The NBA has a Credibility Problem

April 30, 2009

Dear Commissioner David Stern,

I am a lifelong fan of the NBA and I plan on watching and loving this game and this league for as long as I live, and I personally think you’ve done a wonderful job as commissioner during your tenure. Your perpetual efforts to improve the game and expand the NBA’s popularity all over the world deserve commendation.

That being said, you’re starting to lose me.

Last night there were two very clear flagrant fouls that occurred in two separate playoff games. One was called, the other was not.

Dwight Howard threw an elbow that connected with Samuel Dalembert’s face. He was suspended for game 6.

Rajon Rondo slapped Brad Miller across the face as he drove through the lane. No flagrant was called, even retroactively, and no suspension is forthcoming.

I do not believe that either call was part of a grand conspiracy by the NBA to somehow guarantee bigger TV ratings in these playoffs or that either player was doing anything particularly malicious. In the heat of the moment, especially in the playoffs, players sometimes commit hard fouls that were not intended to harm the other player. But the fact remains that we must see consistency in order to protect both the players and the integrity of the game.

Commissioner, you must restore the credibility of the NBA’s officiating crews, or you’re going to start to lose some fans.

Especially after the Tim Donaghy scandal, you should be doing everything in your power to assure that the referees are doing their jobs legitimately and competently. This discrepancy between the Rondo and Howard fouls is not an isolated incident unfortunately; it’s a symptom of the fact that the officiating in the NBA is very poor and by far the most inconsistent among the major professional sports.

I say this because I care very dearly about both the sport and the league and I have been biting my tongue for a very, very, very long time. I would venture to guess that if you asked the average NBA fan about the officiating in these games, the overwhelming majority would say that it is either biased, rigged, or just plain piss-poor. There’s something to that, Mr. Stern, and it needs to be fixed.

It may be too late for the Bulls to get an extra possession or for the Celtics to win game 5 legitimately, but it’s not too late to correct these mistakes and bring credibility to these games both this year, next, and in the future.

Something needs to be done about the home-court advantage, the throwing out the rules in late game situations, and the all too frequent simple blowing of calls.

I’m certain that there is a system of accountability in place for the NBA’s referees, but whatever it is, it’s just not working.

Fix this so that we the fans can actually believe that what happens on the court is decided by the players. If you can’t, then we might as well spend our evenings watching professional wrestling instead.


The Politics of Swine Flu

April 30, 2009

Swine Flu is a serious and concerning issue that requires our direct and immediate attention. Here are a few jokes that I’ve found on the internet over the last few days.

flying_pig

I’ve heard the only cure is liberal application of this special oinkment.

Been on the phone to the NHS about swine flu……but all I’m getting is crackling.

My daughter woke up this morning in pigtails. Should i be worried?

You have to laugh at times like these, or else you might cry. Seriously though, this illness does present some enormous challenges and brings up a number of issues.

Globalization

The rapid spread of the disease has underscored the nature of the risks and benefits that come in a globalized society. I’m certain that more than a few people will use swine flu to argue for more protectionism, and I can’t say that I really blame them. But there will also be some people who will blame the issue on illegal immigrants and will call for the border with Mexico to be closed, and I can’t say that I’d blame anyone for catapulting pig poop at their doors.

Globization means greater speed. This includes the spread of disease and financial crises. There’s really no way we can put the genie back in the bottle at this point, nor should we, but I think this illustrates the need for rules, regulation, and cooperation between nations. This is one of the reasons why we have a United Nations.

Overpopulation

The sad fact is that this planet is vastly overpopulated by human beings. Although I’m inclined against abortion, I think the most compelling argument for the choice is that there really isn’t a whole lot of room or resources leftover. Historically speaking, we are pretty long overdue for a plague that would trim our numbers considerably. I hope that swine flu  doesn’t turn out to be the planet’s answer for pollution but it is inevitable that another black-plague-like illness will come around again.

Universal Health Care

Cases like this make it very clear how important it is for every person on this planet to have access to affordable health care. A good start would be implementing universal health care here in America. Personally, I support a single-payer model, but UHC is a step in the right direction and now the Democrats have no more excuses. They need to deliver this to us or it will haunt them in future elections.

Poorer populations, such as Mexico, have limited access to health care. Therefore, they are more susceptible to disease and infection. This is sad enough for them but it also threatens their neighbors (this includes the rest of the world.)

Will it be expensive? Absolutely. But think how much more costly it is to allow preventable disease to spread through our country and the world. Universal health care is not an entitlement program: it is a public safeguard for the benefit of ALL of us, not just those who can’t afford to buy their own health insurance.

Let’s say that a poor kid in New Jersey catches swine flu. His mother is jobless, collecting food stamps, and making ends meet through unemployment checks. There’s no way that she can afford the cost of his treatment at a decent hospital.

If the taxpayers share that burden and the poor kid is cured of swine flu, then we will have saved not just him, but the other people that he may have infected if left untreated. Isn’t that worth the investment?


Recommended Reading

April 29, 2009

I just found a wonderful article in Mother Jones about moral differences between conservatives and liberals.

Don’t let the title fool you, it’s not an attack on conservative values by any means. It’s an unbiased examination of the moral values that are important to both groups.

Conservatives Live in a Different Moral Universe

I also recommend taking the morality quiz at Yourmorals.org.

My moral foundation results:

Harm ranked as the biggest moral issue to me- considerably higher than both the average liberal and conservative test-taker.

In general I fell somewhere in the middle of the morality map- the exceptions being that fairness was more important to me than most liberals, and on purity I was about even with the average conservative.

I won’t bother you with all of my results because there are a lot of tests to take. Go check it out and feel free to discuss your results and ideas you have about them in the comments section.


