Tuesday, December 02, 2008
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Friday, November 28, 2008
The Amazing Richard Williams
In this day and age when a majority of black families are without fathers, we should all take notice when one not only rises from the ashes, but also attains great fame and fortune in the process. There are several families that come to mind-The Jackson Family, headed by Joe Jackson; The Marsalis family, piloted by father Ellis; and the Williams family, led by the incomparable Richard Williams.
What Richard Williams accomplished could quite easily be called impossible. Raising his family in Compton, California, one of the worse ghettos in the nation, Williams dedicated his life to his two daughters Venus and Serena. So many doubted him-yet he continued to train his daughters to be the best tennis players in the world. I have to admit what I know about the man is limited to information I gather from the internet, but my desire is to know so much more. He should be a beacon to all in the black community-both men and women alike. He stood face to face with racism and poverty and managed to never blink. Not only did he survive, but he triumphed where so many have failed, (or never bothered to try).
So much negativity is directed toward black men in this country. A lot of that negativity is adopted by black women and black men, in the attempts to remain the patriarch of their families, catch hell because of it. I know, I've lived it. Whatever her reasons, Oracene trusted Richard and, from what I can see, stood behind him every step of the way. I know how hard it is to see the sun that shines on Wimbledon, the U.S. Open, and Roland Garros from the mean streets of Compton, but Richard saw it and Oracene believed. I'm not saying that it was a walk down easy street for her-I'm just saying she, at some point, believed in his dream. Many men fall prey to non believing women who sabotage their attempts to garner success in whatever field they strive. Again, I've experienced it first hand.
It would seem like the world, both black and white, would embrace a man like Richard Williams as a true American hero. But he still receives the cold shoulder from the media, and I don't hear much about him in the black community either. All we ever focus on is the fruit (e.g. Venus and Serena) and not the tree that produced that fruit. I can understand the white worlds trepidation-Richard wasn't supposed to rise above the systematic poverty that grips the inner-city. He was supposed to succumb to gun violence, drugs, crime, or have his spirit crushed by the constant presence of the suppressive police force that harasses and abuses inner-city black males on a daily basis. He and his daughters were never supposed to take the world stage and dominate a sport that is reserved for the wealthy and elite of this nation. But, as Richard so eloquently put it when Venus defeated Lindsay Davenport at Wimbledon in the year 2000, Straight outta Compton!" and his family never looked back.
What Richard Williams represents is what the world would have to face if the black family had not been so devastated by welfare in the 60's and 70's, the crack epidemic in the 80's and AIDS in the 90's and the present. If so many black fathers hadn't got caught up in the drug game and so many black mothers in the blame game, the world would see an emergence of successful black athletes, politicians, musicians, physicians, scientists, etc. Euro-centric history doesn't teach us about the great black civilizations that existed when Europeans were in their dark ages but men like Richard Williams, Earl Woods (father of golf great Tiger Woods), and James Jordan, Sr. (Michael Jordan's dad), are examples of the greatness we could once again achieve if we focused on rebuilding our family structure. All too often we face opposition both inside the home and out. Many black men choose to leave the family structure in search of peace. I know I've walked away from many a relationship because of the constant battle I faced with women who seemed hell bent on existing in an impoverished state. The question I always faced was, "Why do you think you're better than everyone else?" Well, because I am. We all are. We can all do better if we'd just try.
I hope that one day someone will make a movie about Richard Williams, before he's no longer with us. We should celebrate people while they are amongst us so that they know we appreciate their hard work and dedication. Richard Williams is not only a credit to the Williams' family and the afro community, but he's a credit to the human race. He managed to wade through the societal muck and emerge victorious! I congratulate the man. I am in deep awe of what he has accomplished and we should all strive to be like Richard Williams.
TPOKW?
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
The Silliness and the Sagging Pants
To sag, or not to sag, that is the question. Ok, maybe not. I think it's safe to say that none of my regular reader(s) wear sagging pants-but hopefully that will change. Frankly, I don't care what you wear, as long as you read and comment. I do, however, have an opinion about sagging pants-I think it's dumb. That being said, I think those who choose this style of fashion have the right to express themselves in this manner. I may find it ridiculous, but that's just me.
Here's what President Elect Barack Obama had to say on the matter:
This is what brings me to the silliness of the sagging pants-laws preventing individuals from sagging never saved anyone's lives. And as the P.E. so eloquently stated, there are much larger issues that we should be tackling. Healthcare, education, war and poverty should be higher on the list. If you live in a city where this ordinance was passed and your public school system is a non productive group of buildings occupying land, you should vote your local lawmakers out of office. Must we attempt to legislate every nuance of social behavior?
At first glance, mandating young men pull up their pants sounds like a good idea. But I've seen the television show Cops and just about every fleeing, sagging suspect is betrayed by pants that end up around their knees. For the fat, out of shape, donut devouring law enforcement officers, this is a blessing in disguise. The playing field has now been leveled by a fashion statement. No longer do they have to chase the swift-footed perpetrators through vacant lots and alley ways. After a couple of strides, pants end up around ankles and the pursuit is over.
For me, there's nothing worse than seeing a young male (black or otherwise-black males aren't the only saggers), with his boxers bunched up and the waist band of his pants damn near around his thighs. I often wonder if they keep their brain back there. What heterosexual male wants to see another man's underpants? I certainly don't. Furthermore, what statement are you making? What are you attempting to communicate? I fail to get the message. I surmise it's a way of thumbing your nose at society for social disenfranchisement. Ok, I feel the rebellious sentiment. My generation opted for long hair. But we also read, and studied, and knew things other than what car P-Diddy drove, or who was sheboinking Rhianna. We had an idea of the struggle of black folks and what might be necessary to turn things around. We cared. Generation Sag seem not to care about tomorrow. Their complete focus is on the bling, or how to come up, no matter what the communal price might be.
