Yes We Can

It's a good day. A very good day. We still face lots of enormous challenges as a country (the current recession, the enormous economic divide that preceded the recession, the need for all Americans to have access to health care, the energy crisis and the corresponding ecological crisis) BUT I feel today that the country is ready to face those challenges, to put aside the dog and pony show of the culture wars and work on the needs of the people-- a government FOR THE PEOPLE! What a radical idea.

I'm pretty spent-- physically, emotionally, mentally-- but I wanted to write something today, on this good day, this good day when we, as a country, decided to look towards the future.

peace

Nicholas Kristof writing from Hebron

I was going to refrain from posting more NYT links, but I read this immediately after seeing John Hagee on television preaching about how much God loves the state of Israel. I've always found Evangelical Zionism more than a little strange, but I wonder what causes the blind approval of anything the Israeli state does. Is it ignorance of the social and political realities in the Middle East, or does ideological commitment outweigh the facts? And would that ideology be religious ("God's chosen people") cynically political (condemning Israel's imperialism would indict the US) or some mix of the two? Is it a perverted reaction to the terrors of 20th century antisemitism and the Shoah? I ask because the motivation that lies behind this uncritical support of Israel determines how (and even whether) we can profitably engage with Evangelicals about Israel's human rights record (a damning history that we, as Americans, have funded economically and supported politically for decades). Any thoughts?

Kristof's piece:

The Two Israels

A sample:
"It is here in the Palestinian territories that you see the worst side of Israel: Jewish settlers stealing land from Palestinians (almost one-third of settlement land is actually privately owned by Palestinians); Palestinian women giving birth at checkpoints because Israeli soldiers won’t let them through (four documented cases last year); the diversion of water from Palestinians. (Israelis get almost five times as much water per capita as Palestinians.)

Yet it is also here that you see the very best side of Israel. Israeli human rights groups relentlessly stand up for Palestinians. Israeli women volunteer at checkpoints to help Palestinians through. Israeli courts periodically rule in favor of Palestinians. Israeli scholars have published research that undermines their own nation’s mythologies. Many Israeli journalists have been fair-minded toward Palestinians in a way that Arab journalists have rarely reciprocated.

All told, the most persuasive indictments of Israeli actions come from Israelis themselves. This scrupulous honesty and fairness toward Israel’s historic enemies is a triumph of humanity.

In short, there are many Israels. When American presidential candidates compete this year to be “pro-Israeli,” let’s hope that they clarify that the one they support is not the oppressor that lets settlers steal land and club women but the one that is a paragon of justice, decency, fairness — and peace."

Gitmo

It's strange that such a small place should simultaneously house what is best and what is worst about the US military. It's unfortunate that the "worst" is the side taken by both military and civilian authorities. I'm grateful for individual men and women of integrity that represent the rule of law at the risk of their own careers and even their personal liberty. I anxiously await a time when justice and the rule of law are characteristic of the system and not the exceptions.

From the Times:

"Commander Kuebler (pronounced KEEB-ler) is the latest example of a lawyer in uniform attacking the Pentagon’s legal system.

He is no natural agitator. At 37, he is in some ways deeply conventional. Married to the first girl he ever dated in high school, he is a self-described born-again Christian and conservative who has 'never voted for a Democrat.' Tom Fleener, a former Guantánamo military defense lawyer, described Commander Kuebler, saying, 'Take the average conservative guy in the street and multiply that by a million.'”

NYT interview w/ Obama

From the Times online


I like a lot of the NYT's video features online. Since they don't have commercial breaks, they can do longer interviews (this one is about 17 min.), and they bring some of the detail of print journalism to a video format that often works better than print for interviews (or at least works differently). Actually, it's a lot of the same things I like about the News Hour (and do I ever like the News Hour!).

Maybe this will be the year that evangelical voters take seriously the gospel's injunction to care for the poor and not show favoratism to the rich. Probably not, but I can pretend to hope.

OK. I should get back to working on the syllabus for my summer class. I get a fresh crop of summer freshmen on Monday morning. (Can you imagine your first college instructor being ME?!?)

Peace.

Politics and Food?

Beyond the demonization of a good cup of coffee.

What's for Dinner?

Here's a taste: "In last summer’s polling, the latest available, Mrs. Clinton scored high among voters who also had favorable views of McDonalds, Wal-Mart and Starbucks."

And why don't republicans like her...?

Politics: Too Funny to Resist

By now, most of you have probably seen the Obama YouTube video that was viewed over a million times before Super Tuesday: "Yes We Can."



Now, a new one has surfaced that gives the same sort of treatment to McCain's speeches.



Enjoy.

Politics and Religion

I know there are two topics that friends are not supposed to discuss if they want to remain friends, but, since we talk religion all the time, I figure it's no big risk to bring politics in behind it. Anyways, here is my plea from a late-primary state to those of you who have super-Tuesday primaries.

