Our Rights and What's Right

I apologize for the time I've taken away from blogging. I moved across the country and found a new job and blah blah nobody cares... Anyway, nothing seemed all that important to talk about, but then today a young man made a little visit to a grade school in Connecticut and shot a whole mess of innocent people.

Now I have something to say.

The other day, after Bob Costas was nearly lynched for having the audacity to suggest that guns shouldn't be so easy to get sometimes, I went on Facebook.

I found a discussion between two of my friends. One suggested that guns don't kill people any more than cars do, and that ultimately it's the people doing it, and why don't we take away the cars since they're also deadly... The other friend said something that I wholly agree with in equating cars and guns is a false equivalency, because while cars (or knives or ropes or whatever else) can be used to kill, they ultimately have a different primary purpose, whereas the purpose of a gun can only truly be one thing. To wound, maim, or kill.

He's right, of course, and that's the reason I don't understand the people out there laboring so adamantly to fight against gun control.

I simply don't see how a logical, evolved person would in good conscience hold out this “right” to have guns as this completely impregnable thing that can't ever be questioned.

Oh wait... I should be totally clear.

I like guns. I am not opposed to private gun ownership. I have considering purchasing one of my own on numerous occasions, even recently. I've gone to shooting ranges. I've enjoyed popping off a few rounds targeted at silly paper plates.

I'm not advocating taking guns away from sane people. Guns, themselves, aren't the problem. It is possible to own a gun safely and responsibly.

Still... I think there are some big things to talk about here that go beyond my personal preferences and freedoms. The public good is at stake here.

So what about that good old 2^nd Amendment?

Essentially the amendment itself says that the people have the right to bear arms, and that this right cannot be infringed upon.

Seems pretty cut and dry, but there's also this part about militias. Oh, and this other part where it's about it being a right only when crucial to the security of a free state.

Really, it's not all that clear what it all means. You know what IS clear?

The US Constitution, along with the first 10 amendments were ratified in 1791.

Here are some facts about guns in 1791...

Guns in 1791 WOULD

• ...be made by a gunsmith.
• ...have rudimentary rifling.
• ...be single-shot weapons.
• ...be loaded through the muzzle.
• ...fire by means of a flintlock.
  

Guns in 1791 WOULD NOT

• ...have interchangeable parts. (Popularized in 1798)
• ...be revolvers. (Invented in 1835)
• ...be breachloaded. (Popularized in 1810)
• ...use smokeless powder. (Invented in 1885)
• ...use a percussion cap, necessary for modern cartridged bullets. (Invented in 1842)
• ...load bullets from a clip. (Invented in 1890)
  

Had the 3 guns carried by the shooter in today's violence been the “Arms” our founding fathers had in mind, he'd have killed 3 people at most. That's assuming the guns didn't malfunction. That's assuming he wouldn't have missed otherwise. That's assuming he walked in with all 3 guns loaded and ready to fire.

Once those 3 shots were done, he likely would have been subdued by one of the many bystanders while he tried to re-load the muzzles and that would have been that. A horrible tragedy to be sure, but nothing like what transpired today.

My point?

The founding fathers didn't have 9mm automatic handguns in mind when they gave everyone the right to “bear arms”. They weren't governing based on the possibility of a sociopath with a Bushwacker opening fire in a kindergarten class.

So you know.. maybe we don't lean so hard on this 2^nd Amendment? Maybe I'm wrong.

But let's just say I am wrong, and Thomas Jefferson and everybody else would have been totally cool with assault rifles.

Should WE be okay with them?

I know that some guns are cool, and some guns are fun to shoot. I get it, totally. I get that it's fun to go to a gun show and buy a .50 caliber sniper rifle, you know... just to have it.

You know what, though?

Maybe YOUR fun isn't what matters. Or mine. Or anyones. Maybe the safety of the people as a whole is more important than your desire to own a cool gun. It's all just dick measuring, right? The need to own a bigger and badder gun than the person next door.

 

You want to “protect” your family? I'm down with that. I just don't think you need an AK-47 to do it. A simple .38 revolver can do that just fine if a gun is the way you want to do that.