Don't get me wrong, I considered the sag when it first hit the scene-but then I stopped myself and asked, "Does my mother, or my children need to see me in this light?" Not to mention the fact that I didn't really identify with the crowd that sagged. I've always seen myself as an intellectual (to a certain degree), and those who sagged seemed disinterested in knowledge. Most saggers could be seen on the street corner-I never cared for hanging out on the street. That's not to say that there aren't individuals with high I.Q.'s sagging, but the combination of the two appear to be oxymoronic to me. Intellect almost mandates you pull your pants up.
The worse offenders of this behavior, and I have nothing against this section of society, are the butch lesbians. It's the equivalent of me donning high-heels, fake boobs, a wig, and stepping out in....style? These women look absolutely nothing like real men-the boobs are a dead giveaway. There is something sick about this thug mentality. How did we get so turned upside down? I have no real advice for a woman who wants to appear to be man-I simply don't know what to say, other than you look utterly ridiculous. A feminine woman has so much to offer-you'll never be me, so stop trying. Again, I have nothing against a woman who is interested in women-but pull your damn pants up.
Each successive generation strives to do other than what their parents did, and I hope the children of Generation Sag decide that wearing your pants just above your knees is just plain dumb, and take things in the opposite direction. Does sagging look cool, sort of. But its association with ignorance and violence make it an endeavor not worth embarking upon. Almost every body of a dead black man you see lying in the street after being riddled with bullets, has his pants down. Why would anyone want to identify with such a thing? Young brothers, don't get me wrong, I support you. I feel that if you want to wear your pants beneath your buttocks with your underwear showing, you should be allowed to. After all, they are your pants, your underwear, and it's your image. Old white men who neither understand nor care about your future shouldn't have the right to tell you not to. But I just think it feeds into a stereotypical myth about black males we just can't afford. If you've decided that sagging is the way to go, at least counterbalance the idiocy by educating yourself. Know more than when Jay-Z's next album drops, or the price of a Maybach-neither of which enhance your existence in a lasting, positive way. Find ways to better your community and help provide a secure future for the next generation, and most of all, please consider PULLING YOUR DAMN PANTS UP!
TPOKW
Here's what President Elect Barack Obama had to say on the matter:
This is what brings me to the silliness of the sagging pants-laws preventing individuals from sagging never saved anyone's lives. And as the P.E. so eloquently stated, there are much larger issues that we should be tackling. Healthcare, education, war and poverty should be higher on the list. If you live in a city where this ordinance was passed and your public school system is a non productive group of buildings occupying land, you should vote your local lawmakers out of office. Must we attempt to legislate every nuance of social behavior?
At first glance, mandating young men pull up their pants sounds like a good idea. But I've seen the television show Cops and just about every fleeing, sagging suspect is betrayed by pants that end up around their knees. For the fat, out of shape, donut devouring law enforcement officers, this is a blessing in disguise. The playing field has now been leveled by a fashion statement. No longer do they have to chase the swift-footed perpetrators through vacant lots and alley ways. After a couple of strides, pants end up around ankles and the pursuit is over.
For me, there's nothing worse than seeing a young male (black or otherwise-black males aren't the only saggers), with his boxers bunched up and the waist band of his pants damn near around his thighs. I often wonder if they keep their brain back there. What heterosexual male wants to see another man's underpants? I certainly don't. Furthermore, what statement are you making? What are you attempting to communicate? I fail to get the message. I surmise it's a way of thumbing your nose at society for social disenfranchisement. Ok, I feel the rebellious sentiment. My generation opted for long hair. But we also read, and studied, and knew things other than what car P-Diddy drove, or who was sheboinking Rhianna. We had an idea of the struggle of black folks and what might be necessary to turn things around. We cared. Generation Sag seem not to care about tomorrow. Their complete focus is on the bling, or how to come up, no matter what the communal price might be.
Don't get me wrong, I considered the sag when it first hit the scene-but then I stopped myself and asked, "Does my mother, or my children need to see me in this light?" Not to mention the fact that I didn't really identify with the crowd that sagged. I've always seen myself as an intellectual (to a certain degree), and those who sagged seemed disinterested in knowledge. Most saggers could be seen on the street corner-I never cared for hanging out on the street. That's not to say that there aren't individuals with high I.Q.'s sagging, but the combination of the two appear to be oxymoronic to me. Intellect almost mandates you pull your pants up.
The worse offenders of this behavior, and I have nothing against this section of society, are the butch lesbians. It's the equivalent of me donning high-heels, fake boobs, a wig, and stepping out in....style? These women look absolutely nothing like real men-the boobs are a dead giveaway. There is something sick about this thug mentality. How did we get so turned upside down? I have no real advice for a woman who wants to appear to be man-I simply don't know what to say, other than you look utterly ridiculous. A feminine woman has so much to offer-you'll never be me, so stop trying. Again, I have nothing against a woman who is interested in women-but pull your damn pants up.
Each successive generation strives to do other than what their parents did, and I hope the children of Generation Sag decide that wearing your pants just above your knees is just plain dumb, and take things in the opposite direction. Does sagging look cool, sort of. But its association with ignorance and violence make it an endeavor not worth embarking upon. Almost every body of a dead black man you see lying in the street after being riddled with bullets, has his pants down. Why would anyone want to identify with such a thing? Young brothers, don't get me wrong, I support you. I feel that if you want to wear your pants beneath your buttocks with your underwear showing, you should be allowed to. After all, they are your pants, your underwear, and it's your image. Old white men who neither understand nor care about your future shouldn't have the right to tell you not to. But I just think it feeds into a stereotypical myth about black males we just can't afford. If you've decided that sagging is the way to go, at least counterbalance the idiocy by educating yourself. Know more than when Jay-Z's next album drops, or the price of a Maybach-neither of which enhance your existence in a lasting, positive way. Find ways to better your community and help provide a secure future for the next generation, and most of all, please consider PULLING YOUR DAMN PANTS UP!
