Filed under: politics | Tags: gay marriage, proposition 8, samuel l. jackson
I’ve been lax in commenting on the ridiculousness that is the ballot measure to ban gay marriage in California. They’re in dire needs of funds because both pro- and anti-gay marriage advocates have been contributing to advertising. I’m in awe: Is it really that controversial? The decision to outlaw marriage between two individuals is discriminatory and wrong. In this PSA, Samuel L. Jackson draws upon our troubled nation’s history of legalizing the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII and our past mistakes in banning miscegenation.
Marriage is a right for all Americans–straight or gay. Do your part by contributing, advocating, or simply persuading. And God knows if you live in California, get out and vote No on Proposition 8.
Interesting article about the success of early voting across the country (a non-partisan feature from a decidedly liberal paper like The New York Times). Can’t beat the images of a row of voting machines opposite a room of slot machines in Vegas, or the anecdote about busloads in Cleveland stopping in to a voting place to do their civic duty before rounding out the day with a fried chicken dinner.
The Times’ video feature that accompanies the article interviews a half dozen early voters from Denver, and many voters–both Republicans and Dems–support my own candidate, Barack Obama. Check out the slideshow of early voting booths.
And if you didn’t catch it last night, here’s a link to the half-hour documentary about Obama’s policies that aired last night on pretty much every channel on the dial. I watched it this morning on YouTube, and was struck by its appeal to working-class voters. I’m a cynic at heart, but got a little teary-eyed–yes, I admit it–at several points listening to Obama’s words and intent (not to mention a little bit of manipulation by the soundtrack, but that’s okay).
When you’re barraged by the campaign slogan of “Change We Can Believe In” a dozen times each day, even staunch supporters like me think the words become a little lifeless. But listening to Obama himself, addressing huge crowds on the campaign trail (here he is yesterday in Raleigh, North Carolina), his sincerity manages to bring the message of “change” and “hope” back to life.
Just got sent this viral video this morning with a headline that read “Obama’s Loss Traced To Ricco Siasoco.”
Needless to say, I was shocked. Then curious. And ultimately, laughing out loud. Move On put together the personalized video, and I’ve gotta say that it’s a great use of technology. The shock of the headline–and the accompanying visuals–is a real doozy. The goatherder from “one of the most remote locations” is absolutely hilarious. View it and then pass it along.
Goes to show you that the Internet really is a powerful medium, especially for citizen journalists. Well done, Move On, well done.
Filed under: racism
I hate when I discover something too late to use it in the classroom. I was teaching Barbara Jane Reyes’ poem “Anthropologic” a few weeks ago, and my first-year students had such a violent, non-curious reaction to Reyes’ anti-colonialism that I felt I must have been doing a poor job of relating the little-known history of U.S. imperialism. I plan to revisit this topic in the coming weeks, as we begin to discuss Reagan’s failed Presidency in Angels in America. My teaching philosophy of late is evolving to include a strong emphasis on the connection between literature and politics.
“Empire or Humanity?”: This animated video of Howard Zinn on American Empire, only about eight minutes long, is paced well and visually interesting (and narrated with a dry though passionate narration by Viggo Mortensen). I also like the approach of the narrative through the personal history of Zinn himself, and his realization that his participation in U.S. bombing during the WWII–ostensibly for the U.S. war against Hitler’s fascism–was naive. His awakening to the idea of American imperialism is both personal and analytical.
“My motive was to help defeat fascism,” Zinn reflects upon his time as a soldier, “and to create a more decent world, free of agression, militarism, and racism.” But were his thoughts on the ground matched by the design of the architects in Washington? And what’s changed from our impulses toward American exceptionalism? Are current U.S. policies in Iraq and Afghanistan more of the same?
Zinn writes that little has changed since the great wars of the past: “As George W. Bush said in his second inaugural address, ‘Spreading liberty around the world is the calling of our time.’ The New York Times called this address, ‘Striking for its idealism.’ We can hardly ask for a clearer, more blunt articulation of imperial design.”
