Shared Sorrow, Shared Joy QUESTION

A very good (white male) person I know wrote me this:
The civil rights struggle in United States. Equality of all race, gender, creed, and sexual orientation is a very good thing, and something we as Americans can have pride in as “we” march towards progress. However, personally, I feel like I’m not allowed to take ownership (perhaps a poor choice of words, I’m looking for something closing to ‘being a party to’) in the achievements of accomplishments of black leaders because of my own skin color. I want to celebrate and claim this men and women as a part of me, because while we may not share the same shade or skin, we share a common humanity. However I feel uncomfortable that it may not be welcomed by some, or I don’t want to offend folks that feel that is an experience or achievements that are special to a certain segment of humanity.

And I wrote back quickly, somewhat in a hurry, before heading off to ANOTHER conference:

It immediately occurred to me that your question re: race could be an interesting conversation on the blog [isn’t that typical of me?], not mentioning you by name. But, my short answer is, Life’s unfair. You don’t get to celebrate as much with the victories because you didn’t get to share in the pain and the humiliation. That’s not meant mean-spiritedly, I hope you recognize.

That may have been a bit glib. But I was recently reminded of this quote:
“Oh, it is sad, very sad, that once more, for the umpteenth time, the old truth is confirmed: ‘What one Christian does is his own responsibility, what one Jew does is thrown back at all Jews.'” That was from Anne Frank’s diary in the spring of 1944. I was reminded of that again when I read about the specific grief by many people in South Korea over the killings at Virginia Tech. Why was that? Certainly, if the killer had been white, would all white people cringe with embarrassment? I suspect not. So if this is true, the specific joys can be shared only so much.

And I’m not even going to get into the ongoing stuff that still go on, such as allegations about higher auto loan rates for blacks and Hispanics, even accounting for differences in income.

Incidentally, someone sent me this link explaining a “psychological disorder”. Anyway, I don’t know that I have a question per se, or even a coherent thought, but I am soliciting your comments anyway.

You might also comment on this: I’ve long been of two minds about hate crime legislation. On one hand, there are people who do target folks because of their race or religion, and sexual orientation. As Rep. John Conyers put it, “These crimes constitute an assault not only on the victim but against our communities.”

On the other hand, I’m not insensitive to the notion that the law should be “blind to the personal traits of the victims”, even if it hasn’t always been so in the past, to the detriment of minorities.

Still, I’m leaning towards the former position because of a story I saw on ABC News regarding the growth of one particular hate group: the Ku Klux Klan. The Klan, which by most accounts, was fading in the 1990s, has had a resurgence by targeting Hispanics, seemingly assuming that their victims are all here illegally, which was 1) untrue and 2) irrelevant when it comes to assault. There was a story of an American teenager of Mexican descent beaten. So I’m hoping that hate crime legislation can be used especially against groups that practice such vulgarities.
ROG

Stress Busters QUESTION


I’m pretty sure that my wife gave me a gift certificate for a massage. not a massage from her, but from a professional outfit. (Not that I mind getting one from her.) It’s been two months, I just came from a conference, I need to go to another soon, and have I gotten this massage? I have not.

That recent report suggesting that boomers may be less healthy indicated that stress, along with weight, long commutes and the like, as one of the factors.

So, what I want to know is simple in concept, and perhaps difficult to achieve. How do you relax? Yoga, meditation, alcohol, drugs, television, turn off the TV, game night? We here at Ramblin’ will not judge you on this; we just want to know.
***
Another way to relax is to laugh well. Some news report, in anticipation of the Republican Presidential debate this past week, indicated that it would be moderated by “Christ Matthews”. I wrote a comment indicating that Matthews had a big enough ego without having a Christ complex. Curiously, they didn’t print my reply; they did, however, fix the post to “Chris”.
***
Is this a real story? George Bush Receives Purple Heart Award.

ROG

VOTING Questions

I was reading in Newsweek a couple weeks ago about some (Republican) politician complaining about ex-cons voting. I don’t see the problem. I think the ex-cons SHOULD vote. Perhaps:
1) They’ll feel more a part of the society as engaged citizens.
2) They’ll be able to better suss out the crooks who actually get elected, the Duke Cunninghams, the Bob Neys.

If anything, I’d think we would like to get MORE people to vote. Are people afraid that a bunch of former felons will get together and take over the town? If so, they should get out and register (and vote) themselves.

(Greg noted this story about the White House pursing legal efforts to limit voter turnout. This is not just unjust, it’s pathetic.)

I also was interested in the recent French election. Apparently, the top two vote getters, Nicolas Sarkozy, who got 31% in the first round, and Ségolène Royal (26%), will be in a runoff, but the candidate who is reportedly most acceptable (or least unacceptable) to the widest number of people, François Bayrou, came in third (19%), so won’t be in the runoff.

So I’m wondering:

1) What restrictions, beyond making sure somebody is of age and actually lives in the district, should there be on voters? I’m against too many restridctions.