Arlen Specter Jumps Ship

April 29, 2009

Republican senator from Pennsylvania Arlen Specter told reporters that he is planning to join the Democratic party:

“I want to win when my term is up. Considering that I don’t stand a chance in hell of getting re-elected if I run with these bunch of lunatics, I’ve decided to switch parties and join the Democrats. I mean, have you seen these guys lately? It’s a freak show. An absolute freak show. You’d have to be completely out of your mind to admit in public that your values are closely aligned with the Republican party. Last week I was at lunch with Mitch Mcconnell and John Boehner and they both ordered raw baby seals, and when the waiter, who was latino, said that raw baby seals weren’t on the menu, Mitch and John started screaming and saying they would kidnap the waiter and then dump him on the other side of the border fence. It was pretty surreal. Everyone in the diner seemed intimidated and I asked them to sit down and relax but they just wouldn’t stop. When security came and asked them politely to leave Mitch pulled out a switch blade and said he would fillibuster his ass if he tried anything on him. By this point I’m slowly trying to sneak out the back door of the restaurant because I was afraid that the scene was going to become violent. But luckily security was able to subdue Mitch and John and take them away without any serious injuries for anybody involved. While they were being dragged away John started shouting that the south would come again. The whole episode was really eye-opening and I decided that there was just no way I could continue to be associated with these people.”

More on this as it develops…


So You Want to Play Poker?

April 28, 2009

I had a dream in my 3rd year of school that I would one day not have to get a real job; I was going to become a professional poker player.

So I set out to learn as much as I could about the game and play as much as possible so that one day I could be featured on late night cable TV making a living as a real card shark. I bought 3 books on poker strategy, read hundreds of articles, researched the best places to play online and in person, and spent my free time dreaming and thinking about poker.

During my very brief poker career I lost some money, won some money, and lost some more money. I learned enough about the game to know that one day I could earn a living playing poker exclusively. But during that short amount of time I learned that I would rather undergo gum surgery on a daily basis than try to become a professional poker player.

Here are the reasons why I chose not to try, and why you probably shouldn’t either:

1. It’s too damn hard.

Yes, it can be done. But if you want to do more than just make rent, i.e. gain disposable income, you’re going to have to turn poker into a full-time job. In fact, you’ll have to work 60 to 80 hours a week, sitting in front of a computer or in a poker room, and you absolutely cannot ever deviate from a hard-line, no-fun strategy.

2. You will hate the people you work with

While I was trying to learn the game I met a good number of people that became friends and I had a lot of fun playing with them and getting to know them. But I also met a lot of complete and total assholes. There are assholes everywhere in society, but it seems to me that as far as hobbies go, there are a disproportionate amount of assholes who are drawn to poker.

Asshole #1

Asshole #1

Of course there are compulsive personalities, which means in addition to gambling, they can be morbidly obese, alcholics, drug addicts, or sexual predators. Then there are the large egos- people who can’t handle the emotional swings of no limit and take it personally when they lose. Most of all there are the short tempers- people who are eager- no, itching- to start a fight over the tiniest slight or joke.

3. You need to already have money to start

Sure, you can play freerolls, sitngos, and low limit cash games and build up your bankroll. But unless you have at least a few thousand dollars to start with, you won’t be able to handle the natural variance that comes with the game. If you already have several thousand dollars that you can afford to lose while chasing your dream, then knock yourself out, but I advise you to invest the money in more satisfying ventures, such as a PCP addiction.

Don’t let me dissuade you. If you really want to spend 14 hours a day glaring at a computer screen, folding 87 percent of your starting hands, and socializing with a fair number of degenerates and sociopaths, then so be it. Just don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Poker is a wonderful challenge; a game of matching wits and testing your luck against the Gods. But I think the best way to enjoy it is to play a weekly game with a few friends over a few beers for stakes that you are 110% comfortable with.


America’s Sisyphean Task

April 27, 2009

This last week in Iraq has been particularly bloody. Over 150 people were killed and several hundred more were injured, mostly Shia visiting holy sites. The violence has brought into doubt the US’s so-called plans for withdrawal.

Until the economy crashed, President Obama ran on a platform primarily based on a promise to end the war in Iraq and bring our troops home. Of course what he really meant was that he would bring some of our troops home and leave a permanent residual force of 50,000 soldiers to safeguard the volatile Iraqi oil… I mean security situation.

Now thanks to this recent slew of bombings, it looks like even that draw down is in doubt. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Iraq and made assurances that if the violence gets worse that we will not leave so quickly and that the US “remains committed to helping them navigate through this period and have a better future…”

There are a whole lot of historical examples that we could learn from or compare the Iraq war too. But the story that best describes our on-going efforts in Iraq has to be that of Sisyphus.

If you don’t know, Sisyphus was a naughty king who was punished by Tartarus with the task of rolling an enormous boulder up a hill, only to see it roll back down again, for all eternity.

sisyphus

In 2005 we couldn’t leave Iraq because we were making progress and they needed our help for stability.

In 2006 and 2007 we couldn’t leave Iraq because all hell had broken loose and without a US presence there, the country would descend into chaos.

In 2008 we couldn’t leave because the political and military gains that we made were too fragile.

Now it appears in 2009, we won’t be able to leave Iraq because the Surge really didn’t work after all and the terrorists will just come out of their holes the minute that we start packing our bags.

It’s been a long time since the initial invasion of 2003 and it might seem like an eternity sometimes. But no God has decreed that we should continue to prop up this country until the end of time. No deity has doomed us to an eternity of surges, counterinsurgency, and political progress that can’t even be measured by watching a sundial move in slow-motion.

