples from marrying, our Yearly Meeting/Annual Conference/Equipping Center sent out reminders of what our Faith and Practice said about marriage and teh Gay. The reminders also included some "resources" one could consult on the legal and pastoral issues. I asked if these resources reflected our interpretation of Faith and Practice. Of course the response was that they were simply resources while F&P remained F&P. When I asked why we did not include a broader scope of resources or let F&P speak for itself... well there was no answer to that.

I would wager there are not many same sex couples sitting in our YM simply waiting for the state go ahead to get married. There are a few gay people that lurk about the periphery of our congregations, but hardly in numbers that would seem to warrant a Yearly Meeting-wide memo. Strange... no not strange... what's the word I'm looking for? Oh it'll come to me soon, but let's say strange for now. Strange that we would need to provide resources and reminders for an issue that really isn't a concern of ours. I mean it doesn't require that we address who we are, how we sin, where we struggle in any significant way to say "Gay, Boooooo!".

Memos about divorce, okay. Reminders about honest economics, sure, that makes sense. Advice about the need and how to forgive, I could see that as mattering to us. But harping on teh Gay is about as meaningful as taking a position on handicraft workers operating without the authority of the guild.

Similarly, when Congress authorized the use of force against Iraq, there were no Yearly Meeting announcements. When we actually started dropping bombs, we had nothing to say. It was that way for recent other "conflicts" as well. It's been that way.

Strange... No. Dangit, what's the word I'm thinking of?

That crowd and the lukewarm applause at the idea of "Not War" disturbed me. We are, thank God, not that crowd so I am not making the case that is exactly how we would respond (I am so praying we would not respond that way). But it did show how easy it is for death-mongering to be a default position; the idea of Not War is foreign and confusing. You don't applaud the idea of Not War. But that's the world, isn't it? It takes something transcendent, something divinely other to convince us that it need not be the case, to convince us, as the gentlemen said to McCain (and Obama should remember) "You can't win an occupation". I'd add, no one wins wars. But to the previous, add our reluctance to be confronted with actual sin (that which we actually do to participate in and legitimize death, injustice, and destruction) and you've got quite a recipe for, well, death, injustice, and destruction.

We're not that crowd, sure. But we are no more eager than they to confront how we participate in death, especially if it requires confession. Why should we be when there are GAYS somewhere that need to be told what we think of them?

Faithless. That's the word.
The Title of This Should've Been the Scene from Holy Grail Wherein Lancelot Butchers a Wedding Party
Hail to the thief (softly)- Radiohead

Thursday, August 14, 2008

Take That, Death


Skybalon- Hello
The Qweenbean- Oh good, I was just calling to make sure you were okay. I just heard there was a motorcycle accident at Citrus.
Skybalon- Oh I know, I was right behind it. Ha ha, what a dummy. I guess I beat the universe again.
The Qweenbean- Well I'm glad you're okay.
Skybalon- You know I'm worth more to you guys dead though.
The Qweenbean- That's short term, I'm a long term thinker... That's the only reason I keep you around.
Oh, can that go in the blog?
Skybalon- No.

Saturday, August 09, 2008

I For One Welcome Our New Masters


I made a perhaps too subtle reference to the anniversary of our glorious triumph over man and nature. This post may be in the same vein but in another direction. I suppose making the metaphor and its carried meaning deadly- (I mean a vein's flowing in reverse can't be a good thing).

Anyway, back when we were becoming death, the various science type persons on the Manhattan Project were given a survey asking how they thought the subsequently created device should be used. At one point, a demonstration that privately showed the power of the weapon to Japanese mucky-mucks, a demonstration that did not include use on a civilian population, was a viable option. That action was one of the survey options.

Of course we know now that it was only possible to get reliable data on the long term human consequences of the bombs by actually using them on actual humans. Anything else would have been purely academic. Plus there was the added bonus of scaring the shit out of the Soviets and letting the whole world know we were the one's in charge of this new order of new maps, stabilized currencies, world banking, and neo-colonialism. (Oh right, I use the word "shit" in this post. Language warning and all that. You know in case your nuclear era delicacies make you sensitive to that word.)

It was necessary to commit a very public act of power that showed the whole world just how great, if not wonderful, we were. We were revealing just what kind of benevolent world dictator we would be. How fitting that today's dubious commemorations should come so closely to yesterday's accomplishments.


It's not quite full circle. I mean to go from Berlin 1936 to Beijing 2008 may be a circuit, but we can't leave out August 1945 for its world stage performative relevance. What is that? An ellipse?

Friday, August 08, 2008

The Jokes Just Write Themselves


Russia moves closer to war with Georgia over South Osseti

"The Georgian Foreign Ministry, meanwhile, issued a statement calling on the international community to 'give Russia the message that invading the territory of a sovereign state and bombing its territory is unacceptable in the 21st century.'"

LA Times

Where's he been?

Wednesday, August 06, 2008

Wait, I Thought You Could Do That in Texas


Texas Executes Mexican Killer Amid International Protests
LA Times

Oh, I see what they mean.