this blog is intended to be an online journal. i consider myself a public man and as such, i think it is fitting some part of my views are available to the public. i hope my blog is positive and constructive rather than derisive or political.
i may write about politics or sports or my childhood or what it is like to long to be a citizen of the world.
particularly about the 1:25 mark of this video clip, frank schaeffer, (author of "crazy for god,") makes a great deal of sense by simply calling a spade a spade, (or in this case, a village idiot a village idiot.) schaeffer is painting with a broad brush and generalizing, (or stereotyping,) on fundamentalist christians but the issue that is this fringe group hijacking american politics is beyond out of control.
in our time of political correctness, schaeffer is like a voice crying in the wilderness in telling us to move past these people since they are crazy. i can't agree with him more in a generalized way. after all, who votes for candidates based on one issue and one issue only, abortion? fundamentalist christians. it is their deal breaker and at the same time it is an issue that has been around for a long time and has swung countless elections, in spite of the fact that virtually no significant action has occurred around it in more than a generation.
which group hates the sin but loves the sinner but favors capital punishment? which group supports candidates who make war? which group opposes health care reform which would allow the least among us a basic modicum of care? which group is so frightened by gay people they constantly seek to marginalize members of that group at every turn? so, i have blogged about these things before but suffice it to say, the influence this fringe group has successfully exerted on our society and our political process is just bugging the hell out of me, (no pun intended.)
schaeffer is succinct. when he calls fundamentalist christians a fifth column of insanity, i cannot disagree with him. normally i wouldn't say it but i've just been hoppin' mad about the fact that christians, of all groups, have not come out in favor of helping the needy through health care reform.
at about the 7:36 moment of this video you can hear gwynethpaltrow's introduction of radiohead at the grammies. at the end of her intro, "utterly brilliant."
paltrow's intro:
the extraordinary band about to play for us begins the next song with these beautiful words: "how come i end up where i started? how come i end up where i went wrong?" yet in truth, they have never went wrong. together they've become one of the most influential, adventurous and thoroughly artistic musical groups of all-time. performing '15 step,' from 'in rainbows,' nominated tonight as album of the year, and accompanied by the usctrojan marching band, the utterly brilliant, radiohead.
this gwynethpaltrow impresses me. in addition to her refined speech, she finds just the right balance in introducing the artists of our day. how does one do that without sounding worshipful or snobbish or self-centered or something? well, paltrow figured it out. she lays the praise on thick but she keeps it brief. she allows herself to be seen as a sycophantic schoolgirl for radiohead for a moment when she dubs them one of the most thoroughly artistic musical groups of all-time. she sums with "utterly brilliant," which radiohead simply is, and only adds to her own legend, (through affiliation,) as a classy and accomplished artist in her own right.
mark was in the bath tonight and he was flicking his penis with his forefinger and so i reminded him of something we have been working on, which is not to play with his weenie. his response was to ask me a straightforward question: "this, weenie?"
"yes mark. that weenie," i grunted back as if rehearsing for the stage production of clan of the cave bear.
"what deez," he countered grasping one testicle in each hand as if they were wads of cash?
"uhhhhh," (damn, i thought.) (he's two and he is asking me about his reproductive equipment? wtfa?!) (already.) "those are your bolz," i stammered. i figured if i masked "balls," somehow, i would be giving him a straight answer but playing on his horrible pronunciation skills. (i'm serious. sometimes he sounds like he's one.)
"bahdz?" he asked.
"no. bolz," i answered intoning the sounds as clearly as i could, "buh-ohhhh-llllllllll-zzzzzzz."
"bolz!" mark shot back with a big smile.
he went on to repeat both words over and over for at least three minutes. maybe five.
"the weenie and those bolz," he joyfully exclaimed while flicking the little genitalia around like a gnarled boxer working the speed bag. "those bolz and the weenie."
indeed little man-weenie and bolz. laugh it up because tomorrow those are going to be the new words you are not allowed to say for a season.
i just heard that "senator ted kennedy lost his battle with cancer," four times on msnbc. i take exception to this person on the television news program depicting his last act in life as defeat. can't we be past that?
everybody dies. everyone. so how can death be considered "losing," if it is as natural as birth? it should be verboten to refer to the end of life as a lost battle whether the perceived battle is with cancer or addiction or heart failure or any illness.
life is not a battle. it is a series of struggles with varying degrees of success.
ted kennedy was a human life lesson. he had great ambition that reached as high as the presidency. he had a frail quality in how human he was, which is to say how public and how tragic a figure he was.
he was known to be a drinker, which is probably something that had diminished recently and should also be outside of any consideration of the measure of the man. he lived the role of the public servant for nearly 50 years and without discussion of how healthy a thing that is for a democracy, the tone of his work is admirable. he senator'd quite well.
he probably got drunk, may have been getting a blow job for all we know, then he drove his car off a little bridge with a woman in the car. ted kennedy got out of the car and made it to safety. his friend, mary jo kopechne, did not get free of the car and she died. ted kennedy did not report the accident until nine hours later. he was already in congress and a drunken driving incident resulting in a death was certainly political death for him and he likely realized that. he probably panicked. there were probably a bunch of phone calls from influential family members and friends to those who could help. ted kennedy probably slept it off.
it is horrible and as kennedy's life bears witness to, it is not unforgiveable. it was a mistake. these things happen. they are random. they hurt. they hurt people. she deserved to have him report the crash immediately. she deserved to have him swim down and try to rescue her. (maybe he did try.)