No, this Sisyphean challenge is of our own making, and it appears that this administration has no more clue how to walk away from it as the previous one did.

If President Obama has any interest in delivering the change that he promised in the fall of 2008, getting us out of Iraq for good would be a nice place to start.


David Foster Wallace speech

April 27, 2009

Transcription of the 2005 Kenyon Commencement Address – May 21, 2005 by David Foster Wallace

(If anybody feels like perspiring [cough], I’d advise you to go ahead, because I’m sure going to. In fact I’m gonna [mumbles while pulling up his gown and taking out a handkerchief from his pocket].) Greetings ["parents"?] and congratulations to Kenyon’s graduating class of 2005. There are these two young fish swimming along and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says “Morning, boys. How’s the water?” And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes “What the hell is water?”

This is a standard requirement of US commencement speeches, the deployment of didactic little parable-ish stories. The story ["thing"] turns out to be one of the better, less bullshitty conventions of the genre, but if you’re worried that I plan to present myself here as the wise, older fish explaining what water is to you younger fish, please don’t be. I am not the wise old fish. The point of the fish story is merely that the most obvious, important realities are often the ones that are hardest to see and talk about. Stated as an English sentence, of course, this is just a banal platitude, but the fact is that in the day to day trenches of adult existence, banal platitudes can have a life or death importance, or so I wish to suggest to you on this dry and lovely morning.

Of course the main requirement of speeches like this is that I’m supposed to talk about your liberal arts education’s meaning, to try to explain why the degree you are about to receive has actual human value instead of just a material payoff. So let’s talk about the single most pervasive cliché in the commencement speech genre, which is that a liberal arts education is not so much about filling you up with knowledge as it is about quote teaching you how to think. If you’re like me as a student, you’ve never liked hearing this, and you tend to feel a bit insulted by the claim that you needed anybody to teach you how to think, since the fact that you even got admitted to a college this good seems like proof that you already know how to think. But I’m going to posit to you that the liberal arts cliché turns out not to be insulting at all, because the really significant education in thinking that we’re supposed to get in a place like this isn’t really about the capacity to think, but rather about the choice of what to think about. If your total freedom of choice regarding what to think about seems too obvious to waste time discussing, I’d ask you to think about fish and water, and to bracket for just a few minutes your skepticism about the value of the totally obvious.

Here’s another didactic little story. There are these two guys sitting together in a bar in the remote Alaskan wilderness. One of the guys is religious, the other is an atheist, and the two are arguing about the existence of God with that special intensity that comes after about the fourth beer. And the atheist says: “Look, it’s not like I don’t have actual reasons for not believing in God. It’s not like I haven’t ever experimented with the whole God and prayer thing. Just last month I got caught away from the camp in that terrible blizzard, and I was totally lost and I couldn’t see a thing, and it was fifty below, and so I tried it: I fell to my knees in the snow and cried out ‘Oh, God, if there is a God, I’m lost in this blizzard, and I’m gonna die if you don’t help me.’” And now, in the bar, the religious guy looks at the atheist all puzzled. “Well then you must believe now,” he says, “After all, here you are, alive.” The atheist just rolls his eyes. “No, man, all that was was a couple Eskimos happened to come wandering by and showed me the way back to camp.”

It’s easy to run this story through kind of a standard liberal arts analysis: the exact same experience can mean two totally different things to two different people, given those people’s two different belief templates and two different ways of constructing meaning from experience. Because we prize tolerance and diversity of belief, nowhere in our liberal arts analysis do we want to claim that one guy’s interpretation is true and the other guy’s is false or bad. Which is fine, except we also never end up talking about just where these individual templates and beliefs come from. Meaning, where they come from INSIDE the two guys. As if a person’s most basic orientation toward the world, and the meaning of his experience were somehow just hard-wired, like height or shoe-size; or automatically absorbed from the culture, like language. As if how we construct meaning were not actually a matter of personal, intentional choice. Plus, there’s the whole matter of arrogance. The nonreligious guy is so totally certain in his dismissal of the possibility that the passing Eskimos had anything to do with his prayer for help. True, there are plenty of religious people who seem arrogant and certain of their own interpretations, too. They’re probably even more repulsive than atheists, at least to most of us. But religious dogmatists’ problem is exactly the same as the story’s unbeliever: blind certainty, a close-mindedness that amounts to an imprisonment so total that the prisoner doesn’t even know he’s locked up.

The point here is that I think this is one part of what teaching me how to think is really supposed to mean. To be just a little less arrogant. To have just a little critical awareness about myself and my certainties. Because a huge percentage of the stuff that I tend to be automatically certain of is, it turns out, totally wrong and deluded. I have learned this the hard way, as I predict you graduates will, too.

Here is just one example of the total wrongness of something I tend to be automatically sure of: everything in my own immediate experience supports my deep belief that I am the absolute center of the universe; the realest, most vivid and important person in existence. We rarely think about this sort of natural, basic self-centeredness because it’s so socially repulsive. But it’s pretty much the same for all of us. It is our default setting, hard-wired into our boards at birth. Think about it: there is no experience you have had that you are not the absolute center of. The world as you experience it is there in front of YOU or behind YOU, to the left or right of YOU, on YOUR TV or YOUR monitor. And so on. Other people’s thoughts and feelings have to be communicated to you somehow, but your own are so immediate, urgent, real.

Please don’t worry that I’m getting ready to lecture you about compassion or other-directedness or all the so-called virtues. This is not a matter of virtue. It’s a matter of my choosing to do the work of somehow altering or getting free of my natural, hard-wired default setting which is to be deeply and literally self-centered and to see and interpret everything through this lens of self. People who can adjust their natural default setting this way are often described as being “well-adjusted”, which I suggest to you is not an accidental term.