What? You need more than 6 shots to protect your family? What fucking gang did you piss off? If we're being honest here, if you're in a situation where 6 shots isn't enough, maybe you're into some shit a little deeper than you should be. I dunno.

So okay.. lets say that Glock is really necessary for your protection. Do you need 5 of them? You only have 2 hands, and maybe you should consider using one of them to open the back door and run like hell.

That's really what I'm getting at here...

I'm not against guns.

I'm against owning a dozen guns. I'm against the ridiculous loophole that allows people to buy a gun from a gun show without a background check. I'm against people making a big deal about those background checks, because it infringes on your rights to wait a couple of fucking days for your “recreational M16”.

I'm sad that you need to take classes before they give you a license to cut hair, sell real estate, drive a car, ride a scooter, and bartend, but you don't need to take a gun safety class before you can buy one.

A lot of people are going to blame a lot of things for this shooting, and you know, we'll probably never know whether the guy got a little too bored killing digital people in a video game, or if he was listening to too much metal, or any of the other bullshit things that are always blamed. One thing we do know? If he didn't have easy access to guns, those people would still be alive.

I think it's time to look at ourselves. Just because we may have the right to bear arms, does that mean we should bear like... all of them at once?

I'm sure there are people who will argue that the government shouldn't have this kind of say over what we do. That tightening up on gun control will simply start the ball rolling and give the feds the foothold they need to start taking away other rights.

It's a risk I'm willing to take to prevent another day like today.

It's About People

I had a thought earlier that went a little something like this:

“Muchacho… It’s been a while since you riled folks on your blog. Why not tackle the subject of gay marriage?”

I guess I may as well start with the crux of it, right?

I am unequivocally in favor of gay marriage. I am also straight.

I’ve been thinking about this topic a lot in the past week or so, because first the state of North Carolina banned gay marriage, and then President Obama spoke out in support of it. Here’s what he said:

"I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors, when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together; when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that 'don't ask, don't tell' is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I've just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married.”
Really, I think this is beautifully said. I had someone say to me on Facebook that President Obama would say anything for votes, and you know… maybe that’s true, but I also think that he could find better quotes to work toward that goal. Far more people would be swayed by him coming out in support of looser gun laws, or by him stating that he’s “pro life”, or by him.. you know… turning white. (Should I delete? Naaahhhh). I’m not sure that being an advocate for gay rights has ever really been a swing issue. Overwhelmingly, the people who are FOR gay rights are already going to be voting for him. It’s actually conceivable that he LOST votes from the conservative, Christian African Americans.

All that is fine, but you know… for the life of me, I’ll never understand why people are so adamantly against Gay marriage. Or why they care. Or why people are so threatened by the very idea of it. So much that republicans made it a ballot issue in every swing state in 2004.. You see, they knew that the best way to get people to come out to vote was to cater to their most basic bigotry, and you know.. while they were there they may as well vote for the Republican.

I do try to understand. I try very hard.

Most people saying they’re against it say that it’s a religious thing. Or they’ll say that it “destroys the institute of marriage” or that “legalizing gay marriage would open the door to other deviant behavior (such as bestiality and polygamy).” or that “allowing gay people to get married will encourage people to be gay” or that “the bible condemns homosexuality” or that… well, that’s enough for now.. Let’s tackle them, yes?

“Gay Marriage Destroys the Institute of Marriage”

I actually heard a different variation on that. A guy I worked with long ago once told me that he was against gay marriage because that would make his marriage less special, somehow. That he viewed marriage as a special club, and that if they started letting more people in, it wouldn’t be as exclusive.

I see this as essentially the same argument, at least in spirit. What I’ve always failed to understand is that folks are more than happy to hurl the “wrecks the institution” bomb at just about the drop of a hat when it comes to gay people getting married, but they always seem to conveniently ignore all those straight people who constantly slap the precious institute of marriage right in its face. Like Britney Spears who’s been married twice, (Including once for just a shade over 2 days), and is engaged for a third time. Or Kim Kardashian who was married for a hair under 3 months, and essentially admitted it was a stunt for television. I’m just bringing up famous people because we all know the stories, but there are just as many people who run off and marry a stranger in Las Vegas after a night of heavy drinking, or they get married and divorced within weeks, or you know.. all kinds of real tributes to the institution of marriage.

