Today's post will be a short one, mainly because of how ridiculous I find the abundance of presidential candidates on MySpace to be.
Hillary Clinton is sponsoring the website I Can Be President, which claims that we should tell our children that they can be president.
I'll add an addendum: if you're a multi-millionaire who'd sell their soul to lobbyists to get the bid.
Welcome to America.
So poorly photoshopped image aside, I'd like to discuss the state of news in America today. I could probably go to a newsstand (at bookstores, on the street, wherever) and be inundated with news that might interest me. Which celebrity is marrying whom? Who got dumped? What did Don Imus say now? Who on earth is Anna Nicole Smith's baby's daddy? And not to belittle the situtation, but who shot who and where?
However, burried somewhere underneath all of this, perhaps on page four or mentioned in an editorial, is perhaps the most important news story of our time: the Iraq War.
As someone who keeps up with the news daily, and generally attempts to watch a few of the major networks at night, I find it interesting how little Iraq is mentioned or talked about. Aside from the glaring debates about whether we should be there (or the dropping of support for the war from people like Bill O'Reilly), no real news is coming from the arid deserts of former Babylon.
In Congress now is a major battle over the Iraq Funding Bill, and this is splattered on the news, but what about the war itself? It's non-existant.
So, in an attempt to balance this situation, I'd love to point you to things coming from Iraq or specifically about Iraq. Especially the soldiers and marines, their stories, etc. However, this becomes increasingly difficult because of the lack of coverage. Aside from an amazing article I read in Rolling Stone about a year ago (Johnny Depp in Captain Jack regalia gracing the cover), I've been disatisfied with coverage from the media, and that's our only source.
Except for the viral world. Thanks to websites like YouTube or Video Google (owned by the same company, and yet...competitors), the soldiers are able to get their stories out.
Thanks to an article from PBS blogs, you can read and see how these sites are helping our troops: You Tube Offers Soldier's Eye View of Iraq War. It's a slightly dated article, but the resource is still there.
From videos like Lazy Ramadi, a soldier's response to the SNL "Lazy Sunday" skit, to the controversial Haji Girl, to more serious fare, the soldiers and Marines are saying something...and I think it's very important that we start listening.
Due to the overwhelming demands of school work, The Grounded Middle will return on Friday April, 27. A post will follow on Saturday, with a Double Sundaes on Sunday, and then posts Monday and Wednesday of next week.
Sorry for the inconvenience, but regular posting will return after that.
*not necessarily an accurate statement. Jesus may NOT approve of this message, but I can almost guarantee he doesn't approve of a lot of the messages being espoused in his name in this day and age.
So Jesus votes Republican. We all know this. How do we know? We've been told. Jesus votes Republican, and if you're for Jesus, you better vote Republican, too. What's wrong with this picture?
America was founded by Christians. Don't you know? Founded by Christians on Christian principles, so therefore Christianity is obviously the religion of America. Right? What's wrong with this picture?
I've just presented two ideas that are running rampant in today's culture. In recent years (mainly since 9/11 or since Bush) Religion and Politics have become as enmeshed as Meat and Potatoes, or Hamburgers and French Fries (wait...that's meat and potatoes, too....). Americans are turning out in record numbers (*cough* not really) to the polls to vote their religious beliefs into practice. Gay marriage? NO! Abortion? Not on their watch. Bush? A God-send, so send him back to the Oval Office.
Again I ask: What's wrong with this picture?
Now, I'm not saying that Christianity is bad, nor are Christians (myself included) inherently bad people. Nor is Christianity bad for America (The Evangelical movement...another animal altogether). Christians (or at least some Christians) did found this nation, and many of the laws can be drawn back to Christian ideology. But also back to Muslim or Hindu or many other religious ideologies. Or even the Code of Hammurabi, or writings from the Greek Culture (famously polytheistic). To say that America is a Christian nation because our laws bear a striking resemblance to the 10 Commandments, is like saying that my Civic (I do not drive a Honda Civic) is a Ford F-150 because they both run on gasoline.