i wonder if maybe he pulled on her and she was dead weight, knocked unconscious maybe by the impact. i wonder if he got his door opened and sensed growing concern over his held breath. i wonder if he kicked into the free water, completely submerged, or if he worked the door open as the car was half-submerged, and felt the car slipping away and pushing into the depth, and climbed around the swinging door and went for air, went for the shore. i wonder if he arrived at the shore and upon realizing he would survive, went back into the water if only half-heartedly, wanting so badly to see his friend paddle to the surface, a nightmare averted. i wonder if he plodded home swaying back and forth along the road in a haze of intoxication and shock or if he screamed and cried out into the frosty night. i wonder if he sat on the shore waiting for her to come out from behind him, from behind a bush or something, whimpering and holding on to hope like a knave at a magic show wanting so much for the magic to be real. i wonder if he called a friend, a wealthy or powerful friend who woul help and who would give advice such as, "nine hours is about as long as you can wait. "go get some sleep. "you got six hours until you get up, take a shower and make the phone call. "your story is you were in shock, you were delirious, and you took a sedative to calm you and you fell asleep, after which you awoke and called." i wonder if he executed a plan the way we would expect it to occur today, (kind of like how dick cheney reacted and controlled the situation when he fired buckshot into his friend while hunting, probably drunk.) i wonder if momentarily or longer, he thought he might get away with telling a story that he was not in the car with kopechne.
i admire wealthy people so much who take on the values of the other class. this is the kennedys. they fought for moral causes and used their wealth to gain influence and to pursue change in the name of virtue. i do not mean to beatify ted kennedy-i merely think it should be agreed that this man made choices which tended to help the lowly, which is in and of itself virtuous.
he should not be vilified for chappaquiddick nor for being a man who drank alcoholic beverages. he should be remembered primarily for what he did, his legislation and his inspiring speeches, his kindness and his example.
wifey watches some of the pop culture tv and i noticed that references to bjork's infamous swan dress are always ridiculed on the e channel or vh1 or such shows. of course. the dress was intellectual and it was easy to construe as being anti-fashion so no wonder the industry vilifies it.
the swan dressed mocked the idea of designer dresses. because there is this paparazzi media for awards shows and people who love them, there is a little industry around shaping public fashion opinion. their authority is self-made and unenforceable, as bjork proved.
instead of a famous designer, bjork's friend made the dress. just think if every person at the academy awards wore something made by a friend, (ideally by someone who knows how to make clothing.) who would the paparazzi cover? would they create public interest stories, (like they do for the olympics,) to accompany the artists as the make their ways into the kodak theatre?
the point is sometimes the famous designers make dresses that are appealing but as taste is subject, it's a crap shoot. moreover, the idea of consensus in matters of fashion is representative of a sheep mentality. so who wants or needs that?
i liked the swan dress. it did not take fashion seriously and it was fun . bjork is cute so of course, she looked cute in the unconventional dress.
i flipped the channel to the ifc this evening and came across'man bites dog,' a belgian film from the early '90s. i remember the night i watched this movie, my apartment teeming with friends and acquaintances all somehow on the make, attending the 2nd or 3rd in a series of weeknight get-togethers called "movie night." in fact, i think 'man bites dog,' killed movie night.
before i go further i should mention the mere sight of the trailer i embedded could make you physically ill. 'man bites dog,' is a dark comedy to say the least. it is done in documentary style as a film crew follows a serial killer around various french locales as he goes about his business, some of which is violently killing any number of unsuspecting victims, and rants constantly on his world view, replete as it is with nuggets of wisdom and advice as only a psychopath can deliver.
BenoîtPoelvoordeis a juggernaut as benoit, the pianist, philosopher, serial killer whose life rages throughout this mockumentary. the heart of the movie however, is in the perspective and perception of the viewer. i think anyone who watches 'man bites dog,' experiences a moment when they imagine themselves in the scene as a member of the camera crew, intent on filming this man and telling an untold if semi-known story, but crossed by the responsibility of acting against an illness disguised as cult of personality. eventually the film goes off the rails and ventures well beyond the ridiculous as the young filmmakers are either killed or become killers and rapists themselves.
on the other hand, it is just another slasher/cult film, only infinitely more clever than those which seasonally grace the screens of american multiplexes. when poelvoorde and directorremybelveauxmade 'man bites dog,' on a nearly non-existent budget as student filmmakers, they may have peaked, which is not meant to be a derogatory remark.
in the end 'man bites dog,' is a remarkably inventive movie that demands to be watched, which is an accomplishment in itself.
noun unselfish concern for the welfare of others; selflessness
Ethicsthe doctrine that the general welfare of society is the proper goal of an individual's actions
a visitor to my blog recently referred to it as altruistic, (or perhaps he said he saw moments or flashes of altruism-my memory belies my age.) the question is; does my blog exhibit an unselfish concern for the welfare of others; selflessness? does it promote a doctrine which considers the general welfare of society as the proper goal of an individual's actions?
i do have something of a belief system. it does not involve any magical creatures or even ancient texts, per se. it is simply a belief in humanity as exhibited through a tendency to act in ways which push forward and positively impact the evolution of mankind. in my thought, individuals who act in such manner are saints or are saintly in those moments when they achieve such action. some of the eastern philosophiesregard right action as noble and i can certainly go along with that.