TPOKW
Friday, November 21, 2008
Obama and the One Drop Rule
According to press releases, next year America will have her first president of African descent. Barack Hussein Obama, politically dismantled former P.O.W. and war veteran John McCain and his maverick sidekick Bullwinkle-er, Sarah Palin with the greatest of ease (Joe B. helped too). Now that it's official, America's true racist feelings are emerging in a place where tongues and opinions are rarely held-the cyber-world. Those who have a hard time with a HNIC (if you don't know what that means, watch Stand and Deliver starring Morgan Freeman), are declaring President Obama bi-racial, which begs the question, has any of them ever heard about the One Drop Rule?
For those of you unfamiliar, the one drop rule, which actually was enacted into law in the early 20 th century, stated if you had one drop of African blood, you were African. According to Wikipedia, the 1910–19 decade was the nadir of the Jim Crow era. Tennessee adopted a one-drop statute in 1910, and Louisiana soon followed. Then Texas and Arkansas in 1911, Mississippi in 1917, North Carolina in 1923, Virginia in 1924, Alabama and Georgia in 1927, and Oklahoma in 1931. During this same period, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Utah retained their old "blood fraction" statutes de jure, but amended these fractions (one-sixteenth, one-thirtysecond) to be equivalent to one-drop de facto. Madison Grant of Virginia in The Passing of the Great Race wrote: "The cross between a white man and an Indian is an Indian; the cross between a white man and a negro is a negro; the cross between a white man and a Hindu is a Hindu; and the cross between any of the three European races and a Jew is a Jew."1. Obviously, the rule was important enough to require the enactment of laws. When the U.S. Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia (1967) outlawed Virginia's ban on interracial marriage, the one drop rule was declared unconstitutional.
The rule may have been considered unconstitutional, but the sentiment behind it remained intact. A mixed race child of African descent is still considered black-even in poverty stricken, war-torn Vietnam. Bi-racial Vietnamese conceived during the war by African-American members of the military are still scorned in Vietnam. Racial identity, as it relates to African blood, is still a major global issue and Obama's election proves that, although we may elect a mixed-race black man to the highest office in our country, accepting his black side is difficult to say the least.
Another point of contention in cyberspace is whether or not he's African-American. Most people say he is not which is the epitome' of ridiculousness because he is more African-American than American born blacks since his father was African. American born blacks are really just Americans. The only connection we share with Africa and Africans exists in the similarities of our skin colors-and one might even argue that those similarities are questionable.
What's most upsetting is that we have to have this conversation at all. Aside from the racial rhetoric, what we all can agree upon is he is darkest President we've had to date. And that darkness is similar to a group of Americans that were once slaves in this country. Disassociate him from black Americans if you wish, there's no arguing the previous two sentences.
I think this is a perfect opportunity for those of us who simply find it hard to accept blacks as fellow countrymen to seek and destroy that internal illness that exists within. That illness that causes you to feel better about yourself because you're not black. I've heard it said in many different ways, I may be poor, but at least I'm not a nigger! or No matter how fat and ugly I get, I can still get me a nigger or Just take it and I'll call the cops and say a nigger stole it. I'm talking about that kind of sickness. Let's find a way to analyze and eradicate it. I know I'm wasting words because racist whites will never give up their animus towards blacks. In some ways, I feel that racist whites are direct descendants of indentured servants who, along with some blacks, arrived prior to slavery and were considered a lessor class of people. It wasn't until the institutionalization of slavery that these whites gained favor amongst the ruling class and were placed in positions of authority over their former fellow (black) indentured servants. The fear of returning to the lower rung of society spawned a hatred for what and who they used to be, and a desire never to return. The mere sight of a slave reminded them of their former less than existence and it was incumbent upon them to prove to the ruling class that they could keep the nigras in their place. Many a slave were beaten, raped, lynched, and murder all in their attempts to demonstrate to the ruling class their ability to maintain order. Well, you can stop now, the ruling class really never saw a difference, and most likely never will.
I don't quite know what the future holds for a country so divided by the simplicity of color-one can only hope that we rise above the pettiness of our dermatological differences and find commonalities that could be instrumental in not only restoring our perception of greatness, but exceeding our previous ideologies and truly building an amazing nation none of us could ever imagined being blinded by something so silly as a one drop rule.
'Nuff said.
TPOKW
Friday, November 07, 2008
No Representation Without Taxation
Read the title again. I know you think you know what it read, but read it again. You probably think it is the same as the phrase coined by Reverend Jonathan Mayhew in a sermon in Boston circa 1750, but it isn't. It is a phrase that should have found its way into our political lexicon the moment the Christian Conservatives arrived on the scene.
During the past 8 years, the Moral Majority has manipulated the political machine in this country. Credited for Ronald Reagan's victory of Jimmy Carter in 1980 by delivering two-thirds of the white evangelical vote, they have been an influential and effective part of the political climate. But the question that comes to my mind is how is this possible if, as a group, they pay no taxes?