I may be reaching.
However, it is when the American populace brings Religion to the Political table that problems arise. People like Becky Fisher (the woman in the picture above, famously depicted in the documentary Jesus Camp which I highly recommend) are claiming in America today, and teaching our children, that Religion and America/Politics are inseparable. And this, my readers, is wrong.
I'm not going to go into a spiel about "separation of Church and State" because, for all intents and purposes, this is not written in the Constitution. Sure, letters between Thomas Jefferson and other founding fathers mentioned the importance of this separation, but those five words do not appear in the Constitution anywhere.
However: Americans are given the right to form/follow religions of their choosing, and the Constitution mentions that the endorsing/formation of religion by Congress is a no-no. But in America today, Christianity has risen to the forefront of politics and is effecting real change in all branches of our government.
What are the headlines today out of Washington? The banning of partial birth abortion; the resurgence of opposition to Roe vs. Wade; posting of the 10 Commandments in governmental buildings; prayer in public school; etc. (the first two have been discussed recently, the last two: probably on the dockets before too long).
Now, in my personal opinion, abortion (especially partial birth) is wrong, unless in cases where rape or incest is considered, or if the mother's life is in danger. However, my political opinion (amazing that the two can be diverged from one another) it should be a woman's right to choose.
Gay marriage? I personally am not for it, but politically, how does this effect my life? How can we take rights away from people? Is that really what America is all about?
If more Christians were like that, America could, as Bill O'Reilly fears, drift into a secular-progressive mindset, but is that such a bad thing?
Jesus preached a few things in his day, and a large portion of those things were peace, love, happiness, tolerance, etc. et all. He did not preach warfare or hatred or interfering with governments (famously he said: "Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's"). Jesus would not be at the forefront of American Politics if he were around today. He'd be somewhere, with outcasts and sinners, preaching the good word while the "Christians" led a "Culture War" that doesn't exist.
What's wrong with this picture?
I think I should open with a warning: I'm not being derogatory to all people of the Left persuasion (just as in a later post I will not be derogatory to all people of the Right persuasion). Many of my close friends are Liberal, and I myself have some Liberal leanings (hence my position in the middle). However, in recent months it has become obvious that many of the left have gone cuckoo, and I'm sure much of America would agree.
When Rosie O'Donnell sits on The View and claims that America had something to do with 9/11, you know things are going to get ugly. Claiming that something other than the heat brought WTC 7 to the ground, Rosie insinuates that 9/11 wasn't as cut and dry as the American government (or more closely: the Bush Administration) would have us believe.
And she isn't alone. While 9/11 conspiracies have been plaguing the Internet since, well, 9/11, very soon a documentary supposedly proving many of the 9/11 myths, will be released, narrated by none-other-than Charlie Sheen. While he may be starring in the number one comedy on network television, his sideline work as a major proponent behind the, "America did 9/11" ilk has drawn him the ire from Fox News talking heads and MSNBC leftist ideologues alike.
Not to say that leftist ideology breeds these kind of crazies, but these people are obviously from the left. Perhaps it was 8 years under Bush (6 of those under a Republican controlled congress) that drove them all bonkers.
How many licks does it take to get to the insane center of a Liberal? The world may never know.
(hope the humorous edition of Double Sundaes wasn't too much to bear. Poking fun at the Repubs next week will be just as humorous)
When I think about the future, I can't help but to imagine my home (maybe a white picket fence, although that's never really appealed to me), my wife, my kids, my job. I don't find myself often thinking about important things like future wars, or what type of fuel we'll be using, or how much a loaf of bread will cost or, perhaps the most important question: will the future even come?