in a way i think the comment is more about my writing than about the content. i have a unique style of writing, one that is not particularly palatable to most people. i write simply. i try to put forth ideas that are basic. i want to distill things down to love and innocence and building blocks and earth, which is to mean, if all that is sacred comes from truth and truth is discerned by children, then i want my ideas to be discernible to children. i have no interest in pleasing the intellectual. i am only interested in him challenging me.
it was meant to be a compliment, this altruism remark, and i received it as such. still i know that some are bound to view my writing style, (if not in some cases my subject matter,) as somehow sophomoric and off-putting. (i don't like everyone's writing style.)
regardless of any commentary on my writing, i do like the idea of altruism. i want to be altruistic. i want my blog to promote the general welfare of society. i do think society at large, or the human race, is far more important than me. i reject out of hand absurdist and other views that consider life meaningless. and yes, i do think people's decision and everyday choices should be based in a broad way on the welfare of others, which is to mean, the welfare of our kind.
the health care industry is spending $1.4 million per day on defeating health care reform, olbermann tells us in his inimitable style. it is the moment of crystalline message and if this fact does not in and of itself convince you of the need to get big business out of our health care you may not be one of the literally millions of people who have come to prefer olbermann's left-leaning imitation of rush limbaugh, (the difference being olbermann merely stands up for what is right and moral, whereas limbaugh, a man whose career was started by huge seed money from right wing think tanks and donors, who funded it through two years of loss, after which it turned in to the giant edifice of profitable propaganda it has become even if showing cracks today, plays down to virtually all lowest common denominators and bears comparison to smut,) to limbaugh himself.
when olbermann earnestly summons ire and bluster to condemn this industry that spends so freely, he says americans in any region overwhelmingly support health care reform and, "the essential, great levelling agent of a government funded alternative to the unchecked duopoly of profiteering, private insurance corporations." by this rhetoric olbermann has come to be the single most prominent mouthpiece of an entire movement.
no, this cheese and crackers and birkenstock and vino class of americans are devoid of a leader. to their credit, it may be a thoughtful choice on their part not to seek or become leaders who would blur the purity of their message. in any case, the americans of future history who elected obama, who let things get completely out of hand but then retaliated on an out of touch party decimating it in 2006 to near irrelevance, the americans who called for the closure of gitmo, the withdrawal from iraq, the investigations into so many crimes and misdemeanors, the americans who became energized by the bush administration and poured their protestations into the campaigns of obama and hillaryclinton, who stemmed a tide of apathy, self regard and corruption, will be regarded by history as significant and course changing.
no martin luther king stood at the head of this movement. the time was not marked by colorful protests that hooked the media and counterbalanced another war, a previous story of (republican,) corruption. in fact, in as much as this movement began in the idleness of the time when bush came to power and half the nation voted for him twice, in as much as it matured by enduring 12 years of conservative, republican rule in congress, it can be defined by its shortcomings in large part and all that was involved in moving it. still, in the end credit can be assigned.
yes, there were the markos's and the arianna's, the naomiklein's and the michaelmoore's, the ronreagans, thomhartman's and noamchomskys, the krugmans and the marshalls, and so many other voices which guided and propelled this movement but one voice can be heard above all, that of keitholbermann.
olbermann is not the leader of the movement, rather he is just a reporter but as such he is the most listened to, most discussed, most referenced word from this movement. he is in certain ways the conscience of it.
he is difficult to ignore, too. he broughthis showto msnbc, (an obscure network to begin with,) in march of 2003, and by maximizing a powerful format that allowed him to touch on five large stories nightly but then also provide an angle on as many more stories as warranted in the hour-long format, he arced from poor to respectable ratings and a four-year contract extension in 2007.
unlike the raging, screaming disseminaters of republican values such as o'reilly or hannity, olbermann's path was been carved for him by these wolves who would argue against things like health care reform. it works like this; beck, limbaugh, scarbrough and the others fly in the face of overwhelming support for this reform by picking out little areas they think they can make headway in order to sway americans away from supporting what they clearly want. in spite of how much we spend on health care per person in this country and how poorly that ranks compared to many countries that do not even have private systems, they use fear to pull away a segment of would be supporters by suggesting that health care will be rationed or that senior citizens will euthanized. on the face these arguments are bogus and baseless but they work. individuals and small groups are affected and the overwhelming support begins to erode.
big picture arguments that illustrate a broken system get lost for some who see only these terrible possibilities presented by what are essentially the tools of the corporatocracy and the republican think tanks. the unknown of change becomes less palatable than the devil known. while the republicans are good at strategy and have been exceedingly effective at cuckolding working class americans, their positions are so bad it can only work for so long.
enter olbermann. when olbermann arrived, (albeit for a second stint,) it could be said republicans were at their apex. bush was the war president who enjoyed broad support in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. there were voices in the din which could be heard even then declaiming the move to war in a land unrelated to the terrorist attacks or any number of backwards policies but with congress under republican control, everything looked rosy on the conservative front. things were anything but rosy however.
republicans were spending taxpayer's money at unprecedented rates, (andrefusing to account for it.) they manufactured a war against a woefully inadequate enemy. they politicized the presidency. they tortured. they retaliated against political enemies. they covered up.
for their part, many americans recognized these things happening but lacked the power to do much about them. it can be a long time to wait two years just to try to vote someone out of office, (just ask the democrats of connecticut who tried to cut lieberman only to have him run as an independent and beat an outstanding candidate in nedlamont.)