Given the triumphant academic setting here, an obvious question is how much of this work of adjusting our default setting involves actual knowledge or intellect. This question gets very tricky. Probably the most dangerous thing about an academic education — least in my own case — is that it enables my tendency to over-intellectualize stuff, to get lost in abstract argument inside my head, instead of simply paying attention to what is going on right in front of me, paying attention to what is going on inside me.

As I’m sure you guys know by now, it is extremely difficult to stay alert and attentive, instead of getting hypnotized by the constant monologue inside your own head (may be happening right now). Twenty years after my own graduation, I have come gradually to understand that the liberal arts cliché about teaching you how to think is actually shorthand for a much deeper, more serious idea: learning how to think really means learning how to exercise some control over how and what you think. It means being conscious and aware enough to choose what you pay attention to and to choose how you construct meaning from experience. Because if you cannot exercise this kind of choice in adult life, you will be totally hosed. Think of the old cliché about quote the mind being an excellent servant but a terrible master.

This, like many clichés, so lame and unexciting on the surface, actually expresses a great and terrible truth. It is not the least bit coincidental that adults who commit suicide with firearms almost always shoot themselves in: the head. They shoot the terrible master. And the truth is that most of these suicides are actually dead long before they pull the trigger.

And I submit that this is what the real, no bullshit value of your liberal arts education is supposed to be about: how to keep from going through your comfortable, prosperous, respectable adult life dead, unconscious, a slave to your head and to your natural default setting of being uniquely, completely, imperially alone day in and day out. That may sound like hyperbole, or abstract nonsense. Let’s get concrete. The plain fact is that you graduating seniors do not yet have any clue what “day in day out” really means. There happen to be whole, large parts of adult American life that nobody talks about in commencement speeches. One such part involves boredom, routine, and petty frustration. The parents and older folks here will know all too well what I’m talking about.

By way of example, let’s say it’s an average adult day, and you get up in the morning, go to your challenging, white-collar, college-graduate job, and you work hard for eight or ten hours, and at the end of the day you’re tired and somewhat stressed and all you want is to go home and have a good supper and maybe unwind for an hour, and then hit the sack early because, of course, you have to get up the next day and do it all again. But then you remember there’s no food at home. You haven’t had time to shop this week because of your challenging job, and so now after work you have to get in your car and drive to the supermarket. It’s the end of the work day and the traffic is apt to be: very bad. So getting to the store takes way longer than it should, and when you finally get there, the supermarket is very crowded, because of course it’s the time of day when all the other people with jobs also try to squeeze in some grocery shopping. And the store is hideously lit and infused with soul-killing muzak or corporate pop and it’s pretty much the last place you want to be but you can’t just get in and quickly out; you have to wander all over the huge, over-lit store’s confusing aisles to find the stuff you want and you have to maneuver your junky cart through all these other tired, hurried people with carts (et cetera, et cetera, cutting stuff out because this is a long ceremony) and eventually you get all your supper supplies, except now it turns out there aren’t enough check-out lanes open even though it’s the end-of-the-day rush. So the checkout line is incredibly long, which is stupid and infuriating. But you can’t take your frustration out on the frantic lady working the register, who is overworked at a job whose daily tedium and meaninglessness surpasses the imagination of any of us here at a prestigious college.

But anyway, you finally get to the checkout line’s front, and you pay for your food, and you get told to “Have a nice day” in a voice that is the absolute voice of death. Then you have to take your creepy, flimsy, plastic bags of groceries in your cart with the one crazy wheel that pulls maddeningly to the left, all the way out through the crowded, bumpy, littery parking lot, and then you have to drive all the way home through slow, heavy, SUV-intensive, rush-hour traffic, et cetera et cetera.

Everyone here has done this, of course. But it hasn’t yet been part of you graduates’ actual life routine, day after week after month after year.

But it will be. And many more dreary, annoying, seemingly meaningless routines besides. But that is not the point. The point is that petty, frustrating crap like this is exactly where the work of choosing is gonna come in. Because the traffic jams and crowded aisles and long checkout lines give me time to think, and if I don’t make a conscious decision about how to think and what to pay attention to, I’m gonna be pissed and miserable every time I have to shop. Because my natural default setting is the certainty that situations like this are really all about me. About MY hungriness and MY fatigue and MY desire to just get home, and it’s going to seem for all the world like everybody else is just in my way. And who are all these people in my way? And look at how repulsive most of them are, and how stupid and cow-like and dead-eyed and nonhuman they seem in the checkout line, or at how annoying and rude it is that people are talking loudly on cell phones in the middle of the line. And look at how deeply and personally unfair this is.

Or, of course, if I’m in a more socially conscious liberal arts form of my default setting, I can spend time in the end-of-the-day traffic being disgusted about all the huge, stupid, lane-blocking SUV’s and Hummers and V-12 pickup trucks, burning their wasteful, selfish, forty-gallon tanks of gas, and I can dwell on the fact that the patriotic or religious bumper-stickers always seem to be on the biggest, most disgustingly selfish vehicles, driven by the ugliest [responding here to loud applause] (this is an example of how NOT to think, though) most disgustingly selfish vehicles, driven by the ugliest, most inconsiderate and aggressive drivers. And I can think about how our children’s children will despise us for wasting all the future’s fuel, and probably screwing up the climate, and how spoiled and stupid and selfish and disgusting we all are, and how modern consumer society just sucks, and so forth and so on.

You get the idea.

If I choose to think this way in a store and on the freeway, fine. Lots of us do. Except thinking this way tends to be so easy and automatic that it doesn’t have to be a choice. It is my natural default setting. It’s the automatic way that I experience the boring, frustrating, crowded parts of adult life when I’m operating on the automatic, unconscious belief that I am the center of the world, and that my immediate needs and feelings are what should determine the world’s priorities.