It's not exactly scientific to think that, at least in my lifetime, the end of the world will come. Sure, there is a lot of hubbub over global warming now, but no one suspects that it will bring about a Day After Tomorrow style of "end" to the human race as we know it (or America at least). Movies like that attempt to show us where we've messed up; they try to teach America (and other gas guzzling rich nations like England or Northern Europe) a lesson. This proverbial shaking of the finger at our SUVs and oil dependency comes with entertainment and famous actors; not with real threat.
However, it is scientific to think that the world as we know it may be much different within our lifetimes, and easily within our children's' lifetimes. With increased threat of vicious storms, rising temperatures, and, eventually, lowered availability of oil, water, land, and food resources, our future planet seems to be in dire straits. And we really need to start bracing for that fall.
I'm not necessarily a subscriber to the "Humans are the sole proprietor of the destruction of our planet" ideology. While I do think that our actions since the Industrial Revolution have had a general effect on the earth's environment, the changes that are taking place now, have happened before. It would be interesting to look at a climate change graph of hundreds of thousands of years (rather than the thousand year graph we presently view when talking about global warming) to see the changes.
At some point in time, our planet was much colder than it is now. This is unquestionable. The ice caps of the north and south extended much further towards the equator, animals like Mammoths existed then, and animals like Dinosaurs were killed out because they couldn't take the cold (theoretically). In the same vein, the earth was also much warmer. At some point in time, the ice caps were much smaller than they are now, if not non-existent. In the US we can see this evidenced through cave formations like the Mammoth in Kentucky, which were formed when that state was under feet of water. Once Kentucky was a swamp, evidencing that water levels were once much higher than they are today.
Today's rising temperature could by the result of human interaction with our environment, or it could just be a sign of the regular climate changes that earth undergoes.
This doesn't, however, change the fact that the differing environment will have an increasingly important effect on the human population. And this is what has become an important cultural and political subject in America today. Al Gore and his fellow producers of An Inconvenient Truth have capitalized on this important issue. Populations in coastal areas are going to be directly effected by rising water levels, and millions of people (in America alone) will be displaced.
The question is: can we do anything to stop it? At some point, I'm not so sure we're the direct cause of this change, but we may be speeding up the time line. Anything we can do to stop our dependency on damaging fossil fuels is a good thing. Right now, we're in a war in Iraq that could, arguably, have been caused by our need for oil. Future wars are going to be fought over the liquid black-gold, unless we cease the need.
So, we can do something good for the environment (theoretically) while also doing something good for peace. Let's wait till water starts wars. Until then, we should all be able to breathe a bit easier.
First: It's amazing how quickly life can lay waste to the best laid plans. So opening apologies for the inconsistent posting the last couple days. I'll attempt to make up for that on Sunday.
And now to the story:
So Iraq is probably not the most popular topic among Americans today. Politically, it's the most explosive issue to hit America in quite a long time, and for many reasons. While it's not quite Vietnam (let us remember that that lasted for 10 years, we were fighting against an organized army, we never really made headway, etc.), it's not far off. We may have won the country, but the peace is appearing to be much more illusive.
In the beginning, I was opposed to Iraq. After the victory in Afghanistan, the shut down of the Taliban, I was of the opinion that we had punished those who harbored the terrorists responsible for 9/11. When the talk about Iraq began, a sick feeling descended down upon me, and I could only shake my head. "it's a bad idea...we have no proof of WMDs" etc.
In the post 9/11 high of pro-America, this was obviously not a popular opinion. I think this would be a great place to mention that many/most of the Democrats who are today bashing the war and the plan for the war, APPROVED the war and the plan for the war four years ago. They voted for us to go into battle, knowing the suggested plan, and yet today they blame all of this failure on the President? Of course, they're doing a good job of deflecting blame, as Iraq is helping their election process, while it is hurting the Republicans.
Today, however, I have to say I'm a supporter of the war effort. I still think it was wrong to go into the conflict in the first place, but the effort, being performed by the soldiers and marines of the US Military, deserves our highest faith and support. No matter how much I disagree with our being in Iraq, I can't effectively blast the war without also condemning the efforts of our Military.