I can understand why people would prefer those paragons of heterosexual virtue over two committed individuals who truly love each other. Totally makes sense to me.

Rush Limbaugh recently said “"We've arrived at a point where the President of the United States is going to lead a war on traditional marriage."

I can see his point, you know.. Rush is, after all, a huge supporter of traditional marriage. He’s been married four times.

“Legalizing gay marriage would open the door to other deviant behavior such as bestiality.”

To make this argument, you have to make the presumption that homosexuality is a perversion or a deviance on par with bestiality. That is… dumb. I’m sorry, but it is. The biggest difference between these two acts is, or should be obvious. It’s consent. A dog can not choose to have sex with a human. A dog is a creature of instinct. Humans have the free will to choose. That’s, essentially the reason pedophilia is illegal too. A child can’t make that decision. That’s why it’s abuse and not love. Two adult men or two adult women can choose just as easily and logically as one of each.

Secondly, to say that gay marriage is somehow some sort of gateway to perversion is completely baseless. I know gay men and women, and to my knowledge none of them have ever wanted to sleep with their dog, or marry their cat, or say naughty things to their parrot. Gay marriage presents no more a precedent for marrying a dog, than does so-called traditional marriage. It just doesn’t. Do you know why? Because we’re talking about things that aren’t connected. It would be just as logical to say that reading the obituaries every Tuesday will make it rain in Syracuse.

“Allowing gay people to get married will encourage people to be gay.”

That makes perfect sense. In fact, I can’t believe I never thought of it before, but I need to go hang out at the ballpark. I wouldn’t be surprised if I’m throwing a perfect curveball in no time. Don’t worry.. the fact that my knees aren’t any good, and the fact that I haven’t played baseball in 15 years is totally irrelevant. If I hang around some pitchers, I’m sure I’ll end up in the majors soon enough.

“The Bible Condemns Homosexuality”

Well… That’s true. The bible also features:

The Earth is created not once, but twice.
God (the omnipotent being) gets tired
Talking snakes,
Bushes that catch fire, speak, and do not burn.
Rivers turning to blood
Men of insanely old age (Noah was 500 when his sons were born)
Giants roaming the Earth.
People getting turned into salt.

That’s all in the first 2 books.

“Wait Muchacho… Wait wait wait… Those are all stories. Allegorical or metaphorical. They’re not intended to be taken literally. But the LAWS. The LAWS are clear.”

Oh… well that changes everything.

Yes, according to the Book of Leviticus, it is forbidden for a man to lie with another man.

It is also forbidden to eat the fruit from a tree that is younger than 3 years old. It is also forbidden for a man to cut his hair or shave his beard. There’s a passage that says that if you “curse your father or mother “ you should be put to death. There’s a passage that goes into detail about how if a person is a witch or wizard and sends out their spirit that they should be put to death (This particular section is the actual support of the puritan witch trials). Also it says

- Grow two different crops in the same field
- Wear clothes made of different types of fabric
- Have sex with a woman on her period
- If a priest’s daughter is a whore, she should be killed (This also presumes that priests can have children)
- People with deformities or handicaps can’t go to church.
- You can’t eat a beetle, but you CAN eat a locust.
- If a guy has a wet dream while in the army, he has to leave camp until he re-purifies himself.

My favorite- If a guy is getting beaten up, and his wife stops the fight by grabbing the other guy’s balls… you’re supposed to chop her hand off. Seems oddly specific. I wonder if Moses was in need of a bag of frozen peas.

For anyone who says they’re against gay marriage because the bible says it’s against the rules..I would urge please go to their closet and check out how many poly-blends they have hanging on the racks.

Who is the one to determine which rules are valid and which rules are old-fashioned?

This is a fairly straightforward question. If the bible is to be taken literally, as many Christians believe, I wonder why I don’t see more heavily hairy men wandering around. If it’s to be taken and then interpreted, who’s to say whose interpretation is correct?