This should be no surprise: I want to encourage you to vote in the primary for Barack Obama. There are a number reasons based in foreign and domestic policy that make me support Obama, but here is the main reason-- the core reason-- that I support him (have supported him for about a year now) and think that you should also. This text appears at the top of the screen on Barack Obama's website: "I'm asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring about change in Washington... I'm asking you to believe in yours." It is, I know, a little cheesy, but it represents a view of politics and national potential that places the burden of hope-- and thereby earns the right to hope-- on the nation as a whole, on the citizens, on the people, and not on his own shoulders, however capable. He does not claim that he can change the country for us (none of the "stand up for me in the ballot box and I'll stand up for you" tripe); he stands as a voice calling us to live up to our own potential, to listen to our own consciences, to dare to believe in our own ideals. Change in this country, movement towards equality and justice and freedom, will not (cannot) come from the government or the "halls of power"; it must come from the people, our effort, our sacrifices. Barack understands that. He understands the necessity of inspiring the American people to work for justice. He understands that this government of the poeple will only work for the people when it is led by the people.

I know we don't normally talk politics on the blog, but I do feel the urgency of this moment (to paraphrase Dr. King), and for the first time in my life I want to vote for a candidate and not just against their opponent. If you are voting in a Democratic primary, your vote would be well used in support of Barack. I will be voting for him in Texas, but they don't let us vote until mid-March. Even those of you who are Republicans-- I think you should consider crossing over for the primary and voting for a candidate who takes such a sincerely inspiring and sincerely moral position. We all know how rare that is in American politics.

http://www.barackobama.com/

Dmitri's choice

Here is a link to an article on Slate about Vladimir Nabokov's final manuscript... and whether or not his son will burn it according to his father's final wishes.

Dmitri's Choice

A sample:
"Here is your chance to weigh in on one of the most troubling dilemmas in contemporary literary culture. I know I'm hopelessly conflicted about it. It's the question of whether the last unpublished work of Vladimir Nabokov, which is now reposing unread in a Swiss bank vault, should be destroyed—as Nabokov explicitly requested before he died."

Mapping the Political Landscape

Hey, you there! Remember when we used to post to this blog? Share funny stories, argue with Grady and Coye and Ryan about things important and things not so important? Yeah, I miss that.

Just for fun, I filled out the series of questions on electoralcompass, which then plotted my range of responses on a graph to suggest which political candidate I ought to support. No big surprises here. More moderate than Coye, less than Dusty (yes, you are my political landmarks).

Happy 2008.

Obama and the Fam

OK, this is either a commentary on the unhinged nature of our political system, the unbelievable strength of coincidence, or, my favorite option, proof that the Masons really do have a nefarious plot to rule the world. It is, in a word, bizzare.

From the Chicago Sun Times: "Barack Obama is related to both President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney." Yeah, that's right. Related. The brief article continues: "Obama and Bush are 11th cousins" because "they share the same great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandparents -- Samuel Hinckley and Sarah Soole Hinckley of 17th century Massachusetts."

And the Cheney connection? "Obama is related to Cheney through Mareen Duvall, a 17th century immigrant from France. Mareen and Susannah Duvall were Obama's great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandparents and Cheney's great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandparents. That makes Obama and Cheney ninth cousins once removed."

Oh Let Not Time Deceive You

Inflammatory Idea of the Week

Hopefully not too inflammatory.

I decided I'd like to know who, if anyone, you guys find interesting out of the field of presidential candidates and, if anyone looks worth voting for in a way more substatial than "at least they're not...", why you find them interesting. This is, of course, just preliminary thoughts about people we won't be voting for or against for months, but I thought it would be interesting to hear what you guys think. That's how democracy is supposed to work, right? Citizens discussing their leaders in the common marketplace of ideas and all that. And since we already fight about religion, why not add politics to the mix. (It would also be a special treat for me and Andy who otherwise only see Republicans on TV or occasionally in business class when we get on airplanes.) We live in the most powerful country ever; we should be doing this kind of thing.

If you don't have any favorites at the moment, what are the factors that will determine who you vote for (or against). What do you care most about in an administration? (This really kind of sounds like an online dating survey, doesn't it?)

The Importance of State's Rights

You might recall that last year an international group of astronomers concluded that our solar system does not have nine planets as was previously thought, but eight, plus a whole bunch of sub-planetary detrius floating around. This was particularly bad news for the space-object-formerly-known-as-Pluto (SOFKAP), which was reclassified by this body of astronomers as nothing more than a big rock and is no longer considered a planet. My very educated mother just served us nine pizzas, indeed!

For concerned fans of the planet Pluto, it seemed that nothing could be done to save the little fellow from demotion. Science had spoken. All was lost.

Until now. The state of New Mexico, in a courageous assertion of state's rights, has decided to thwart scientific opinion by recognizing Pluto as a planet while SOFKAP is in its jurisdiction. Forget gay marriage-- if the New Mexican legislature has its way, the SOFKAP scandal will become the biggest issue in state's rights for a long time to come. As the Las Cruces Sun-News reports, "Under a measure approved by the House on Tuesday, Pluto will regain its status as a planet as it passes through New Mexico skies. The joint memorial also declared March 13 as "Pluto Planet Day."" That's right, whenever SOFKAP, the little planet that could, finds itself over the New Mexican skies, it can hold its head up high, a planet once again. And I, for one, am glad that New Mexico has taken a position on this issue. When will other states, or even the federal government, stop wasting time with absolutely pointless legislation and get on with the important work of governing? Thanks to New Mexico, planets of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. Bravo!