I strongly support our military, and have often considered that track as perhaps my own future.
In that vein, I think it's high time the funding conflict going on in Washington, especially from the Democrats point of view in which they are threatening to cut off funding to the troops, needs to end. No matter how unpopular the war is, the funding to our troops cannot cease.
I think it's highly irresponsible to even play around with the idea of forcing the president to pull out of Iraq by canceling the funding. That sends a message to the troops that their well-being is expendable for cheap political gain. Washington is a battleground, but it's not Iraq. Iraq is real life. Washington is political life. The two are very different.
As the time stamp shows, this post is coming a little late. I've been pouring through the news today in search of something of interest, something that I haven't already discussed, and I came up with zilch. Nada.
So, today I'm introducing my first weekly post..."Theatrical Thursdays." Thanks to the abundance of video on the world wide web, I hope to find one or two interesting videos to share with you, as well as a brief discussion of the content, or of something that was sparked therein.
Today's Video: Bill O'Reilly visits The View (otherwise: Clash of the Titans)
This is a relatively old video, but very interesting, especially considering the amount of vehement hatred that seems to pour from O'Donnell towards O'Reilly and back again.
I'm sure the person who opened the package at NBC that contained the above picture, several video clips, and an 1800 word diatribe must have felt like they won a horrendous lottery. The fact that Cho Seung-Hui was prescient enough to shoot two people, return to his dorm room, send out the package that is now being shown and played on every news station on cable, and then continued on his spree is a testament to exactly how cold blooded he was.
But it's also a testament to something else.
Much like at Columbine, when it was revealed that Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold had recorded many of their actions and plans in the year leading up to the attack, it is evident that Cho was in search of some kind of celebrity that he couldn't get in life.
Perhaps I'm cynical, but it seems to me that celebrity is a great wish for those who perform school shootings. And if this hypothesis is true, it means that the media, and we as everyday Americans, fall into the hands of these crazed lunatics and create from them vicious celebrity.
There isn't a single person in America who doesn't know the name of Cho Seung-Hui. Because of the package he sent NBC, I'm sure there isn't a single person in America who doesn't know his face, or hasn't heard his voice. Fox News, NBC, CBS, CNN--all have made celebrity of this monster.
While I, when speaking with a friend yesterday, jokingly suggested that American News agencies are in a sad state of affairs when it takes something like this to get Anna Nicole Smith's Baby off the news, the type of coverage is no different.
Cho is America's next Don Imus. For weeks to come his face, his words, his actions will dominate the airwaves, and his final wishes will come true. He is no longer a loser...he is the most famous person in America. The most infamous.
And this can only lead to a bad, horrible place. Cho himself, in one of his video clips, referenced the "martyrs" Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris. He idolized them. And some future shooter, years from now, will idolize Cho, and that is a scary thought. I cannot help but to feel somewhat responsible for that future day, because I know who Cho is. I know his name. I know his face, and his words, and his actions.
The celebrity that has been created from this horrendous event, may one day come back to haunt us.
Perhaps it would be better, to leave him faceless, nameless, and buried in the most ignoble of manners.
Perhaps, it would be better, if Cho had asked for celebrity, and we all forgot his name.
I seriously doubt that any blog today is ignoring the terrible events that occured yesterday on Virginia Tech's campus, and I will not ignore them either.
While these events were terrible on their own, they will have a profound effect on the American culture and mindset for years to come (especially among college and high school campuses). However, we, as Americans, cannot allow events such as this to destroy our basic rights, or to force us into lives of fear. If we allow that, then crazy people who seek to do us harm have prevailed.
The first thing to come out of any shooting spree is always the call for stricter gun control laws, or even the throwing out of the second amendment all together. While I think the constitution should remain untouched, that Americans should be left with their right to bear arms for their own protection, I do believe that the gun laws in many states (especially Virginia's) are far too lax. Cho Seung-Hui was able to purchase both of the guns that he used in the attacks legally. And I am unable to come up with a system that would prevent things like this, but the call for better control, registration, something must go up.