In the end, we can argue about religion or whatever forever, and because there are a million religions with a million different views, we’ll never get anywhere. I believe what I believe, and you believe what you believe.

The question regarding why it should be YOUR religion that dictates what other people do is a valid one, and one for which you don’t have an answer. A Baptist will say the same thing as a Catholic, and they’ll say the same thing as a Jew. “Because we’re right”. Well… Prove it. There’s no unifying, official faith. People’s religions are as varied as grains of sand, and therefore governing based on religion is impossible.

If only we lived in a country founded on other principles…

Oh wait…

We live in America where there’s a very specific division of religion and government. Despite what many people believe, the USA isn’t a Christian country, at least not governmentally speaking. Some people argue that the Founding Fathers built this country upon Christian values, and they may have personally held certain beliefs, but they were very specific regarding the nature of the USA.

From The Treaty of Tripoli (Ratified in 1797, less than 10 years after the drafting of the Constitution.):

“the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion”.
Thomas Jefferson was the first to overtly discuss separation of church and state when he wrote:

“America shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
There’s also a section where he talks about how religion is between a person and their God, and only them. This is essentially my position regarding prayer in public schools. There’s a great distinction between being against prayer and being against public school mandated prayer. This is a distinction that is often ignored… I’m digressing. (Full disclosure… I had 12 years of Catholic school. 8 of which included multiple daily prayers.)

My point of all of this is that marriage being legal in the United States business isn’t REALLY an issue of religion, or at least it shouldn’t be. There are two kinds of marriages, and the law is only concerned about one.

If the Tofu Muchacha and I went to a Shawnee medicine man and had him “marry us”, the only folks who need to recognize that marriage are Me, The TM, and the Shawnee people. On the other hand, if the TM and I went to the courthouse and had a judge marry us, the only people who need to care are me, the TM, and the Government of the US.

Do you see the distinction?

You see… when people get all upset about gay marriage being legal or not, I don’t understand, because it has absolutely nothing to do with them. It doesn’t have to do with their religion. It doesn’t have to do with the sanctity of their religious marriage. It doesn’t have to do with them in any way. It would be like me telling my neighbor he wasn’t allowed to put up a basketball hoop in his driveway because I hate basketball.

It only has to do with those two people having the same LEGAL rights in the United States as any other 2 people. The United States is a country founded by folks who rebelled against an unjust governing body. People who were not given the same legal rights as their countrymen across the Atlantic. Oddly, I see a lot of connection.

Look… My stance Is this:

If your religion forbids gay marriage, fine. That’s on you. If you think it’s an abomination, fine. That’s also on you.

The laws of the United States are adjustable exactly because our founders had the foresight to know that times change. They knew that the people writing the laws were human, and could not possibly be expected to be exactly just at all times. They created avenues for course correction.

- Married women were not legally permitted to own property under their own names in all states until 1900.
- It wasn’t until 1975 that married women could have credit in their own name.
- Interracial marriage wasn’t allowed in many states until the 1960s. It was illegal in the state of Alabama until the year 2000.

Times change. Laws should correct to become MORE just, not less.

You're Fucking Kidding, Right?

Look. I'm not one to belabor a point. I'll wait til you stop laughing.

Many of you will remember my previous entries on the subject of political bumper stickers generally, and MY own political bumper sticker specifically. I believe that I have made my stance on "Anti" Obama stickers very clear. I also believe that I have made my stance on the harassment of someone solely based on their BUMPER STICKERS very clear. To summarize:
Anti-Obama Stickers = Pointless, sad, (and possibly racist) Sticker Harassment = Pointless, weird, creepy.
Okay... so now that we have that out of the way, let me just say.

You Obama-hating mother fuckers have gone too far.

I have been violated. I have been vandalized. I am really fucking mad.

This evening, the Tofu Muchacha and I went to a nice dinner at our favorite Thai restaurant, and then headed to the grocery store. Both of these took place in what is essentially our extended neighborhood. The place we call home. I mean... I already am feeling all jumbled up about my own home because of the terror of the cats, but that's for another blog altogether.