as another example, i live in the district of daviddreier, the elder statesman of house republicans. he presides over a gerrymandered district carved out of the foothills of the sangabriel mountains. never an odder shaped district did one see but in foothills can be found the houses of the wealthy and so, despite neighboring districts represented by the likes of the sanchez sisters and adamschieff, dreier has a leg-lock on his constituents. honestly, i don't even bother to call his office. health care reform? why waste my breath? dreier was so lock-step with bush he probably had one of those nicknames bush handed out so freely. (bandar bush comes to mind.)
in any case, keitholbermann came to prominence by widely expressing the outrage of these otherwise impotent feeling americans who were embarrassed by all america had become.
nightly even those who tune in regularly likely just think olbermann is a newscaster or a pundit, a guy doing a good job and a voice in his time, but they probably are not seeing the historical significance. in fact, olbermann is the thomasnast of his day and the bush administration to include the hangers-on who are boehner and gramm and others, is boss tweed. olbermann is in no way the leader of a movement but he is a chronicler and an agitator on some level and ultimately he will be seen in a favorable light, certainly far more favorable than him who he flatters by imitation nightly.
my son stopped out back the other day, squatted, and poohed in his "big boy pants." right there, in our carport. in broad daylight. i guess he really had to go.
it is kind of heavy. don't you think? potty training. potty training.
i am really parenting now. sometimes i flash forward and imagine mark and me, in the future. he has come to me for money again and i am lecturing him on responsibility, (or something,) and he turns to me and he blurts out something he heard recently in a psychology class to the effect of, "i am this way for a reason dad. perhaps you should not have been so permissive in potty-training me."
mark is doing fine-i think. he ramped up quickly when we focused on urination and he has a good grip on that.
it is hard to know what is right in any number of moments. faith and i sometimes have differences of opinions but usually we bat them back and forth a bit and who feels strongest gets the final lean. and we act and we hope and we work and we cope.
because i don't think of myself as having been hard on my parents i am hoping to have the benefit of karma in such a way mark is not hard on me, (and he turns out all right.) terra, for her part, potty-trained quickly and seems unscathed by the experience.
still, i remember that psych 101 class. i remember freud's conclusions and i understand he has not been proven wrong about anything. the idea that parenting styles play a large role in determining who and how people turn out as adults makes all the sense in the world to me.
what do parents do? what did my parents do? what did your parents do?
do they think about these things as i am? do they tailor their parenting like a man creating a double-breasted jacket by hand or do they live and react daily all the while allowing factors such as moods and time constraints and measures of energy to play on their influence?
that is how i lose control of my master plan. sometimes i am tired and lazy from working and all the rest and instead of engaging with my kids i turn on the noggin channel. their little brains slip softly and smoothly into a lower gear, whirring along with the learning shows noggin presents but still enduring a decrease in synapses all the same. alas, i can read or work or watch a movie or facebook, (yeah, i used facebook as a verb-so what?)
do i feel guilty? at times. a little bit. unlike most guilt this one has a point. it checks me and helps me create more energy and focus for raising my children.
mark runs up to the act of pooping, (if taro gomican use the word then so can i.) like a dragster heating up its wheels by gunning the engine so they spin ahead of the start line and ahead of the race, mark needs about three trips to the potty to actually execute a pooh. he knows he needs to go but then when he gets there he seems to become a little frightened and he changes his mind. i try to coerce him to stay but on that first trip (so far,) always to no avail. he cries and we put his big boy pants back on him and go about whatever may have been happening until some short time later he has to go again.
i told faith i think mark is experiencing a form of postpartum depression in that moment when he actually defecates. it is as if this thing his body has created demands exit and there is something in mark, in all of us, that is tied to our creation. it's not the major part of us. it's an overwhelmed fraction and hence, everyone poops. (right?) and so we all must have passed through this moment in life when we come to grips that this, our basest and most common art, these daily little creations, must be disposed of and discarded summarily. a two-year-old can only assimilate or consider so many facts or aspects of an issue, so perhaps they feel a base sadness in release but after so many times begin to realize they feel relieved too afterwards and soon, letting go becomes normal and they, (we,) never return to our initial misgiving.
faith and i are doing our best. we love terra and mark so much and we are trying to give love and guidance and support and nurturing as best we can. and i am trying to be responsible in thinking about these things. i don't want to just sort of guess and hope for the best.
sara and tommy got married this past weekend and did it in high style.
atop the roof of a hipster hotel in a sleepy beach town overlooking the pacific ocean sara and tommy exchanged vows of love and trust and devotion then hosted a party that baked in the sun above 5-star ensconced tourists, re-adjourned on a campground seaside as some guests hit the surf and others barbecued while still others played the guitar and drank more beers, then moved again slowly and serpentinely back across pch to the shanty, a dive bar for closers of which, this wedding had seven counting the bride and groom.
cue kc and the sunshine band 'cause, "that's the way, unh-huh, unh-huh, i like it!!"
benbernanke is and has been in an especially important position. to have arrived at the prestigious position of chairman of the federal reserve, while initial privilege may have played a role, he had to have displayed an array of great skills in his arena which would include public relations. here, being questioned under oath by vermont senator bernie sanders, bernanke remains remarkably cool considering the facts of the case.
bernanke may have a sense of entitlement regarding not only the united states tax monies given to his agency to distribute to failing banks but also to the secrecy that has surrounded the transactions. however, he almost does not show it at all as he coolly answers questions as if his answers are respectable, honest and fair to the american taxpayers.