The thing is that, of course, there are totally different ways to think about these kinds of situations. In this traffic, all these vehicles stopped and idling in my way, it’s not impossible that some of these people in SUV’s have been in horrible auto accidents in the past, and now find driving so terrifying that their therapist has all but ordered them to get a huge, heavy SUV so they can feel safe enough to drive. Or that the Hummer that just cut me off is maybe being driven by a father whose little child is hurt or sick in the seat next to him, and he’s trying to get this kid to the hospital, and he’s in a bigger, more legitimate hurry than I am: it is actually I who am in HIS way.

Or I can choose to force myself to consider the likelihood that everyone else in the supermarket’s checkout line is just as bored and frustrated as I am, and that some of these people probably have harder, more tedious and painful lives than I do.

Again, please don’t think that I’m giving you moral advice, or that I’m saying you are supposed to think this way, or that anyone expects you to just automatically do it. Because it’s hard. It takes will and effort, and if you are like me, some days you won’t be able to do it, or you just flat out won’t want to.

But most days, if you’re aware enough to give yourself a choice, you can choose to look differently at this fat, dead-eyed, over-made-up lady who just screamed at her kid in the checkout line. Maybe she’s not usually like this. Maybe she’s been up three straight nights holding the hand of a husband who is dying of bone cancer. Or maybe this very lady is the low-wage clerk at the motor vehicle department, who just yesterday helped your spouse resolve a horrific, infuriating, red-tape problem through some small act of bureaucratic kindness. Of course, none of this is likely, but it’s also not impossible. It just depends what you what to consider. If you’re automatically sure that you know what reality is, and you are operating on your default setting, then you, like me, probably won’t consider possibilities that aren’t annoying and miserable. But if you really learn how to pay attention, then you will know there are other options. It will actually be within your power to experience a crowded, hot, slow, consumer-hell type situation as not only meaningful, but sacred, on fire with the same force that made the stars: love, fellowship, the mystical oneness of all things deep down.

Not that that mystical stuff is necessarily true. The only thing that’s capital-T True is that you get to decide how you’re gonna try to see it.

This, I submit, is the freedom of a real education, of learning how to be well-adjusted. You get to consciously decide what has meaning and what doesn’t. You get to decide what to worship.

Because here’s something else that’s weird but true: in the day-to day trenches of adult life, there is actually no such thing as atheism. There is no such thing as not worshipping. Everybody worships. The only choice we get is what to worship. And the compelling reason for maybe choosing some sort of god or spiritual-type thing to worship — be it JC or Allah, bet it YHWH or the Wiccan Mother Goddess, or the Four Noble Truths, or some inviolable set of ethical principles — is that pretty much anything else you worship will eat you alive. If you worship money and things, if they are where you tap real meaning in life, then you will never have enough, never feel you have enough. It’s the truth. Worship your body and beauty and sexual allure and you will always feel ugly. And when time and age start showing, you will die a million deaths before they finally grieve you. On one level, we all know this stuff already. It’s been codified as myths, proverbs, clichés, epigrams, parables; the skeleton of every great story. The whole trick is keeping the truth up front in daily consciousness.

Worship power, you will end up feeling weak and afraid, and you will need ever more power over others to numb you to your own fear. Worship your intellect, being seen as smart, you will end up feeling stupid, a fraud, always on the verge of being found out. But the insidious thing about these forms of worship is not that they’re evil or sinful, it’s that they’re unconscious. They are default settings.

They’re the kind of worship you just gradually slip into, day after day, getting more and more selective about what you see and how you measure value without ever being fully aware that that’s what you’re doing.

And the so-called real world will not discourage you from operating on your default settings, because the so-called real world of men and money and power hums merrily along in a pool of fear and anger and frustration and craving and worship of self. Our own present culture has harnessed these forces in ways that have yielded extraordinary wealth and comfort and personal freedom. The freedom all to be lords of our tiny skull-sized kingdoms, alone at the center of all creation. This kind of freedom has much to recommend it. But of course there are all different kinds of freedom, and the kind that is most precious you will not hear much talk about much in the great outside world of wanting and achieving and [unintelligible -- sounds like "displayal"]. The really important kind of freedom involves attention and awareness and discipline, and being able truly to care about other people and to sacrifice for them over and over in myriad petty, unsexy ways every day.

That is real freedom. That is being educated, and understanding how to think. The alternative is unconsciousness, the default setting, the rat race, the constant gnawing sense of having had, and lost, some infinite thing.

I know that this stuff probably doesn’t sound fun and breezy or grandly inspirational the way a commencement speech is supposed to sound. What it is, as far as I can see, is the capital-T Truth, with a whole lot of rhetorical niceties stripped away. You are, of course, free to think of it whatever you wish. But please don’t just dismiss it as just some finger-wagging Dr. Laura sermon. None of this stuff is really about morality or religion or dogma or big fancy questions of life after death.

The capital-T Truth is about life BEFORE death.

It is about the real value of a real education, which has almost nothing to do with knowledge, and everything to do with simple awareness; awareness of what is so real and essential, so hidden in plain sight all around us, all the time, that we have to keep reminding ourselves over and over:

“This is water.”

“This is water.”

It is unimaginably hard to do this, to stay conscious and alive in the adult world day in and day out. Which means yet another grand cliché turns out to be true: your education really IS the job of a lifetime. And it commences: now.

I wish you way more than luck.