So anyway, we come out of the grocery store and the TM says "Obama's Gone!"

I wasn't sure what she meant at first, because it's not a thing you can just understand out of context, but then I looked at my car and noted that the notorious Obama/Biden sticker was GONE.

No more Obama Dog. That's what my friend Colette dubbed my car because of the 2 stickers. You can see the 2nd one still in the picture above. The Obama sticker stuck opposite the key hole from the dog sticker.

Now, if you've ever seen or touched a bumper sticker, you'll know that there's no fucking way that thing just fell off. Sticker properties notwithstanding, I've also checked on it relatively regularly ever since I started really thinking about how pissed people seem to get about it. Never once did it even demonstrate a loose corner.

That leads me to only one conclusion. Some mother fucker robbed it. Or at least peeled it off and discarded it.

This is not acceptable.

I'm sorry, but I don't care if my sticker was of a throbbing open sore. I don't care if it was a picture of a murder. Going up to a stranger's car and removing an item is nothing more than theft. This goes back to the whole "leave the stranger alone, because the stranger might be crazier than you" thing. What if I'd come out and seen this person violating my car, and I was all... "You know... I was planning on bludgeoning someone at the Walmart later, but whatever... they'll do."

Or maybe more realistically, what if I just called the cops. What you've done is illegal! You've vandalized my car. You've damaged my property.

You've also made whatever point you feel like you're making, but it has had the absolute opposite effect of your intent. While I'm unlikely to be swayed toward your ridiculous, close-minded, tea-party nonsense anyway, now I not only completely disagree with that self-same close-minded, ridiculous, tea-party nonsense, but... I also want to add "irrational and a whole lot creepy".

What the fuck is wrong with people?

I don't like Sarah Palin, but I don't go scrawling "idiot" on all the SARAH! stickers no matter how much I want to. I might call her an idioton my blog, but that's just a thing people say on their blogs. I have no real support for that (aside from the idiocy), but the point is... it's my blog. I can say that. I can say anything I want. But I can't say it ON someone elses' personal property.

Am I weird to feel like I want to go the opposite way now? I was totally down with just having my quiet little Obama sticker (a replacement has been ordered already, so SUCK IT!).

But now... I dunno. I think I want to really make a statement. Here are the stickers I'm considering:









See? Now those are making a statement. Funny as hell, and clearly taking a position. You can't come back from any of these. You are clearly who you are. All I had was a simple "OBAMA/BIDEN" sticker. Not now.

I'm taking suggestions. The best Liberal bumper sticker goes on my car. Right next to my replacement Obama /Biden sticker.

Flabbergasted

Okay, so back in January, I wrote this blog where I talk at length about the sad, sad people who have to have negative political bumper stickers.

I then received a lengthy, and virulent response (to which I responded.)

Little did I know that the depth of the bumper sticker insanity had barely been marked at all.

This afternoon, I was on my way to pick up the Tofu Muchacha from work, and I was driving through downtown Cincinnati. Cincinnati isn't known as being the most tolerant place on Earth. It's a city known recently for the racism of their sports team owners and race riots.

So anyway, I'm driving, and I stop downtown at a red light. A car pulls up next to me, and honks their horn. I look over, and the windows are tinted, so I can't see the driver. They honk again, and I roll down my window.

The next part is a little bit of a blur.

It happened in regular speed, but you know sometimes something is so surprising that your brain can't give it the proper context quickly enough?

So this dude is leaning over toward me (he's on my driver's side, but he's like.. leaning into his passenger's seat). And I expect him to say something like "Your back tire is low" or "Do you know which way is Plum Street?", but no...

"HEY! HOW'S OBAMA TREATING YOU????"

It takes me a second to even register what in the hell he's talking about, but I realize he's seen my "Obama/Biden" sticker on the back of my car.

So I sort of stammer for a second, (as an ode to Colin Firth's Oscar win), and then I say:

"UM... I.., uh... have no complaints?"

He cuts me off toward the end by shouting:

"JACKASSSSSS!!!"