Filed under: africa, global justice, politics | Tags: africa, drinking water, ghana, mccain, obama, peace corps, poverty, togo, world
You’ve heard–and like me, probably appalled–by the statistics like this: one billion people survive on less than a dollar a day. When I was travelling in Ghana and Togo this summer, I was amazed at the absence of the most basic necessities: clean drinking water, functional roads, even availability of toilet paper.
I’ve been listening and learning about the candidates’ policies on foreign policy, and so often it focuses solely on economic sanctions, the Middle East, and Russia. These issues deserve their attention and my own understanding of their positions. But how often do we learn about Obama and McCain’s policy on fighting the incredible poverty that plagues the world’s poorest nations?
This is the method my friend JT and his villagers used to obtain drinking water in Togo. Fortunately, for us, the U.S. government--through the Peace Corps--provided a simple water filter in which we added two drops of bleach (yes, bleach) to the river water we drank.
If you care about the health of other nations in addition to our own, take a look at this chart detailing Obama and McCain’s policies on fighting global poverty. It breaks down, in a visual way, the basic differences between the candidate’s positions on helping other nations. As the world’s strongest economy (I know this seems like an oxymoron), we have the responsibility to help other nations.
Obama cites statistics like the cost to get all children into elementary school: one billion dollars. He backs this up with a commitment: “I will invest at least $2 billion in a Global Education Fund.” McCain, however, evades a concrete contribution. He sets down a vague policy (or non-existent policy) that says: “This is why we all should agree that a quality education is the right of every child.”
I don’t want to become didactic or to proselytize. Yet it seems so easy for us as Americans–yes, real Americans–to take on the challenge of eradicating these horrible sanitary, educational, and health conditions. I’m not shy to echo Senator Obama and say it’s good to spread the wealth around.
Filed under: politics | Tags: ayers, fake america, jon stewart, mccain, obama, olberman, olbermann, palin, real america
Keith Olbermann is unrepentant in his political views. Whether you agree with him or not, he supports his bold statements with evidence and reason. About the divisiveness of McCain’s campaign: the McCain staff is “taking a crack in a dam” and “burrowing into it.”
This video of McCain-Palin supporters at a rally in Strongstown, Ohio, highlights the “mob rule” that Olbermann refers to.
Okay, it might be argued that Senator McCain and Governor Palin can not be held responsible for the erroneous, small-minded views of their supporters. But they are certainly capable–and responsible–for their own spokespeople, television ads, and stump speeches.
Examples of the divisive McCain campaign:
- Nancy Pfotenhauer, a McCain Senior Policy Advisor: Let’s discuss the “real Virginia”–not the fake Northern Virginia in which those darn democrats from D.C. reside. The “real Virginia” is “more Southern in nature.”
- McCain TV ad: Obama is “too risky for America.” Message: Obama is a terrorist and hides the truth, because of his relationship with Bill Ayers.
- Gov. Sarah Palin herself speaks about the “real America”: It’s wonderful to visit “the small little towns..the wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America” who are “very patriotic, very pro America areas”
As Olbermann puts it, the McCain campaign has created an “us and them, the pro and the anti” areas and citizens of the United States of America. Personally, I hope that I’m not reduced to choosing an “either-or” model of national identity.
Do you belong to the real or fake America?
The inimitable Jon Stewart did a great mockumentary about the real and the fake America.
I love the fact that Barack Obama is savvy enough–and light-hearted enough–to let his hair down. In this clip from the Ellen show, two of my favorite public figures, Barack Obama and Ellen Degeneres, banter about Obama’s dance moves.
Still, even in this fluff piece for daytime TV, Obama manages to subtly remind his viewers that it’s not all fun and games, after all he’s got a Presidential opponent–as well as the knowledge and ability to negotiate a treaty between the host and her guest crush (watch the clip for the object of Ellen’s desire).
So, who do you think has the better moves: Barack Obama or his wife, Michelle?