The separation of church and state is a phrase that I've heard practically all my life-and has been one of the most memorable political phrases to date. From my understanding, this is why religious organizations are exempt from paying taxes. If you don't contribute financially to wealth of the nation, why is your hand immersed in government affairs? I certainly don't believe that anyone's views should be discriminated against, provided they are within the boundaries of the law. But matters relating to God, (pick one), should be separate from matters of the state. Yes, Christians are citizens of this nation, but religion and its dogma has its place-in the church and not interlaced throughout branches of government.
If the Religious Right, or the Moral Majority want representation, pony up. The Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN), the Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN), Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson could never have amassed the wealth they've attained if they had to pay their fair share in taxes. Yet they were allowed access to the White House and the President and have been influential. The mere fact that the first Presidential Q & A session between now President Elect Barack Obama and Senator John McCain was held at the Saddleback church, in my opinion, is a violation of the 'separation of church and state' mantra.
1 The phrase "separation of church and state" is derived from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to a group identifying themselves as the Danbury Baptists. In that letter, referencing the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Jefferson writes:
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."
With that said, and mandated by the faithful, this should go both ways. The "Moral Majority" should keep it's nose out of matters of the state. Imposing their views upon non believers, and attempting to turn those views into laws violates the very principals for which they fought. They can't have it both ways. Either the government can interfere into their affairs, or vice-versa, or matters of the state are matters of the state, and matters of the church are matters of the church.
Too often the lines get blurred because congregationalists are voters and politicians aren't bold enough to put them in their place. Legally, churches aren't supposed to engage in political affairs. Doing so compromises their tax exempt status. But this didn't stop both John McCain and Barack Obama from participating in a Q & A 'debate' at the Saddleback church in Lake Forest, CA. Both candidates knew that by refusing to participate in the debacle would have alienated a very powerful voting block. At some point someone must send a message to this group and let them know under no uncertain terms are they to support candidates, denounce candidates, or speak of politics in their congregation-ever. There are rules and, like everyone else, they must obey them. After all, it was the church who insisted upon this separation.
At the risk of alienating readers, I'll admit that I am not a religious individual. For lack of a better term one might call me agnostic. In my opinion, we should all be agnostic. Who amongst us can say truly whether or not God exists? If you haven't literally talked to him or seen him, it's pretty safe to say you can't know beyond a shadow of a doubt that he exists. I'm not talking about hearing your own conscience and attributing it to God. I'm talking about actually hearing a voice that if someone else was in the room they'd hear it as well. We've had too many individuals come along throughout history who've claimed they've heard the voice of God and now they are responsible for communicating the message to the masses. Even man has developed the ability to conference call-God has to have a way to speak to more than one person at a time. But I digress.
To put it bluntly, most evangelists are living, breathing, business men who take advantage of the tax exempt status granted the church to amass untold wealth. That money flows in one direction-from the congregation to the pockets of the church leaders. If a member of the congregation is in financial need, the most the church is able to offer is prayer. Try paying your bills with that. Sometimes, they'll tap the congregation to help said member, but never will they open up the church coffers to help the needy of the congregation. Sadly, most of these individuals are happy to walk away with just the prayers-even though they may have, over the years, contributed thousands of dollars to the church. I don't knock a man his hustle. If you've got people willing to exchange legal tender for that which they could achieve at home, then more power to you. As Thomas Jefferson so eloquently put it, ".....religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God." If this is true, what on earth does one need with a church. I don't think Thomas Jefferson envisioned the nonsense that passes for religion today. But to each his own. My position is simple, as an organization pay taxes like the rest or keep your nose out of matters of the state. And as I so eloquently put it, NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION.
Enough said.
TPOKW
Addendum:
A couple of evenings past, a young man of about 20 came to my door selling magazine subscriptions. I know he thought that it was the first time someone had tried to sell me a magazine subscription I didn't want, but unbeknownst to him, I've been staving off individuals like him since I was 20. Anyhow, he began his script the moment I came to the door and I politely listened. At one point in his monologue he asked if I believed in God and my answer was "No." Perplexed, he then asked me, "What are you, Muslim?" Now I know in the the written form of communication there are no long pauses, but I'd like for you, the reader, to take a Final Jeopardy moment and seriously contemplate what that young man asked me, (play Final Jeopardy theme here). Did any of you hear what I heard? Since when is Allah not a deity? Who kicked him out of the line up? How did Muslims become godless people?
This is my problem with religion. With the exception of Buddhism (which really is a lifestyle more so than a religion), each one professes to be the true religion of God. And for the most part, they all pretty much teach the exact same tenets-thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not kill, etc. If adhered to, there would be no religious wars. No crusades-No religious 'conversions' at the hands of barbaric Conquistadors. Most religious teachings are beautiful, but there implementation leaves a lot to be desired. I don't know why any person with half a brain couldn't see the chasm that exists between religious practices and religious teachings. I don't want to choose sides in the ongoing holy war that exists between Muslims and Christians, but the Christians have all but declared the Muslims a godless- that's what I got from that young man's question. Again, I'm a neutral party here, I think both sides need to clean up their act, but where is it written that any of us have the power to render a people godless? If you expect others to respect your beliefs, you'd better start by respecting the right of others to believe in what they choose-provided those beliefs do not harm others. Otherwise, there will be an ongoing sibling rivalry while each side jockey's to be God's chosen people, (another concept that disturbs me to no end).
I understand why this young man opted to throw God into his sales pitch-religion, being a instrument of control, can sometimes be invoked to aid consumers in loosening their purse strings. I wonder what his response would have been had I said that I was religious and then subsequently order a subscription to Playboy magazine. Hmmm....perhaps I'll try that next time.
®
References:
1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state
During the past 8 years, the Moral Majority has manipulated the political machine in this country. Credited for Ronald Reagan's victory of Jimmy Carter in 1980 by delivering two-thirds of the white evangelical vote, they have been an influential and effective part of the political climate. But the question that comes to my mind is how is this possible if, as a group, they pay no taxes?