And then he rolls up his window. I admit to flipping him the bird, but I don't even know if he saw me. It was a fucking drive-by heckling.

About a sticker on a stranger's car.

I mean... aren't there a lot of issues with this? Does anyone else think that this sort of stinks of a lack common sense? Would you randomly shout angry things at a person you've never met? What if I had a gun on my passenger seat, and I'd just been all "Okay.... That's one fewer bullet for the spree I was planning, but what the heck!"? Is that a risk someone should be willing to take to shout a couple of angry curses about the alleged political views of a person?

What if I was just borrowing my sister's car? What if I bought it used and just hadn't had time to cover that sticker with my "Buck Ofama" sticker? What if I sported the sticker ironically? (none of the above, by the way.. I really did vote for Obama, and I would again.)

Kind of difficult to have any sort of meaningful exchange with a person when they're shouting from a neighboring car.

My point is...

Who's he convincing, exactly?

Is being menacing (and barely articulate) supposed to talk some sense into me?

I dunno.... Just some thoughts.

Let's Blame Someone!

You know what's really starting to piss me off?

All those bumper stickers crapping on the Obama presidency.

"Don't Blame Me. I Voted for McCain"
"Obama Bin Laden"
"OneBigAssMistakeAmerica"

How 'bout fuck you?

Listen... I'm no apologist. I know there are issues with the country. I know that Obama is fallible. Everyone is fallible. I know that this blog will come across as one big "liberal, commie rant" or whatever, but that's not it at all.

I also know that the problems with America are bigger than one person, one administration, one party, or even one two-term silly redneck. As much as I disliked the very presence of Gee-Dub, I never was short-sighted enough to assign all the blame for anything to him.

Here's what I don't like. Here's what makes me feel icky... It just seemed a little too quick to be actually, you know... thought-out. The "Anti" sentiment that pervades. I think I saw my first "Don't Blame Me... " sticker 2 weeks after the inauguration. Amazing. I'd love to know exactly what Obama did one way or the other after just 2 fucking weeks. Nothing. He was still learning the routes to effing oval office from his bedroom at that point. The system is basically designed to prevent quick decisions and quick actions.

I think it's pretty safe to say that anything that actually makes it through to becoming actual policy/law in the first two years of any administration is more attributable to the previous one.

Let's take the whole... "Obama is a reckless spender who has ruined America's economy" thing. Seems to me that in the year 2000, America's economy was as strong as it ever was in history. Yes? Yes. By October of 2008 our economy was facing collapse. Yes? Yes. There were days and days of drops in the stock market that each were bigger than the Black Monday collapse of 1929. Then on October 3, 2008, president Bush signs the SEVEN HUNDRED BILLION DOLLAR Bailout that was approved by a largely Republican congress. I'm not saying it was right or wrong, but it certainly wasn't Obama being economically irresponsible. But don't blame those people who voted for McCain. Goodness no.

I know the war isn't Obama's fault. I mean shit...he was in the fucking Illinois STATE Senate when we got involved, but it's amazing.... If you're against the war, it's Obama's fault because they're still there. If you're FOR the war, it's Obama's fault for being too much of a pussy and pulling out. (I wonder what pervs will happen upon my blog after Google mistakenly leads them here after that last sentence.... Hi Reverend Haggard!! Hi Bill O'Reilly!! Hi Larry Craig!!")

Anyway... I'm honestly not particularly political, so I don't care much for who's fault whatever is. After all that, it's not my point.

My point is that these fuckers are so obviously racist, it makes me sad. The stickers and the blame and the allegations of "socialism" or being "un-American" is just a thinly veiled excuse for all those Dixie-Flag-Waving, Back-of-the-bus pointing, pathetically obvious rednecks to be the racist fuckers they are all out in the open. It's scary.

These idiots, who are against a national health care system even though half of them can't afford heathcare themselves, who say it's un-American to repeal "Don't ask don't tell" yet can't be axed to provide a single reason why being gay matters while you're shooting a gun...