there is the one moment when sanders asks bernanke the names of the banks who received the tax monies of american citizens. bernanke has a moment where you can see his frustration. it is just a moment and it goes by fast but it is there, (for just a second.) otherwise this top banker plays his role and acts as if there are perfectly good reasons why the fed need not be accountable, (which of course is absurd.)
i think humans are all the same for the most part. i mean, i think eggs are eggs and sperm are sperm and while we may look different in many ways, we are all just the same and subject to our environments. moreover, i think we are all pretty much exactly where we want to be, (in life,) and i think we broadcast ourselves daily.
with this in mind i have been considering what my appearance says about me. i think my wrinkles say something about me, about my age. the gray hairs and soft middle also give clues, (along with the slow march of my hairline.)
recently i have developed a phobia related to heights. i think it says something about me. it represents a malady. it feels like the first stage of alzheimers, which i also think is a sign-a sign of illness. i mean, isn't adhd just a clinical way of saying short attention span, or victim of marketing? even obesity, i am sure some suffer it because of a real flaw of chromosomes or a physical ailment, but they are the minority and the rest are merely compensating for feelings of inadequacy, (or ignorance.) they do not have the will to live a life of discipline. maybe they eat and do not exercise as a covert means of sneaking away from their abilities or their best selves.
i own a measure of that group, too. my metabolism has changed but i have not chosen the path towards better health and wellness through disciplined exercise and healthy eating. i sit softly on the precipice of obesity. is it laziness? yeah, it is. and ignorance. i am aware and blind at the same time.
i wonder too about people with skin problems or clinical depression or hunchbacks. what about drug or alcohol addictions?
i know some healthy people. of course, even they have areas where they fall short. (all things are shades of gray after all. right?) but relatively speaking, there is a class of people who are fit and look youthful for their age and work hard in their careers and in their lives and who have good social lives and are well balanced in most ways and who do not need idols nor crutches and who practice moderation in all things and who have a healthy sense of humor, live in the moment, plan ahead, practice kindness, accept responsibility, avoid excuses and pursue nobility.
in myself i have come to recognize the capacity to make poor choices and i am familiar with those areas where i, in fact, do still make poor choices, (regularly.) i am always trying to be better all the same.
"a man is only as sick as his secrets."
the people i know who hide things about themselves make me a little sad because i know the adage is true. they hide the pills they take or the jealousy they harbor. they hide the things they say about others. they compartmentalize their lives in order to keep track of things. it seems they think they are better for the lies, too, as if the fooling others more than offsets their own knowledge of their own lies.
in some part i think this is the secret of life. i often refer to it as karma, which stands in for my more complicated theory but in reality it hinges on being honest with oneself.
emerson suggested we all publish ourselves in every way, (every day.) (on a side note, i read through the first half of emerson's complete works about four years ago then had to set it down. i could not allow myself to read it all in a month because i refuse to read books twice and so, because his writing was in many ways profound, i had to interrupt myself and my learning in order to wait a season before finishing it. i plan on getting back to it in another couple of years or so.)
the point of all this rambling is this; when i recognize a personal ill, even if it is by some outward sign of that illness, i try to identify the cause and see if i can make a change. a few years ago i was especially unhappy in my job. i had endured a hard season and just when light should have appeared at the end of a tunnel, it stayed dark. the dissatisfaction forced me to search for the cause of my despair and i realized that i could spend my entire career in the spot i was in and that if i did that, i was going to feel like i had failed in some part by not venturing forth and challenging myself. i imagined rationalizing a long career in the contact center i had already been in for 12 years to my daughter some day when she arrived at adulthood and i thought it would be a hard sell because i would have spent years raising her in such a way as i would have lead her to believe i was capable of so much more than what i would have been had i sat tight in that place and played it safe.
this is not to pat myself on the back, however. sometimes i get it right and other times i fail miserably, like most of us i suppose. i just think it is a good to recognize that i am not hiding anything from myself, (even when i try.) i know everything about me.
have you heard any of these acapella renderings of michaeljackson's songbook? i guess those who post them are just isolating the vocal track.
i heard someone on the radio the other day talking about them so i decided to checka few outmyself. (and again i say this age of new and emerging media is bombastic.)
michaeljackson's voice is amazing. in a way it is nearly a shame he was such a good performer and such a fantastic and innovative dancer. these things took away from the legend of his voice. there is an acapella rendering ofben, from mj's youth when his voice was simply pure, but this vocal track from billie jean, represents mj's adult voice as one of the best ever. listen to the variety therein and the instinctive quality of bouncing around the register and complementing the beat.
i lost a friend this week. bob was 45 and left his family way too early. from the seeking the positive, (or seeking the poignant,) department, a group of guys who regularly play basketball together will be somewhat closer and more involved.
i don't know when was bob's last sunday playing basketball up at the local middle school. i know i had not seen him in what had to be six or eight weeks. i have been playing basketball up at this school with a group of probably 30 regulars of whom about half show up on any given sunday for several years. the age range is about 25-55 and i can think of at least one player on the outside of both those numbers.
so on sunday i was late getting to the court because i got in that trap of thinking maybe this is the time roddick beats federer. when i arrived i warmed up on an adjacent court to where a group was playing three on three. when they finished and adjourned to a patch of shade astride the court, i moved to the main court to continue my pre-game shooting regimen.
as the players trickled back to begin anew, bob started walking away towards his car. "damn," i thought. i miss bob and have not seen him in a while. at the risk of sounding trite, bob was the nicest guy of all the regulars. he was affable, amiable, and easy to get along with though not necessarily easy to know. he mixed his basketball with a light-hearted banter of regular conversation and guy jokes.