When upstanding members of our society are gunned down, the call must go up.
However, guns should not, cannot be removed from law abiding citizen's hands. If that were to occur, only those who were criminal would have guns, and what protection would law abiding citizens have? A crazed person, like Cho Seung-Hui, bent on destruction, could get their hands on weapons, outlawed or not.
The forefathers knew that, and we, as Americans, cannot allow this tragedy to overcome that knowledge.
Our prayers rise for those lost, but the constitution here may be at stake, and we cannot forget that.
Take a moment of silence for prayer or meditation or to send your thoughts out to those who are today discovering that their friends or children or classmates or students will not be coming home.
As a fellow collegiate, I send out my prayers and thoughts and meditations to those students on Virginia Tech's campus who are today dealing with this tragedy.
It is a shame in today’s society that the single most important news story for a week straight is not who Anna Nicole Smith’s baby’s daddy may be, but rather, three words spoken by an aging shock jock suffering from mental diarrhea. Wanting to open my blogging career with an entry about Imus doesn’t exactly seem like a joy, but it’s something I feel should be addressed, because what those three words have spawned in our present culture is frightening to me, and should be frightening to anyone who cares about the liberties of America.
There are a few things about this situation that have angered me over the week, and the first of those was the simple fact that Imus has said hundreds of things worse than this (knappy headed hoes…not exactly as bad as his diatribes against Jews or women, or the Indian tennis double players). Why this phrase, especially considering that it could have very easily have come out of a Dave Chappelle or Carlos Mencia show, or off the airwaves of any rap station in America? Behind this question is another, in which for days after the words were said there wasn’t a major uproar (sure, the Rutgers girls were hurt, and Imus was apologetic), but he surely wasn’t in immediate danger of losing his job. Until Sharpton. Perhaps he wasn’t the first to suggest that this would be a race issue, but he was the one who gave the issue its face. While personally, I find it hard to think that Imus’s remarks towards the Rutgers players is any more racist than what he’s said about other races, or any more sexist than what he’s said about white women or other women, the media immediately latched onto this and the truth is now that Imus has lost his job and his credibility. What Al Sharpton has shown America is not that diatribes against African-Americans (or just three words, not necessarily diatribes) will lose you your job because Imus is not the only one saying these things. Sharpton should be knocking on the doors of every rapper and talking with them about the sexist, racist, and violent lyrics that pour from the same radio that Imus once did. But Sharpton calls this “poetry.”
So, I think there are two major issues that come out of this scandal that are important to look at in depth:
Americans ARE as Dumb as Everyone Says We Are
Or at least at some point this is what corporations, the media, and news would like us to believe. Apparently, we, as Americans, are not able to determine what is good and what is bad. I’m not sure about standard Americans, but generally when I come across a show that messes with my sensibilities (and I have fairly strong sensibilities, so they aren’t often ruffled), I do what comes naturally: I turn the dial or change the channel. Sometimes I find myself watching Fox News because I find them interesting, but at times the preachy musings of Bill O’Reilly force me to go to MSNBC where even then Keith Olbermann’s desire to be the next Edward R. Murrow has me forgetting the news for the day and spending the night with the Discovery Channel. This ability to make decisions is a basic ability of human beings. When I was four I knew that I wanted to play with Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles things and not G.I. Joes (that would come later). So, for the corporations, the media, or the news to perform a witch hunt against Imus is simply a sign that they do not trust us Americans to make a decision for ourselves.
If the thousands of Americans who listened to Don Imus had heard his remarks and then turned him off, it would have reflected in his ratings. If those people continued to turn him off, it probably would have affected his job. This is the consumers right to choose their poisons. Howard Stern, who makes Don Imus appear like a vestigial virgin in contrast, still has a lucrative job, even after saying and doing things much worse. Stern’s response to criticism was simply to say, if you don’t like me turn me off. Much in the same way I sometimes prefer O’Reilly or Olbermann, Americans have the ability to dictate what they prefer, and those preferences are reflected in what is offered. Capitalism mandates that things that are not popularly accepted will not continue. If there isn’t a market for it, it won’t last.