Earth Year

April 24, 2009

Earth Day, like so many worthy causes, has become a very popular fad. Each year that passes there is more attention paid to events coinciding with the holiday and more awareness is brought to environmental problems.

trees

The problem is that it only comes once a year. Like Christmas, it allows us a chance to indulge in warm, fuzzy feelings and commit acts of unselfishness that serve to alleviate our guilt over our lifestyles that we live for the other 364 days a year. That’s the good news.

The bad news is that there are still millions of Americans who do not take climate change seriously, or worse, think it’s a natural phenomenon that has absolutely nothing to do with pumping billions and billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. Until we are collectively willing to admit our part in the trashing of our planet and the depletion of our natural resources, there will be no real progress.

The earth is dying.

Let me repeat that.

Our planet is dying.

There are natural cycles of temperature change but at no point in our history has there been so many species on the brink of extinction. This is not an accident. This is not a part of the circle of life. This is very real and very dangerous.

It’s really very sad to see so many people fretting about the financial debt that we are loading onto future generations while at the same time they dismiss climate change as a hoax. If we wiped out the national deficit tomorrow, our children and grandchildren would still be inheriting a dying planet. What good is a surplus when you don’t have solid ground to stand on?

Earth Day is not enough. So many sermons in December exhort us to experience and share the spirit of Christmas all year round. It’s about high time that we took that idea and used it for environmental awareness as well.


Neocons Love Terrorism

April 22, 2009

I wrote an article about President Obama saying that the Attorney General is open to pursue charges against former Bush officials for College News today.

You’ll have to excuse my editor for some minor errors in the article, I have. The point to take away from it is the response in the comments section from “chuck”:

“So you are saying that you know for fact tha tBush ordered torture?  Because you said in what I am sure was a non bias statment”Eric Holder needs to do his job and start investigating the Bush administration for its use of torture and illegal wiretapping during the war on terror”.  You show yourself for what you are.  I just hope the next terroist attack that is successful because our protectors are afraid to protect us, does not hurt anyone in my family. I am not so worried about your safety though”

Not only did chuck misquote me, but he implied that I deserved to be hurt in a terrorist attack because I don’t condone torturing during interrogations of Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations.

I wish I could say that chuck is a lone nut but he’s not the first conservative that I have seen to make this implication. During the CPAC conference John Bolton said that if Chicago were to be destroyed in a nuclear attack by Iran that Obama would change his tone regarding the war on terror. The comment drew guffaws from the audience.

I’m supposed to believe that conservatives care more about America than liberals when they wish for us to die so that they will be proven right?

This kind of conservatism is what is killing the Republican Party and showing that being right about the evil terrorists is more important to them than the actual security of America.

It’s reprehensible, inexcusable, and disgusting in the worst way.

End of story.


Matt Drudge: Warmonger

April 21, 2009

The President is getting a lot of flak for shaking hands with and speaking to Hugo Chavez recently, especially from the right wing media and the Drudge Report.

Ordinarily I try to avoid discussing Matt Drudge and the effect that he has on our national media but sometimes, like he that shall not be named on the radio, he’s just too big to ignore.

drudgewar

When he’s not perpetuating the idea that a Paris Hilton sex video is as newsworthy as the Paris Peace Accords, Matt Druge actively seeks to encourage war on every possible front. This last weekend the majority of the headlines that Druge promoted were about Obama speaking to Chavez and the imminent Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities (an imminent inevitability that Drudge has been obsessed with for three and a half years running.)

The media is now the most powerful influential force in politics which makes warmongers in the 3rd estate more dangerous than ever.

In Citizen Kane, Orson Welles promises to deliver war. It seems that too many journalists and newspaper magnates enjoyed the film for the wrong reasons, considering they now take up the proverbial sword so gleefully and on a regular basis.

If Fox News and the Drudge Report had a media monopoly in this country I’d be willing to bet that we would have already bombed Iran and North Korea at the very least. Perception is reality, and the media colors our perceptions in America more than any other entity. If enough people believe that Hugo Chavez is a madman who would sell WMD to terrorists, then our leaders (who are just as beholden to the media, perhaps moreso), would certainly do something about it. If Drudge can convince enough powerful people that Iran wants martyrdom rather than prosperity then the DOD will be happy to oblige.

At the end of the day, he’s looking out for his bottom line. War sells newspapers and adspace today just as much as in Hearst’s time. Unfortunately, bombs and missiles are much more effective today at killing people than back then.

Here’s to hoping that if we do end up warring with Venezuela that a wayward missile will find its way to Matt Drudge’s house.


Like a Whole Other Country

April 17, 2009

Last night the governor of Texas said that one day it might be possible for his state to secede from the union, and this drew some big cheers from the conservatives in the audience.

I guess it really is like a whole other country, which makes their flag-waiving and patriotism look pretty hollow.

I am currently reading Lincoln: the novel by Gore Vidal, and I highly recommend it to any history and/or political junkies, especially right now. I dont actually believe that Perry’s threat is legitimate or that Texas or any other states are on the verge of secession, but it’s still worth looking at the possibility given the growing fringe movement on the right.

Abraham Lincoln showed some frightening flashes of fascism during the Civil War. As states were leaving the union, he used his “inherent powers” in order to suspend Habeus Corpus, shut down dissident newspapers, and imprison anybody for an indefinite period of time without charging them with a crime. He left most of the details to his Rovian Secretary of State, William Seward. Perhaps it would be better to say that Karl Rove was Sewardian.

Anyway, there was a great deal of dissension within Lincoln’s administration about these developments. While defending his actions Abe claimed that he needed to do these things in order to preserve the union and defend the constitution of the United States. There were some who believed that the Union would have been better off if they had simply let the Confederate states leave.

What would the world be like if Lincoln had taken this approach?

Of course the sin of slavery couldn’t be tolerated, but there would definitley have been some political benefits if the North and South had split permanently.