bob must have been 6'4" so he was never missed. in my mind he was wearing alight blue t-shirt when he walked away though i do not even know if that is true. maybe i am just painting him in the color of sky because he was a soft touch amidst a bunch of creatures who fart and talk about it and make 10.3 gay jokes per hour and occasionally make a crass reference to some aspect of women's anatomy. (yes, i am guilty of this juvenile behavior, too.)
bob was as cool as light blue though. he came out and typically stayed to the end. he played hard and had fun at the same time. he had guys up to his house in the hills to play poker and attended when it was at someone else's house as well.
so when he reached half court of the other court between the court we played on and the gate out of the playground, i yelled out, "see ya bob!" bob pushed his hand into the sky and yelled back, "see ya," without turning for a peak. i came to discover bob had just told someone in the shade that he was feeling kind of sluggish, as explanation for his premature departure.
the next morning i got to work at 7am and got a phone call from one of my buddies who said bob had passed away after leaving the hoops action on sunday.
"what?" "do you mean he is in a coma?"
no. he's dead.
what?!
bob had gone home and began vomiting, my friend revealed. he had taken a cold shower and vomited some more then told his wife they should go to the hospital. on the way to the hospital bob had stopped breathing.
i later found out they had worked on bob in the emergency room for about 45 minutes. i still have no idea what the killer was.
my friend asked me to call another friend, which i did.
"what?! "are you serious?! "from what," my friend barked in a mix of anger and disbelief? "bob died," he said to his wife. bob's son had just finished the fifth grade, where my friend was his teacher all year and his wife had a group of his peers in the next classroom.
at the end of the day's hoops on sunday, there had been a schism. one group of guys agreed to come out and play on wednesday evening. another guy who could not play on wednesday lobbied for tuesday and seemed to generate some interest. as word went around about bob's demise many of the regular sunday morning hoopsters agreed to show up on tuesday night to play some ball and honor bob.
i think i counted 13 guys who showed up that evening. two guys came in street clothes who could not play but wanted to be there. this group usually just plays basketball and that is it. when the games are over they go their separate ways, back to their families and their jobs. on tuesday night they brought beer. when darkness fell they stayed and cracked open the cold ones. they conjured bob in all his incarnations. they wondered aloud about the future for his family. they invented possibilities for what had smitten bob.
after dark in the deep blues of night these weekend basketball warriors put the jokes and machismo aside. they discussed ideas, from the meaning of life and the meaning of mortality to how the fathers among us just have to, at all costs, work to be active, involved and memorable in the lives of our children.
at 45 and leaving behind his wife, high-school aged daughter and sixth grade son, (among others i am sure,) bob went to his reward way too soon. it is heartbreaking that this tragedy has occurred. it is heartbreaking in our basketball community and to others every day, everywhere, who endure. it is the melancholy of life. it is the south pole of emotion and that which every other feeling is measured and contrasted by. kahlilgibran said joy and pain were opposite sides of the same stone and we could only know the two in equal, (though opposite,) measures, even if we do tend to get them in disproportionate amounts. this is the pain.
bob's death will color our competitive basketball struggles evermore. our appreciation of being able to play with these guys, these salt granules of the earth, will be heightened by this depth we find ourselves mired in today. the amount of joy we gain from the camaraderie and the workout and the routine, the little lessons we learn from the winning and losing, the active friendships that will bloom into fullness, these things have new boundaries now. its like bob's final contribution to our sunday morning basketball ritual.
and this is where i do say something trite because i am a part of all i have known and i think when we break out the ball even this sunday, three hours before bob's memorial service, we'll honor bob by remembering him and by carrying a bit of him with us and by stretching tired limbs and pushing ourselves to play and compete.
i have a friend named gabe who may be my most interesting friend. i don't know that he is in fact the most interesting man in the world, but the guy on the beer commercials could be an impostor.
like most friends he has an array of talents and good qualities. the sum total however, is an interesting person who is good to spend time with. gabe is an artist. he is mexican-american and he could not more thoroughly represent that term. he enjoys all things in life. he appreciates the beauty of a lovely lady. he believes there are times for beer and ganja. gabe gets along well with children and conjures that facet of himself with ease.
i am reading 'notes from the underground,' right now, by dostoyevsky, and i cannot help but think of gabe when i am reading it. dostoyevsky's narrator, though living in a time and place so far from where i live, possesses all the sensibilities of both a modern day bohemian and an avant-garde elitist of some sort. or, gabe, (if you will.)
my life sensibility is one in which i am optimistic. i believe life has meaning and that mankind is always evolving for the best. in fact, when i discarded the religious beliefs that were passed to me by my parents, i adopted a world view that centered on the idea that man is always evolving towards the light, towards goodness, and therefore, all action on the part of man that contributes to that evolution is noble.
like gabe, dostoyevsky's underground man scoffs at such notions. he seems to believe life is meaningless and that the only sensibility it embodies is that of the absurd. for me it might be just as easy to face an absurdist life every day but i choose a path altogether more positive.
in days gone by gabe and i used to spend a great deal of our free time together, (and even some of our not free time as we worked together for a season.) over beers we often debated one another's world view and gabe was especially adept at defending his position. he is an intellectual in the truest sense of the word. not like some guy who went to the best schools and knows all the philosophies or the entire western canon, gabe is a natural who may drop a pearl of wisdom or insight into a conversation but it will not necessarily be easy to detect nor will it in any way be purposeful or self-serving. or, if it is self-serving the end will be for gabe's personal amusement.