The separation of church and state is a phrase that I've heard practically all my life-and has been one of the most memorable political phrases to date. From my understanding, this is why religious organizations are exempt from paying taxes. If you don't contribute financially to wealth of the nation, why is your hand immersed in government affairs? I certainly don't believe that anyone's views should be discriminated against, provided they are within the boundaries of the law. But matters relating to God, (pick one), should be separate from matters of the state. Yes, Christians are citizens of this nation, but religion and its dogma has its place-in the church and not interlaced throughout branches of government.
If the Religious Right, or the Moral Majority want representation, pony up. The Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN), the Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN), Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson could never have amassed the wealth they've attained if they had to pay their fair share in taxes. Yet they were allowed access to the White House and the President and have been influential. The mere fact that the first Presidential Q & A session between now President Elect Barack Obama and Senator John McCain was held at the Saddleback church, in my opinion, is a violation of the 'separation of church and state' mantra.
1 The phrase "separation of church and state" is derived from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to a group identifying themselves as the Danbury Baptists. In that letter, referencing the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Jefferson writes:
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."
With that said, and mandated by the faithful, this should go both ways. The "Moral Majority" should keep it's nose out of matters of the state. Imposing their views upon non believers, and attempting to turn those views into laws violates the very principals for which they fought. They can't have it both ways. Either the government can interfere into their affairs, or vice-versa, or matters of the state are matters of the state, and matters of the church are matters of the church.
Too often the lines get blurred because congregationalists are voters and politicians aren't bold enough to put them in their place. Legally, churches aren't supposed to engage in political affairs. Doing so compromises their tax exempt status. But this didn't stop both John McCain and Barack Obama from participating in a Q & A 'debate' at the Saddleback church in Lake Forest, CA. Both candidates knew that by refusing to participate in the debacle would have alienated a very powerful voting block. At some point someone must send a message to this group and let them know under no uncertain terms are they to support candidates, denounce candidates, or speak of politics in their congregation-ever. There are rules and, like everyone else, they must obey them. After all, it was the church who insisted upon this separation.
At the risk of alienating readers, I'll admit that I am not a religious individual. For lack of a better term one might call me agnostic. In my opinion, we should all be agnostic. Who amongst us can say truly whether or not God exists? If you haven't literally talked to him or seen him, it's pretty safe to say you can't know beyond a shadow of a doubt that he exists. I'm not talking about hearing your own conscience and attributing it to God. I'm talking about actually hearing a voice that if someone else was in the room they'd hear it as well. We've had too many individuals come along throughout history who've claimed they've heard the voice of God and now they are responsible for communicating the message to the masses. Even man has developed the ability to conference call-God has to have a way to speak to more than one person at a time. But I digress.
To put it bluntly, most evangelists are living, breathing, business men who take advantage of the tax exempt status granted the church to amass untold wealth. That money flows in one direction-from the congregation to the pockets of the church leaders. If a member of the congregation is in financial need, the most the church is able to offer is prayer. Try paying your bills with that. Sometimes, they'll tap the congregation to help said member, but never will they open up the church coffers to help the needy of the congregation. Sadly, most of these individuals are happy to walk away with just the prayers-even though they may have, over the years, contributed thousands of dollars to the church. I don't knock a man his hustle. If you've got people willing to exchange legal tender for that which they could achieve at home, then more power to you. As Thomas Jefferson so eloquently put it, ".....religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God." If this is true, what on earth does one need with a church. I don't think Thomas Jefferson envisioned the nonsense that passes for religion today. But to each his own. My position is simple, as an organization pay taxes like the rest or keep your nose out of matters of the state. And as I so eloquently put it, NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION.
Enough said.
TPOKW
Addendum:
A couple of evenings past, a young man of about 20 came to my door selling magazine subscriptions. I know he thought that it was the first time someone had tried to sell me a magazine subscription I didn't want, but unbeknownst to him, I've been staving off individuals like him since I was 20. Anyhow, he began his script the moment I came to the door and I politely listened. At one point in his monologue he asked if I believed in God and my answer was "No." Perplexed, he then asked me, "What are you, Muslim?" Now I know in the the written form of communication there are no long pauses, but I'd like for you, the reader, to take a Final Jeopardy moment and seriously contemplate what that young man asked me, (play Final Jeopardy theme here). Did any of you hear what I heard? Since when is Allah not a deity? Who kicked him out of the line up? How did Muslims become godless people?
This is my problem with religion. With the exception of Buddhism (which really is a lifestyle more so than a religion), each one professes to be the true religion of God. And for the most part, they all pretty much teach the exact same tenets-thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not kill, etc. If adhered to, there would be no religious wars. No crusades-No religious 'conversions' at the hands of barbaric Conquistadors. Most religious teachings are beautiful, but there implementation leaves a lot to be desired. I don't know why any person with half a brain couldn't see the chasm that exists between religious practices and religious teachings. I don't want to choose sides in the ongoing holy war that exists between Muslims and Christians, but the Christians have all but declared the Muslims a godless- that's what I got from that young man's question. Again, I'm a neutral party here, I think both sides need to clean up their act, but where is it written that any of us have the power to render a people godless? If you expect others to respect your beliefs, you'd better start by respecting the right of others to believe in what they choose-provided those beliefs do not harm others. Otherwise, there will be an ongoing sibling rivalry while each side jockey's to be God's chosen people, (another concept that disturbs me to no end).
I understand why this young man opted to throw God into his sales pitch-religion, being a instrument of control, can sometimes be invoked to aid consumers in loosening their purse strings. I wonder what his response would have been had I said that I was religious and then subsequently order a subscription to Playboy magazine. Hmmm....perhaps I'll try that next time.