Take a look at the 2008 electoral map:

2008-map

Now take a look at the original Confederate states.

confederate_states_of_americasvg

Notice anything? Like every single former Confederate state except Florida voted for the Republican candidate?

The South has consistently voted conservative for a very long time. The only Democratic Presidents who have been elected since World War 2 (with the exception of Obama) have been southern and relatively moderate in the grand scheme of the political compass. This is because the south simply refuses to vote for any progressive candidates; several districts in 2008 actually swung further to the right for McCain than they did for Bush in 2004.

Wouldn’t we be better off if we didn’t have this albatross hanging around our necks?

I’d venture to guess that if we had let them go in 1860 that today we would have universal health care, an absurdly high standard of living, the best education system in the world, and quite possibly the most socially progressive society.

Lincoln believed that keeping the United States of America together was more important than any other issue, and I tend to agree.

But it doesn’t stop me from wondering what might have been…


The Boston Teabaggers

April 16, 2009

Coverage from yesterday’s Tea Parties from Yahoo! News:

“Texas Gov. Rick Perry fired up a tea party at Austin City Hall with his stance against the federal government, as some in his U.S. flag-waving audience shouted, ‘Secede!…

“In Boston, a few hundred protesters gathered on the Boston Common — a short distance from the original Tea Party — some dressed in Revolutionary garb and carrying signs that said “Barney Frank, Bernie Madoff: And the Difference Is?” and “D.C.: District of Communism…

“Other protesters also took direct aim at Obama. One sign in the crowd in Madison, Wis., compared him to the Antichrist. At a rally in Montgomery, Ala., where Twisted Sister’s “We’re Not Gonna Take It” blared from loudspeakers, Jim Adams of Selma carried a sign that showed the president with Hitler-style hair and mustache and said, “Sieg Heil Herr Obama.”

tea_bag_02

Enough.

Enough. Enough. Enough.

Where were these jackasses when President Reagan increased the size of the federal government exponentially?

Where were these rabble-rousers when President Bush raised military spending to 700 billion dollars a year?

Now that a Democratic President is spending in order to stimulate the economy during the worst downturn in 80 years, all of the sudden every Republican in the country is a born again, repentant fiscal conservative???

The idea that the conservative movement is now the agent of change and rebellion is about as laughable as a brigade of young Republicans riding down Pennsylvannia avenue on Harley Davidsons in black leather jackets to the tune of Black Flag’s American Waste.

Earth to the teabaggers: wanting lower taxes doesn’t make you a rebel or a patriot; it makes you a whiney little kid because most of us stopped complaining about taxes when we received our second paychecks at our first shitty job busing tables.

Tax cuts for the wealthy and cutting social programs are not now, have never been, and will never be designed to help those of you who lined up in the streets yesterday to complain about big government. (You know, the one that fixes potholes so that your Escalade doesn’t lose a rim every time you go around the block.)

The people who benefit from this teabagging and conservative populist rage are the ones who brought this financial calamity down on us. They don’t care about deficits or the Dow or your patriotic sentiments; they just want to horde every penny that they possibly can, and they will never, ever, ever, fix those potholes if left to their own devices.

The vast majority of you are never going to make more than 250,000 dollars a year, no matter how hard you work, how many vitamins you eat, or how many times you sing God Bless America.

Stop diluting yourselves and get the rich guy’s balls off your head already.


Rambling in Iowa

April 14, 2009

I must apologize for the lack of recent updates. It’s been a relatively slow news week and the holiday weekend was spent in Iowa, which I sincerely wish that John Edwards had won last year, but what-ifs are an exercise even in futility.

Ordinarily I would consider Iowa a red state. But in our most recent election it went for Barack Obama and last week this down-home, all-American, guns and corn-field loving state decided that they don’t care anymore if gay people get married or not.

Personally, I feel that marriage is a religious institution and that the state should not intervene. I think that the gay community should have every right that ordinary married couples have, so long as they don’t call it marriage and the government doesn’t ask the church to change its policy. The founding fathers, namely Jefferson, were adamant about the separation of church and state so that the state would be protected from the religious zealots in the church and that the church would be protected from the professional sociopaths in government. It’s a damn good idea and it shouldn’t be altered lightly.

However, I also feel, as I imagine most Americans do, that we all have much bigger fish to fry right now.

This pirate story is a nice distraction from the fact that we’re being anally penetrated by Wall Street fatcats and their Washington cronies to the point of sanguination. It’s something out of a Tom Clancy novel or a video game; three snipers simultaneously pull the trigger and take out three merciless pirates, so saving a noble US sea captain. Something about this story stinks. It’s too perfect. It too closely resembles a photo-op opportunity for our new President to display his tough-guy credentials for the world to see. There’s no way to know for sure, but if you prefer believing the official version of the story, then don’t let me burst your Candyland bubble.

Back to Iowa, and the town so small that it doesn’t even warrant its own zipcode. The flood last year so devastated this area that the grass still lies flat: one can tell that some kind of heavy body of water or fat bastard had been laying on the land for an extended period of time by the tired way that the still brown earth is coiffed. (grow up.)

Just outside of town one farmer has a large billboard on his property with red and black font that reads: “GOD is pro-life. Are You?”

It’s a gigantic turn-off even if you are pro life, because you know this hillbilly has a rifle under his bed and is itching to display some very non pro-life tendencies if a minority should cross his yard past dusk.

But this wonderful, everlasting, ever-giving recession has changed our collective mindset, and hopefully of this hillbilly as well. Maybe we are coming around to the fact that the powers that be have been playing our cultural preferences against one another while they’re robbing us all blind, or maybe we’re just more concerned with earning a decent living than with deciding what other folks should or should not do in the privacy of their homes.