i don't speak to gabe often because life is like that. we move and things change and as much as i enjoy gabe's company, i recognize the value in simply cherishing the gabe i know and knew and who i still get together with on occasion. moreover, i am always hopeful of knowing more people like gabe in my future.
the thing i admire though is the fact that gabe is different. he is his own man. he's an original. few dare to truly blaze their own path in life. of all the people i know or have known, way too many are constrained by convention and obligation. while gabe is flawed and it is not to me to identify these flaws, his primary sensibilities are to be true to his nature.
i have said before that gabe has great taste. some might say that i stole any number of my own tastes from gabe but i would not subscribe to that idea. rather it is likely that our tastes are in fact quite similar but he came upon some tastes before i did and so, introduced me to those flavors.
gabe is that character one most remembers from a group of friends. recently i hung out with gabe at his college graduation party and another old friend remarked about how colorful this group of friends had been, highlighting the number of nicknames we had and used.
bear. kool, or kool-kat. pep or pop-star. jizz-bloke. weasel. alfonsine. juice. chunk. magic. almost all of those ridiculous names were handed out by gabe. i suppose he had the gravitas to assign these names and actually have them stick and get used by others.
maybe gabe is just a regular guy or maybe he is a modern superhero, (in a world of short attention spans and bland tastes.) maybe he is out of touch or maybe he is just touched. in any case, it's good to know people like gabe.
A guy named Chris replied to all today on an email sent to some 20 people of a political nature. You see the subject at hand was those so called "tea parties." A few people had expressed some reasonable views in response to a youtubelink of a foolish man dressed up as Thomas Paine and waxing in pained philosophical expressions about how outrageously high taxes are and how truly responsible President Obama is for this state of affairs.
Chris replied to all in a reasonable tone and wrote about how our country, like many of our citizens, was living beyond its means. He conjured Americans subscribing to the premium channels on the TV, maxing out their credit cards, and ultimately giving to charity in spite of this level of spending being beyond their means. Chris is a true believer. He knows the government has been irresponsible and that the federal budget is inflated and must be cut drastically.
Given the nature of the messages average Americans get, from marketing and our schools, from our politicians and media and so on, it is understandable that Chris would believe as he does. There are a million messages out there and the one that portrays taxes as devilish and outlandish is pervasive if not ubiquitous in our society.
What is strange to me however, is the sense of privation I get from Chris’ message. Why does he automatically assume it should be okay for most people to do without? Without the goods purchased on credit, without HBO or Showtime, without the top sense of giving a neighbor money to pay their gas bill... Why?
I have more questions for Chris. If 70% of Americans demand a public health option but our representatives to government are beholden to corporate entities who fund their candidacy and so, refuse to vote as their constituency would dictate, where did the corporations get all that money to give, (to give,) to the politicians?
They get it from Chris, and everyone else. Once the software has been developed and the wires and satellites are in place, how much does it cost to deliver those premium channels daily? What if we nationalized that? Couldn’t we get all of the channels to be free or perhaps like 60 cents annually on our tax bill? That would probably cover the maintenance of all the technology it takes to deliver premium cable to all households in America.
Instead Americans are beyond willing to pay what amounts to exorbitant amounts of money as part and parcel to the sacred recurring revenue model of and for the private companies that have effectually purchased the wires and satellites, (and buildings and infrastructure,) and purport to maintain them.
Americans think they go to Walmart, (for example,) to get a great deal. Meanwhile three Waltons perch amidst the top 10 wealthiest Americans and Walmart invests vast sums of money into our political system. How great a deal are those Walmart products now if the company generates that much surplus capital? Couldn’t the prices be significantly lower?
To date Americans have been prone to accept the mark-up from Walmart and other similar companies but the federal government, despite running some of the most efficient and accountable systems in our society, is given the cold, lower-my-taxes shoulder.
It is laughable to blame President Obama for high taxes. In fact it is thinly veiled partisan politics at best considering the recent history of Republican administrations spending us into deep debt and Democratic administrations acting responsibly by digging us out.
Still, Chris is missing more key points. The American corporations which charge the prohibitive prices Chris alluded to also do not contribute to the tax base in a proportionately fair amount. Rather, American corporations pay amounts far below what is required by the tax code because they prefer to pay large amounts, (though relatively less,) to high-powered tax attorneys who shelter their money in a variety of creative ways. And yet Chris feels undeserving of these amenities?
I called my provider of high speed internet access yesterday to explain and describe in detail the error message I am getting when I try to send an email. I expected the technical support would be able to help me get everything working but on the contrary the person I reached by phone told me I should go to the Microsoft support website to look up the error message. (He could address a problem related to my connection or my IP address but he was not familiar with Microsoft Outlook.) I am going to fire my internet provider this weekend. They provide the connection, which cannot cost them much, for about $35 per month, and yet they provide almost no support. It seems their infrastructure is primarily occupied with billing.
Chris went on in his email to decry those who receive welfare benefits. He said he is a recovered drug addict who eschewed public benefits and quit his addiction through sheer will power. Chris makes no mention of thosein our society who do nothing but rather have money which makes money for them.
I guess if I asked Chris if he thinks it is okay for society to collect an amount, a small amount of taxes to go to those who have addiction problems, I think he would say yes. Rather he is expressing an idea that we give people with these types of problems, problems of choice or pleasure, (we could call them,) too much assistance. This is odd from one who has suffered addiction. I mean what else should he spend his money on? By giving we receive a great feeling that makes our daily walk light. It is a reward. It’s better than a slightly better car.