Since the protestation makes no sense, the only conclusion I can make is that they were determined to be against him no matter what, which is... dare I say it, the most un-American thing of all. The notion that a person is automatically wrong because they may represent a viewpoint that they are told doesn't mesh with what their ideals should be... it's so fucking convoluted and dumb, and monarchist. That's right. I said MONARCHIST.

I was once told, by a person I wholly respect otherwise, that President Jimmy Carter "hates America" because he had the audacity to state the opinion that a majority of the anti-Obama sentiment was at least partially racially motivated. I mean... Jimmy Carter. Nobel Peace Prize winning Jimmy Carter... Hates America. WHAT? Of course, he's right. Carter, I mean. To many people made the decision before there was a single fact supporting either side for it to be legitimate, informed opinion. Another guy I know put up a sign in his front yard the day after the election, saying something to the effect of "R.I.P. America". No possible way that Obama could do a good job. Not according to Sign Guy. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact it's a black guy with a Muslim name. No, no... Not at all.

I mean, me personally, even if I didn't like the guy, I think the election of Barack Obama was one of the greatest moments of evident growth in our nation's history. I know it's sort of like the back-side of Godwin's Law by bringing up Martin Luther King while discussing racism, but seriously... If you can't see progress in the fact that 40 years after the iconic figure of the civil rights movement was murdered in an act of overt racism a black man was elected PRESIDENT.. I mean... COME ON PEOPLE. How can that be Un-American? We should all be embarrassed that South Africa beat us to it.

But sure.. Let's post some fucking bumper stickers.

Hey while we're at it.. lets vote in a whole new congress based on the propaganda that Obama has too much power, or the Democrats have too much power, or they're just misguided and evil or whatever. The best way to get anything done either way is to swap out a full third of the decision making body in one swoop.

It's the biggest flaw in what sure seems to be a broken system. There's no chance at continuity.

Maybe one day, long ago, the American public as a whole was more shielded from the process and the folks elected to lead could lead. Now, there's such a divide, and there are so many loud voices convincing people of whatever is in the interests of the actors spouting whatever makes them rich, that we end up with so much turnover nothing can ever truly be accomplished. We live in a country of perpetual agitation.

ASIDE:
Is it worse if Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly believe what they say or don't?

The funniest thing to me is that I can't think of a single thing that any iteration of our government has done that has affected me on any level aside from a financial one. And is that what it all comes down to? Obama might raise taxes so we hate him? Well, that and the fact that he's black?

How shallow are we the people that money and race are the only determiners of a leader's worth?

I haven't even started in on the whole fucking travesty in Arizona, which is sad on a whole other level. That gets into the power of the media, the vapidness of Sarah Fucking Palin, the willful shift and or deflection of blame. It's just gross.

That whole thing is beyond fucked up. I could write a whole post about it, but you know... I won't. I'll be back to obsessing over sports and Disney and movies tomorrow. I'll just leave you with the words of Sheriff Clarence Dupnik who probably will be criticized for them. Oh wait... he already has been. I'm shocked.

"When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government. The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous."

Well done Cincinnati. Well done.

Once again, my hometown city of Cincinnati has done me proud. Cincinnati... home of race riots, and Mapplethorpe protests, and possibly racially motivated killings by police. The place so out-of-touch Mark Twain once quipped that if the world ended, he wanted to be in Cincinnati, because it wouldn't happen here for another 20 years.

Once again I'm super pumped to be from such an enlightened place.

The world renowned political artist Shepard Fairey is here in town. There will be a retrospective of his 20 years of work at the Cincinnati Contemporary Arts Center, and as a part of his show, he's been installing some of his political murals around the Cincinnati area.

This past weekend I had the opportunity to see one of his more controversial pieces up close and personal when he installed it directly across the street from the theater where I was directing A Piece of My Heart...




So there it is.

Clearly Shepard Fairey is a flaming racist. Right? Clearly by posting this mural containing the word "OBEY" in a predominantly African American neighborhood, he's trying to subjugate black people. Right?

Apparently there were a number of people who would agree with the above statements, because almost immediately after the mural was completed on May 20th, there were loads of people in the neighborhood threatening to deface it or paint over it, because they feel discriminated against somehow.