I could not live out there, where the main attraction in town is a railroad and the deer outnumber the human beings countywide. But I can see the appeal of living free of the perpetual buzz and hum of the city. The country provides endless inspiration for good writing, but only a limited number of stories. The city however, provides a bottomless well of story potential.

The day before departing I spent the afternoon in a run-down apartment on the near West side. There was no occasion in particular; just a gathering of unemployed twenty-somethings in a backyard where beer, barbecue, and other earth-bound substances were served in abundance.  We told anecdotes about our fruitless searches for jobs; nervous laughter at the excitement that a minimum-wage data entry opportunity represents. Without market research panels we might all be in the streets.

Something strange is happening to many people my age. Our expectations are being lowered. Every single day they are lowered. Some people will tell you they were too high to begin with, that our moron boomer parents shouldn’t have handed out trophies for 4th place in Tee-Ball and that we’re all doomed now because we’ve come to think that the whole world revolved around us. Maybe they’re right. But I can’t escape the nagging suspicion that something awful is happening to this generation of digital idealists.

What happens to a raisin in the sun?

Generation X would say that it will dry and rot and it should have been smart enough to grow legs in the first place.

Boomers would say that it would shrivel, and that would be sad, but that not all hope was lost.

The greatest generation, who are now departing this Earth at an astonishing rate, would perhaps say that the raisin should have worked harder, and maybe it could have remained a grape, and contributed something to society.

What will Generation Z have to say?

Perhaps nothing, if current trends continue. After all, it is the last best hope in the alphabet.


Media Drops the Ball on Summers

April 8, 2009

I was curious to see how the media would react when I initially found out about Lawrence Summers’ cozy ties with Wall Street. After several days it seems that it has reacted with a collective yawn and a shrug.

It doesn’t help that the administration leaked the news on Friday night (a tried and true way of burying embarrassing stories in the news cycle), but I’ve seen almost nothing from the major media outlets regarding this flagrant and dangerous conflict of interest.

This is where the polarization and centralization of the media fails the American public.

Conservative outlets like Fox News have been more interested over the last few days in accusing Obama of shredding the founding documents than with reporting on a legitimate political scandal within his administration. MSNBC has given about fourteen seconds of airtime to this story and Jon Stewart is too busy fawning over Obama like a pre-pubescent Jonas Brothers fan to even notice. Because they’re so busy representing one point of view, it’s become impossible for these major media conglomerates to actually report relevant news.

This is why the blogosphere is so important. We can not rely on newspapers, television, and radio to do fulfill their journalistic oaths any longer.

The facts:

Lawrence Summers, one of the Obama administration’s top economic advisers, was paid over five million dollars last year from a major hedge fund and has earned millions more in speaking engagements with Citigroup, Lehman, and Goldman Sachs.

Now this man is entrusted to craft policy that affects these institutions??? Summers and the golden boy Geithner must be removed from their respective offices. Period.

Obama is no dummy, and he knows that they represent a very clear conflict of interest and they can’t be trusted to act in America’s best interests as opposed to Wall Street’s.

The liberal media cannot continue to give Obama and his staffers a free ride. The only real voice of dissent on the left that I’ve heard since January has been Paul Krugman. Where are the rebels? Where are the dissenters? You can’t tell me that every single progressive in the country is ecstatic about the direction of this country and that the only opposition that we’ll see for the next four years will come from the right.

Edward R. Murrow once said that “we must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it.”

The honeymoon is over, folks.

Either we start calling out the Obama administration when it’s wrong or we’re going to start seeing some serious abuses of power.


Socialized Medicine = Good Business

April 6, 2009

There are still many people out there who believe that if the government steps in to make comprehensive health care reform that it will be a disaster. I don’t know what planet these people are living on, but experience seems to dictate that we have no choice but to adopt a single payer system.

health_costs

Opponents of socialized medicine and any “entitlement programs” are generally free marketeers who also whine about taxes and think any government interference in business is a crime against nature. Perhaps these people really don’t understand what it takes to run a business these days, because health care costs are crippling the economy as much as faulty mortgages and securities.

Example: I was laid off in January. Since that time I’ve kept myself busy writing books, working out, networking, blogging, and applying to any and every job that I think I have a reasonable chance of getting.

The most recent interview I had went about as well as one could possibly imagine. (The job itself is a less-than-thrilling data entry opportunity, but it certainly beats unemployment.) I showed up early, hit it off very well with the boss, demonstrated my knowledge in real time when he had a software problem, and was the only candidate who knew how to perform the tasks that he wanted.

The only hitch was that he would be required to cover my health insurance. So, despite the fact that I seemed to be the most qualified candidate, he decided to go with somebody who he wouldn’t have to cover.

This pattern is repeating itself over and over all over the country these days. Because of the astronomical costs of health care, employers are shredding payrolls and passing on talented candidates because they just can’t afford to offer coverage to their employees.

Universal health care is a step in the right direction, but it will do little to actually lower the cost of care.

This represents a perfect opportunity for the government to do the private sector an enormous favor: by socializing medicine, costs will be controlled and employers will be free from the albatross of private health care plans.

Are there problems with socialized medicine? Absolutely. Is it going to be expensive? Of course.

The naysayers will keep braying about this until the end of time, but the fact of the matter is that we can no longer afford to listen to them. Our system is completely and utterly unsustainable from every possible vantage point. Even if we are lucky enough to emerge from this recession, the American economy will still be hindered by an enormous handicap.

Without systematic changes to our health care sytem we will fall behind in the global economy. Allowing our businesses to compete on an even playing field doesn’t sound like red mischief to me. It sounds like common sense.