®
References:
1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
The Incomparable Tim Wise
I became acquainted with Tim Wise's magnificent work one day while listening to KPFK, a progressive and independent, listener supported radio station in Santa Barbara, CA. I was immediately amazed with his approach to race relations in this country, not because he is of European descent, but because he sees things for what they are and has the courage to speak truthfully, even if he is hated by some of his own kind. The appropriately named Mr. Wise, makes me proud to be an American of African descent. Recently, I was falsely accused of threatening someone's life and subsequently arrested on felony charges. I spent less than 3 hours in custody because someone I love deeply immediately posted 8% of the $50,000 bail. I remember feeling like a loser-being cuffed before the officers were even able to determine fault. I can't go into detail because the case is still pending, but suffice it to say I was horrified as I sat in the holding tank and listened to officers discuss amongst themselves the "facts" of the case and how I was such a loser ("He has a job-who'd hire him?).
Reading the words of Tim Wise helped restore my self-esteem. He reminds me that our judicial system has been, since its inception, unjustly tilted against blacks and that, although African-Americans do commit crimes, quite often (as in my case) they are falsely accused and face an uphill battle just to make themselves whole again-if that is even possible. Those that know me personally know that I've defended myself against this injustice in my personal, military, and professional life and through wisdom and sheer luck have emerged scarred and battered but never incarcerated. Once again I'm faced with injustice and must prove to a court what should have been blatantly obvious to the arresting officers. I am certain I will prevail.
I would like to share with you something I read this morning on Mr. Wise's blog. His words, as always, are inspirational so please, take the time to read this entry in its entirety. I am also posting his opening statement on affirmative action from youtube. I am certain you will enjoy this as much as I did.
Much respect to you Mr. Wise.
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Good, and Now Back to Work: Avoiding Cynicism and Overconfidence in the Age of Obama
Good, and Now Back to Work:
Avoiding Both Cynicism and Overconfidence in the Age of Obama
By Tim Wise
November 5, 2008
Tonight, after Barack Obama was confirmed as the nation's president-elect, I looked in on my children, as they lay sleeping. Though they are about as politically astute as kids can be, having reached only the ages of 7 and 5, there is no way they will be able to truly appreciate what has just happened in the land they call home. They do not possess the sense of history, or indeed, even a clear understanding of what history means, so as to adequately process what happened this evening, as they slumbered. Even as our oldest cast her first grade vote for Obama in school today, and even as our youngest has become somewhat notorious for pointing to pictures of Sarah Palin on magazines and saying, "There's that crazy lady who hates polar bears," they remain, still, naive as to the nation they have inherited. They do not really understand the tortured history of this place, especially as regards race. Oh they know more than most--to live as my children makes it hard not to--but still, the magnitude of this occasion will likely not catch up to them until Barack Obama is finishing at least his first, if not his second term as president.
But that's OK. Because I know what it means, and will make sure to tell them.
And before detailing what I perceive that meaning to be (both its expansiveness and limitations) let me say this, to some of those on the left--some of my friends and longtime compatriots in the struggle for social justice--who yet insist that there is no difference between Obama and McCain, between Democrats and Republicans, between Biden and Palin: Screw you.
If you are incapable of mustering pride in this moment, and if you cannot appreciate how meaningful this day is for millions of black folks who stood in lines for up to seven hours to vote, then your cynicism has become such an encumbrance as to render you all but useless to the liberation movement. Indeed, those who cannot appreciate what has just transpired are so eaten up with nihilistic rage and hopelessness that I cannot but think that they are a waste of carbon, and actively thieving oxygen that could be put to better use by others.
This election does indeed matter. No, it is not the same as victory against the forces of injustice, and yes, Obama is a heavily compromised candidate, and yes, we will have to work hard to hold him accountable. But it matters nonetheless that he, and not the bloodthirsty bomber McCain, or the Christo-fascist, Palin, managed to emerge victorious.
Those who say it doesn't matter weren't with me on the south side of Chicago this past week, surrounded by a collection of amazing community organizers who go out and do the hard work every day of trying to help create a way out of no way for the marginalized. All of them know that an election is but a part of the solution, a tactic really, in a larger struggle of which they are a daily part; and none of them are so naive as to think that their jobs are now to become a cakewalk because of the election of Barack Obama. But all of them were looking forward to this moment. They haven't the luxury of believing in the quixotic campaigns of Dennis Kucinich, or waiting around for the Green Party to get its act together and become something other than a pathetic caricature, symbolized by the utterly irrelevant and increasingly narcissistic presence of Ralph Nader on the electoral scene. And while Cynthia McKinney remains a pivotal figure in the struggle, the party to which she was tethered this year shows no more ability to sustain movement activity than it was eight years ago, and most everyone working in oppressed communities in this nation knows it.
It's like this y'all: Jesse Jackson was weeping openly on national television. This is a man who was with Dr. King when he was murdered and he was bawling like a baby. So don't tell me this doesn't matter.
John Lewis--who had his head cracked open, has been arrested more times, and has probably spilled far more blood for the cause of justice than all the white, dreadlocked, self-proclaimed anarchists in this country combined--couldn't be more thrilled at what has happened. If he can see it, then frankly, who the hell are we not to?
Those who say this election means nothing, who insist that Obama, because he cozied up to Wall Street, or big business, is just another kind of evil no different than any other, are in serious risk of political self-immolation, and it is a burning they will richly deserve. That the victorious presidential candidate is actually a capitalist (contrary to the fevered imaginations of the right) is no more newsworthy than the fact that rain falls down and grass grows skyward. It is to be properly placed in the "no shit Sherlock," file. That anyone would think it possible for someone who didn't raise hundreds of millions of dollars to win--at this time in our history at least--only suggests that some on the left would prefer to engage politics from a place of aspirational innocence, rather than in the real world, where battles are won or lost.