2) What can be done to engage more people in the political process? Would Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) or other alternate voting methodologies work? How about voting over several days and/or online?
***
For free IRV? stickers send a self-addressed stamped envelope to: voteIRV.org, 26 Glen Street, Malden, MA 02148. Spread the word and make it stick: IRV; for a better democracy!
***
Dennis Kucinich, member of Congress and Presidential candidate, has introduced Articles of Impeachment Against Vice-President Richard Cheney. Kindly, Kucinich waited until the the Veep’s blood clot was under control to reintroduce the measure.
***
Bush v. Bush.
***
Erin Davies makes the best of a bad situation, letting the world see and contemplate the hate speech scrawled on her vehicle. The initial act of vandalism was especially disturbing to me since it happened in my city (Albany), but Erin’s reframing is quite intriguing.
***
What the rains of last week did to the basement of the David Sarnoff Library last week.
***
Last, but certainly not least, send some love to Kelly and Lefty.

ROG

A Mental Mistake

I made a tactical error this week: I watched, and read far too much about Virginia Tech. There were two episodes of My Name Is Earl listed on my DVR Monday night; it was really Dateline NBC. That Boston Legal on Tuesday? ABC Primetime. Yeah, I COULD have just deleted them, but no, I kept watching. At least I’ve missed, so far, the controversial airing of some of the material sent to NBC by the killer. Yet I was coming to a conclusion not dissimilar to this one. Which is to say, I do feel for the VT community, and the country as a whole, but I’m struck by how one bomb in Baghdad might well kill two or three dozen people. I wonder if we – I – have become inured because it happens so damn often there.

The shock of VT will subside when the NEXT thing happens – was the Don Imus thing only last week? – only to be brought back in the spotlight by the inevitable lawsuit by some of the families of the last 30 victims. (Meanwhile, whether to lock up the guns or for everyone to be packin’ heat is addressed well here.

But the BIGGEST mistake I made this week was going here where one can find the full text of a couple of Cho Seung-Hui’s plays. Oddly, it wasn’t the plays I found most disturbing, it was the banal dialogue of people. Nasty sniping at each other. “Someone should have turned him in, gotten him therapy” (in fact, they did). Well, you can read it if you want. For some reason, the movie Minority Report came to mind, even though I’ve never seen it.

Anyway, here’s one comment. Please tell me what you think, if you will:

This guy’s sick for sure. But he’s sick because he killed 30+ people. He’s not sick because he wrote weird plays.

As a writer, I find it offensive that so many people say this kid should have been turned into counselors, authorities, school officials, etc. because of something he wrote. Do we really want a society where we judge the content of someone’s character based on a creative piece he or she wrote? If your answer is yes, then think of all the books we would have to burn. Think of the great works of the past that we would never read. Forget about Shakespeare’s “Hamlet,” “Macbeth,” or almost anything else by Shakespeare. Forget about Henry James’ “Turn of the Screw.” We couldn’t read “Fahrenheit 451” even though we’d be living in a society sort of like the society in “Fahrenheit 451.” And Stephen King? Are you kidding? He’s as sick as this guy, if we’re judging people based on creative works. The school officials are not to blame. The students are not to blame. The local law enforcement officials are not to blame. This could have happened anywhere, on any campus, in any dorm. That’s what makes it so tragic.

I was intrigued, however, how the local media lucked into “the local angle” as poet Nikki Giovanni, who I used to read 20 years ago, taught Cho a couple years ago, but booted him out of class. She spoke at an already scheduled lecture at the University at Albany on Thursday.
ROG

1st and 16th Amendments QUESTIONS


1. There’s been a lot of discussion about the rules of engagement on blogs and whether removing inappropriate comments is censorship. Initially, I think, the rules of engagement should be common decency, and if someone puts something inappropriate on the comments on this blog – and I alone get to decide what that is – then I will. But then , I came across a ning called Stop Cyberbullying, and I recognize cyberbullying can be disruptive in the victims’ lives. So I thought, maybe there SHOULD be some sort of rules of engagement. It may be like the speed limit, where many/most people drive over it, but maybe it’ll keep some people from doing 70 in a 35 m.p.h. zone.
So, do we need rules of engagement in cyberspace? What would it look like? And who gets to enforce them?

2. Paying taxes this weekend. Again. I suppose we could take fewer deductions, but then the government would have my money longer. I’m not always thrilled with the use. I can support a national defense, but not so much lucrative contracts to the Betchtels of the work that take the money and do shoddy or no work. I’m glad my taxes pay for schools, libraries (well, yeah), feeding the poor, clothing the hungry. Not so keen on the government executing people in my name.
So, if one could pick and choose: what taxes would you gladly pay, and which ones make you pause?
(Picture from Narconews.com.)
**
And while I’m in the question mode, a couple speculative modes about TV:
1. If Fred D. Thompson actually runs for President, will the networks that carry his various Law & Order shows have to broadcast only those episodes in which he does not appear? Otherwise, won’t his political opponents make a claim for equal time?

2. On last week’s Boston Legal, a very pregnant Denise (Julie Bowen) accepted a wedding proposal from the father of the child, Brad (Mark Valley). But in the preview for the next episode, Shirley (Candice Bergen) seems to suggest that Julie should not marry Brad. Is she saying that this single professional woman go it alone with her baby, a la Murphy Brown (Candice Bergen)?
ROG

Social media & sharing icons powered by UltimatelySocial