Chris says nothing of the corporations which charge high prices for all the things he expects people to value, (cell phones and services.) He would prefer to blame the lowly and troubled who make poor choices, which they pay for one way or another, (through karma, health, hook or crook.) Even if it does our essence or spirit good and even if they are sometimes us, Chris looks in another direction Well, you know, maybe he is just expressing that he misses his addiction?
I understand how Chris ends up with the attitudes and opinions he espouses. Opinions are bought in large part. Money has been spent on spin in America. Corporations spend vast amounts of money on grass roots advertising, (as well as more conventional advertising,) again because of the outlandish amounts they charge for their wares, in order to impact the thought processes of Americans. Right wing talk radio, which jumped out to a head start on any liberal version of the same by about 15 years, daily gets the best radio ratings and pounds ideas into people’s brains along the lines of:
*taxes are bad *the government is inept at operating any venture whatsoever *tolerance is bad, or differences should be feared *Clinton is evil because he represents the opposite of family values
That’s just the first four that come to mind, but all four of those are exact opposites of the truth. They are ideas that are sold and bought en masse everyday in America. Funny how a majority of Americans will suggest a majority of Americans are somehow dumb or ignorant and yet, few admit to being in that class.
The notion that modern "teabaggers," are in any way analogous to our founders who revolted against a higher tax rate than their English cousins and also lacked representation is like comparing the Chicago "Black Sox," to the righteous revolution of Fidel Castro in the Cuban Sierra Maestra. These are comic but dangerous partisans compared to a movement of men who lived lives fat with accomplishment and deserve to be admired.
this is clap for the killers, a track from street sweeper social club, which features tom morello and boots riley. it is unfortunate there is nothing to look at above but i wanted you to be able to hear the song so...
i can't help but contrast this record with any of the audioslave records. where audioslave songs had power chords and an arena rock sound, sssc has tom morello's signature innovative guitar so reminiscent of rage against the machine. as much as i like chriscornell, everything he has done since soundgarden has sounded contrived and as if he has been trying to find a certain formula or voice of his own sans his former bandmates.
i bought one of the audioslave records, (as well as cornell's first solo record,) and i enjoyed some of the songs on it. still, for both morello and cornellaudioslave was rather pedestrian.
boots riley, (formerly of the coup,) is gifted as rappers go. he has a style that is distinctly his own and he has the ability to make rhyming seem somehow fresh in an age when rappers have blended together and become largely irrelevant.
street sweeper social club further combines the political roots and ethos of both morello and riley with an accessibility heretofore unseen. here in losangeles, sssc can be played on kroq, power 106, kiisfm, 100.3 the sound, klos, kcrw, pacifica and perhaps star or any of several other softer stations on the dial. this gives the idea of their music being the bombs and machine guns of a new revolution all the more authenticity. the mass appeal sssc is capable of could contribute to the further edification of the youth of today.
things are changing and there are many forces at work in the world contributing to this end. consider street sweeper social club yet another one of those forces.
do you have something you do when you are nervous or uncomfortable? i do. i smile.
no, this is not some device i have learned to handle these uncomfortable situations gracefully. it is simply a nervous response. it has been happening my entire life, too.
once when i had to appear before a judge after being apprehended for failing to appear on a traffic ticket, i smiled as the judge finished speaking to me and a certain look of disgust came over his face. i think he doled out my punishment without regard for my inopportune smile but i also think that for just a moment he wanted to throw the book at me.
once when breaking up with a girlfriend the nervous smile took over my face. she was enraged. her sadness gave way to anger and i stammered trying to explain it was just nerves that forced me to smile like it was christmas morning but that was sort of unbelievable because after all, i had a huge smile on my mug. who wouldn't be pissed?
i understand some people stutter when they are nervous. others sweat, or turn red. some can't talk and others can't stop talking. as for me, i grin.
today i had to counsel an employee of mine. i am quite fond of this employee and think she does a great job and brings real value to my team, but an incident occurred which was fairly minor but needed to be addressed.
i told my employee that this was not yet a disciplinary action but that if something like this ever happened again, it would certainly result in such an action. first her eyes turned red. then she started to sniffle. i explained that i wanted to talk through the events that had led to this meeting so that we could come to agreement on the unacceptability of her action and never have it happen again. she began sobbing, tears rolling down her face like raindrops on a window.
i felt the smile welling up in me. the thought of the message i was working to convey as clearly as possible wavered in my mind, giving way to thoughts of how to stifle this smile. several thoughts raced through my mind in that moment. i heard the chorus of x's 'i must not think bad thoughts,' echoed momentarily. i imagined grim determination as a force of gravity pushing down on the corners of my mouth.
alas, nothing worked and as i focused in on her eyes and the words she spoke through a steady stream of tears, my furled brow relaxed and a smile popped onto my face so that i suddenly felt like jimmy stewart, suddenly awakened from a bad dream, fedora pushed back up over his hairline, smiling a broad, country smile of utter contentment. i was nervous but from looking at me you would have thought i was secretly tickling myself under the arm. it was uncomfortable staying on message despite my employee's obvious state of distress.
after only a moment i regained control of my face and pushed the smile away. i finished the counseling session and all was well that ended well. my employee did not remark on the smile though i saw a visible awareness of it come over her face in that moment. damn i wish i could control my nervous smile but so far, i have not been the best at this.