So let us be clear as to what tonight meant:
It was a defeat for the right-wing echo chamber and its rhetorical stormtroopers, foremost among them Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck.
It was a defeat for the crazed mobs ever-present at McCain/Palin rallies, what with their venomous libels against Obama, their hate-addled brains spewing forth one after another racist and religiously chauvinistic calumny upon his head and those of his supporters.
It was a defeat for the internet rumor-pimps who insisted to all they could reach with a functioning e-mail address that Obama was not really a citizen. Or perhaps he was, but he was a Muslim, or perhaps not a Muslim, but probably a black supremacist, or maybe not that either, but surely the anti-christ, and most definitely a baby-killer.
It was a defeat for those who believed McCain and Palin would be delivered the victory by the hand of almighty God, because their theological and eschatological vacuity so regularly gets in the way of their ability to think. As such, it was a setback for the religious fascists in the far-right Christian community whose belief that God is on their side has always made them especially dangerous. Now, having lost, perhaps at least some of these will be forced to ponder what went wrong. If we're lucky, perhaps some will suffer the kind of crisis of faith that often prefaces a complete nervous breakdown. Either way, it's nice just to ruin their Young-Earth-Creationist-I-Have-an-Angel-on-My-Shoulder day.
It was a defeat for the demagogues who tried in so many ways to push the buttons of white racism--the old-fashioned kind, or what I call Racism 1.0--by using thinly-veiled racialized language throughout the campaign. Appeals to Joe Six-Pack, "values voters," blue-collar voters, or hockey moms, though never explicitly racialized, were transparent to all but the most obtuse, as were terms like "terrorist" when used to describe Obama. Likewise, the attempt to race-bait the economic crisis by blaming it on loans to poor folks of color through the Community Reinvestment Act, or community activists like the folks at ACORN, failed, and this matters. No, it doesn't mean that white America has rejected racism. Indeed, I have been quite deliberate for months about pointing out the way that racism 1.0 may be traded in only to be replaced by racism 2.0 (which allows whites to still view most folks of color negatively but carve out exceptions for those few who make us feel comfortable and who we see as "different"). And yet, that tonight was a drubbing for that 1.0 version of racism still matters.
And tonight was a victory for a few things too.
It was a victory for youth, and their social and political sensibilities. It was the young, casting away the politics of their parents and even grandparents, and turning the corner to a new day, perhaps naively, and too optimistic about the road from here, but nonetheless in a way that has historically almost always been good for the country. Much as youth were inspired by a relatively moderate John F. Kennedy (who was, on balance, far less progressive than Obama in many ways), and much as they then formed the frontline troops for so much of the social justice activism of the following fifteen years, so too can such a thing be forseen now. That Kennedy may have been quite restrained in his social justice sensibilities did not matter: the young people whose energy he helped unleash took things in their own direction and outgrew him rather quickly in their progression to the left.
Tonight was also a victory for the possibility of greater cross-racial alliance building. Although Obama failed to win most white votes, and although it is no doubt true that many of the whites who did vote for him nonetheless hold to any number of negative and racist stereotypes about the larger black and brown communities of this nation, it it still the case that black, brown and white worked together in this effort as they have rarely done before. And many whites who worked for Obama, precisely because they got to see, and hear, and feel the racist vitriol still animating far too many of our nation's people, will now be wiser for the experience when it comes to understanding how much more work remains to be done on the racial justice front. Let us build on that newfound knowledge, and that newfound energy, and create real white allyship with community-based leaders of color as we move forward in the years to come.
But now for the other side of things.
First and foremost, please know that none of these victories will amount to much unless we do that which needs to be done so as to turn a singular event about one man, into a true social movement (which, despite what some claim, it is not yet and has never been).
And so it is back to work. Oh yes, we can savor the moment for a while, for a few days, perhaps a week. But well before inauguration day we will need to be back on the job, in the community, in the streets, where democracy is made, demanding equity and justice in places where it hasn't been seen in decades, if ever. Because for all the talk of hope and change, there is nothing--absolutely, positively nothing--about real change that is inevitable. And hope, absent real pressure and forward motion to actualize one's dreams, is sterile and even dangerous. Hope, absent commitment is the enemy of change, capable of translating to a giving away of one's agency, to a relinquishing of the need to do more than just show up every few years and push a button or pull a lever.
This means hooking up now with the grass roots organizations in the communities where we live, prioritizing their struggles, joining and serving with their constituents, following leaders grounded in the community who are accountable not to Barack Obama, but the people who helped elect him. Let Obama follow, while the people lead, in other words.
For we who are white it means going back into our white spaces and challenging our brothers and sisters, parents, neighbors, colleagues and friends--and ourselves--on the racial biases that still too often permeate their and our lives, and making sure they know that the success of one man of color does not equate to the eradication of systemic racial inequity.
So are we ready for the heavy lifting? This was, after all, merely the warmup exercise, somewhat akin to stretching before a really long run. Or perhaps it was the first lap, but either way, now the baton has been handed to you, to us. We must not, cannot, afford to drop it. There is too much at stake.
The worst thing that could happen now would be for us to go back to sleep; to allow the cool poise of Obama's prose to lull us into slumber like the cool on the underside of the pillow. For in the light of day, when fully awake, it becomes impossible not to see the incompleteness of the task so far.
So let us begin.