Filed under: boston, pop culture | Tags: boston, bostonia, tricycle, woot woot
How do you know you’re truly a Bostonian? The ability to relate the story of the Curse of the Bambino (and the way it was reversed two years ago) is one way. Navigating illogical, one-way streets or citing the best restaurants and bars in Dorchester or Jamaica Plain are also tell-tale signs of Bostonhood.
But the true mark of a Bostonian? You know about the Woot Woot Guy.
When I first moved here nearly 20 years ago, I remember walking down the sidewalk on Comm Ave with friends. We were among the many loud, immature B.U. kids screaming about how we scammed the T driver by throwing pennies in the machine instead of correct change (remember those clunky dinosaurs?), or headed over to the old Boston Garden to cheer for our alma mater in The Beanpot. But suddenly, out of nowhere, a booming voice calls out in that rhythmic holler so familiar to any true Bostonian.
Woot, woot, woot….
We nearly fell off the sidewalk to avoid an African American man on a large tricycle, his little American flag waving in the breeze. You know who I’m talking about.
I’m of the camp that says he’s yelling “woot, woot, woot…” Later, I thought he was yelling “whoop, whoop, whoop…” Recently, I learned he’s hollering “move, move, move…”
If you were ever curious, his name is Louie. And he’s got a Facebook group for all his loyal fans.
Filed under: film, pop culture | Tags: almodovar, bullfighting, hemingway, matador, ordonez
I’m enthralled by Spanish matadors and the art of bullfighting. There is such beauty to it, such ritual: the ornate, tailored jackets; the repeated, split-second skirmishes with death; our violent, red-eyed vilification of the bulls.
There was a feature story on 60 Minutes tonight about a pair of handsome, bachelor, bullfighter brothers named Francisco and Cayetano Ordonez. I want not to be absolutely riveted by this sport (so many refer to it as an art), in part because of its bare cruelty to animals. I also don’t want to watch as man faces beast without weapon. Come on, you can’t call that flimsy red cape his protection. Insanity? Brutality? It’s like watching a horror movie: my hands are covering my eyes but I’m still peeking through. I do and I don’t want to know.
At its core, I do believe bullfighting is beautiful. Hemingway and Almodovar have both shown this–Papa Hemingway did it in prose in my favorite of his novels, The Sun Also Rises: Almodovar with a dazzling feminist spin in his Oscar-winning Habla con Ella (Talk to Her). Still, both of these artists created fictions. The Ordonez brothers are the real thing.
Be forewarned, the bullfighting clip is not for the faint of heart.
In my literature class, we’ve been talking about cultural norms: preconceptions about drug users and addiction, the purpose of prisons, Western versus non-Western perspectives. Today I’m introducing my students to the Gall Peters map.
Seemingly innocuous, right? No big deal; it’s just another map.
What you probably noticed immediately is that this world is literally upside down. We expect the U.S. and Europe–the Northern hemisphere no less–to occupy the top half of our maps. It’s the way it’s always been; it’s how the world should be.
And another thing, what’s up with the sizing of certain continents, like, um…Africa? How come it’s so, um…large? Like 14 times as large as Greenland?
This map accurately reflects the geography of our world. Gall and Peters were two cartographers concerned with social justice. Though they were from different eras (James Gall came up with the idea in 1855, while Arno Peters translated it to print in 1972), both tried in their own ways to rectify an injustice in mapmaking. Historically, mapmakers have drawn maps to aid seafarers, thus projecting a 3-D model of the Earth–a circular globe–onto a one-dimensional surface of a map. This causes incredible distortion. In only one example, Greenland becomes 14 times the size of Africa. This is scientifically incorrect.
But more importantly, what are the political implications of changing maps? Does literally envisioning our world to posit Western nations on top and third world nations at the bottom translate into our world view?
Can mapmakers make a difference just by adopting a different, more accurate model of the world?
One of my favorite television shows explains it all more succinctly and humorously than me. I love the nerdiness of the cartographers in this video, and also the way that they blow C.J.’s mind.