So let us make our own decisions about what we find acceptable or not.
All Men Are Created Equal…but Free Speech is Not
When Don Imus appears on the cover of TIME magazine, it makes the issue a big deal. Perhaps up until that point he hadn’t been a big deal. Sure, dominating newscasts may give the impression of importance, but when your only other competing news story involves Anna Nicole Smith’s baby, I wouldn’t exactly call it a major award. But when TIME recognizes your importance, America pays attention.
And what does the cover of TIME ask? Who Can Say What? (view inset picture above)
And this is a great question. Because of Imus’s words (and remember, there were only three of them), radio broadcasters across America are sitting a little hotter in their chairs for fear of what they may say or do. While this is a good thing, it’s also a terrible thing.
Explanation?
People now realize that what they say carries consequences. In this American culture, it seems that you can get away with saying anything, simply because of free speech. And you can. However, you should be prepared to deal with the consequences of what you say. If nothing else, Imus has taught America responsibility.
However: Imus has also given those who would like to P.C. America (to its free speech grave) a ticket in this situation where now they can teach America responsibility. They, the Al Sharptons and those behind the firing of Imus, now have a pulpit in which they can preach that you are not free to say anything you like.
Sure, don’t get me wrong, I think what Imus said was reprehensible (especially considering that this is the most minor of a long string of racist, sexist remarks). However, Imus said it to an audience who knew what to expect. People listened to Imus daily and knew that shock jocks shock people. In this case: Imus shocked the wrong person. This isn’t grounds for his expulsion from his job or chosen career. Imus sold. What he said sold. And, under the American Constitution, Imus has done nothing wrong. The founding father’s granted everyone rights, one of those was not the right to not be offended.
In a perfect world, Imus would have lost the faith of his listeners, who would then have affected change by silencing him in the best way possible: the volume dial. When Imus’s ratings dropped, the network would have dropped him. Same result, but reached in a democratic and AMERICAN way.
But we do not live in that perfect world. Imus was fired for what he said, sending a message to anyone in the public sphere (be it Rosie O’Donnell on The View or Snoop Dog, or Lisa Lampinelli and her fellow comedians such as Carlos Mencia), that what you say can destroy your life. Rather than letting the American public choose Imus or not, that right of choice, just like Imus’s right to free speech, has been taken away.
In conclusion, I want to make it clear that I think Imus losing his job for this is a just end to what he said. However: the decision was reached in the wrong manner, as I’ve already pointed out. This situation has spawned the next evolution of the P.C. movement, and eventually, all Americans will be touched.
One day, we’ll listen to clean music, clean talk shows, clean television, etc. And this blogger believes that that will be a terrible day. What America and its artists and mouth pieces have to say is not clean, and when we begin to ignore the things we don’t want to hear (i.e. the truth that racism and sexism still exists), then radical and important change will cease. How are Americans to know that racism needs to be addressed unless someone outwardly expresses their racism (as Imus may have done in this case)? The P.C. police would like to homogenize all American speech into perfection, and create nothing but lies about the imperfection that America still is.
But perfect speech is not perfect thought or action.
Maybe one day, when all people do view all other people as equals, and all men and women of any creed and color and religion find themselves on an even and completely homogenized keel, this talk will cease to exist and it will not be a problem. The truth is: what Imus said is only a problem, because the culture behind his words still exists. Imus’s three words are only the tip of an iceberg, where in 90%, the culture, is hidden from our view. Right now, America knows the iceberg is there, and we can smoothly sail around it, in knowledge of the problem, but not skirting the issue. If the P.C. police have their way, that 10% will disappear, but the iceberg, will not.
And it’s a shipwreck waiting to happen.