Oh... then there were the white people who apparently walked by and assumed the artist was black. They threatened to paint over it too. Because they didn't want to be the victims of reverse racism.

(For the record, Shepard Fairey is a 40 year old white man.)

Now... I spent a pretty good amount of time taking in this particular mural... I've searched and searched for a single anti-black image. I've searched for a single anti-WHITE image.

What I did see was images of peace (note the guns with the flowers). I saw commentary on the power of propaganda. I saw an ironic statement about listening to the masses instead of trusting our own eyes.

I really dug it.

Sadly, it's no more. The above image is what you'd see today if you drove past. Some fucking ignorant idiot painted over it last night. They don't know who did it. It was just as easily a white person as a black person. Just as easily a man as a woman. One thing we do know is that the person who did it is far more close-minded and foolish than the artist they believe they are silencing.

When the Tofu Muchacha told me about the painting-over, I found myself profoundly sad. It's so typical of this fucking town to knee jerk to this level. Then I come to find out that it's the SECOND of his murals to be defaced in the area in the past 2 weeks. I mean... GOD DAMNIT.

Please people... before you make fools of yourself by "protecting" the populace from this supposed racism, maybe you should look up the statements of the artist.... I dunno... crazy.

Oh... it should also be mentioned that aside from this horribly racist, anti-black mural, Shepard Fairey is also the artist responsible for the Barack Obama "HOPE" posted. What a bigot! Am I right?

Anyway, I don't want to go on and on. I just want to congratulate my city for embarrassing itself... yet again.

Kudos Cincinnati.


PS... I haven't even gone into the whole part about how the defacing of the mural is, in itself, a crime... you know... since the mural was on private property, and it itself has value due to the artist being a hugely famous dude. So... not only did the idiots miss the point. Not only did they kill art. They also will probably go to jail for it. Good protesting folks!

Obligatory Politics

Hey Folks-

I feel, generally, that it's important for me to keep super divisive opinions out of this particular blog. That said...

Today I'm proud to be an American for one of the first times since the Clinton administration. Yes... I had an overwhelming sense of patriotism around 9/11. Yes... I had my "Support the Troops" magnet on my car for several years, and still would if I still had that car. Yes...that's a simple gesture that really doesn't SAY anything.

Today I feel that surge of "love of country" again. Why? For the first time in my eight bleak years I feel like something important happened politically that may actually show there's hope for a turn-around. I was emotional watching the "roll call" of delegates from each state. I was emotional when I saw a woman openly weeping for joy on national television, calling today "Christmas". I was emotional when I listened to John Lewis (seriously...read that link), a congressman from Georgia, who marched with Martin Luther King. The man said something that struck me more than anything any politician has ever said. His exact words are important enough that I found a transcript....

"Well, I’ve been knowing the Clintons for a long time. President Clinton has been like a brother. And I’ve known Hillary Clinton has been my friend for many, many years. And they’re still friends of mine. And I supported them in the very beginning. And along the way, I saw something happened. I had what we call an executive session with myself. And I said what Barack Obama is doing is akin to the movement of what we were fighting for, struggling for. And I said to myself I want to be on the right side of history. And I made the decision to change and commit to Barack Obama . "

The man realized that he wanted to be on the "right side of history". Coming from a man who has such a sense of history, that means something important.

So yeah... I'm pumped about the official nomination of Barack Obama. I don't know if he'll win, but I know that it says nothing but good things about our country that the Democratic party's candidate for president came down to a choice between a woman and an African-American. I know also, that his ability to stir people, to inspire them is a gift that I've so rarely seen in politics that I want to get up and act for the betterment of the world. The only other person that inspired me was Bill Clinton. (I'm about to watch Clinton's speech from tonight. I DVR'd it.) That dude is still a rock-star. Still the greatest speaker I've ever seen. Still the most charismatic. That said, I think Obama can surpass him.

(Clinton has just had a 5 minute insane ovation. Awesome)

I think Obama will. I'm finally feeling like a turn-around is possible, and that's why today means something to me.