Reading the words of Tim Wise helped restore my self-esteem. He reminds me that our judicial system has been, since its inception, unjustly tilted against blacks and that, although African-Americans do commit crimes, quite often (as in my case) they are falsely accused and face an uphill battle just to make themselves whole again-if that is even possible. Those that know me personally know that I've defended myself against this injustice in my personal, military, and professional life and through wisdom and sheer luck have emerged scarred and battered but never incarcerated. Once again I'm faced with injustice and must prove to a court what should have been blatantly obvious to the arresting officers. I am certain I will prevail.
I would like to share with you something I read this morning on Mr. Wise's blog. His words, as always, are inspirational so please, take the time to read this entry in its entirety. I am also posting his opening statement on affirmative action from youtube. I am certain you will enjoy this as much as I did.
Much respect to you Mr. Wise.
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Good, and Now Back to Work: Avoiding Cynicism and Overconfidence in the Age of Obama
Good, and Now Back to Work:
Avoiding Both Cynicism and Overconfidence in the Age of Obama
By Tim Wise
November 5, 2008
Tonight, after Barack Obama was confirmed as the nation's president-elect, I looked in on my children, as they lay sleeping. Though they are about as politically astute as kids can be, having reached only the ages of 7 and 5, there is no way they will be able to truly appreciate what has just happened in the land they call home. They do not possess the sense of history, or indeed, even a clear understanding of what history means, so as to adequately process what happened this evening, as they slumbered. Even as our oldest cast her first grade vote for Obama in school today, and even as our youngest has become somewhat notorious for pointing to pictures of Sarah Palin on magazines and saying, "There's that crazy lady who hates polar bears," they remain, still, naive as to the nation they have inherited. They do not really understand the tortured history of this place, especially as regards race. Oh they know more than most--to live as my children makes it hard not to--but still, the magnitude of this occasion will likely not catch up to them until Barack Obama is finishing at least his first, if not his second term as president.
But that's OK. Because I know what it means, and will make sure to tell them.
And before detailing what I perceive that meaning to be (both its expansiveness and limitations) let me say this, to some of those on the left--some of my friends and longtime compatriots in the struggle for social justice--who yet insist that there is no difference between Obama and McCain, between Democrats and Republicans, between Biden and Palin: Screw you.
If you are incapable of mustering pride in this moment, and if you cannot appreciate how meaningful this day is for millions of black folks who stood in lines for up to seven hours to vote, then your cynicism has become such an encumbrance as to render you all but useless to the liberation movement. Indeed, those who cannot appreciate what has just transpired are so eaten up with nihilistic rage and hopelessness that I cannot but think that they are a waste of carbon, and actively thieving oxygen that could be put to better use by others.
This election does indeed matter. No, it is not the same as victory against the forces of injustice, and yes, Obama is a heavily compromised candidate, and yes, we will have to work hard to hold him accountable. But it matters nonetheless that he, and not the bloodthirsty bomber McCain, or the Christo-fascist, Palin, managed to emerge victorious.
Those who say it doesn't matter weren't with me on the south side of Chicago this past week, surrounded by a collection of amazing community organizers who go out and do the hard work every day of trying to help create a way out of no way for the marginalized. All of them know that an election is but a part of the solution, a tactic really, in a larger struggle of which they are a daily part; and none of them are so naive as to think that their jobs are now to become a cakewalk because of the election of Barack Obama. But all of them were looking forward to this moment. They haven't the luxury of believing in the quixotic campaigns of Dennis Kucinich, or waiting around for the Green Party to get its act together and become something other than a pathetic caricature, symbolized by the utterly irrelevant and increasingly narcissistic presence of Ralph Nader on the electoral scene. And while Cynthia McKinney remains a pivotal figure in the struggle, the party to which she was tethered this year shows no more ability to sustain movement activity than it was eight years ago, and most everyone working in oppressed communities in this nation knows it.
It's like this y'all: Jesse Jackson was weeping openly on national television. This is a man who was with Dr. King when he was murdered and he was bawling like a baby. So don't tell me this doesn't matter.
John Lewis--who had his head cracked open, has been arrested more times, and has probably spilled far more blood for the cause of justice than all the white, dreadlocked, self-proclaimed anarchists in this country combined--couldn't be more thrilled at what has happened. If he can see it, then frankly, who the hell are we not to?
Those who say this election means nothing, who insist that Obama, because he cozied up to Wall Street, or big business, is just another kind of evil no different than any other, are in serious risk of political self-immolation, and it is a burning they will richly deserve. That the victorious presidential candidate is actually a capitalist (contrary to the fevered imaginations of the right) is no more newsworthy than the fact that rain falls down and grass grows skyward. It is to be properly placed in the "no shit Sherlock," file. That anyone would think it possible for someone who didn't raise hundreds of millions of dollars to win--at this time in our history at least--only suggests that some on the left would prefer to engage politics from a place of aspirational innocence, rather than in the real world, where battles are won or lost.
So let us be clear as to what tonight meant:
It was a defeat for the right-wing echo chamber and its rhetorical stormtroopers, foremost among them Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck.
It was a defeat for the crazed mobs ever-present at McCain/Palin rallies, what with their venomous libels against Obama, their hate-addled brains spewing forth one after another racist and religiously chauvinistic calumny upon his head and those of his supporters.
It was a defeat for the internet rumor-pimps who insisted to all they could reach with a functioning e-mail address that Obama was not really a citizen. Or perhaps he was, but he was a Muslim, or perhaps not a Muslim, but probably a black supremacist, or maybe not that either, but surely the anti-christ, and most definitely a baby-killer.
It was a defeat for those who believed McCain and Palin would be delivered the victory by the hand of almighty God, because their theological and eschatological vacuity so regularly gets in the way of their ability to think. As such, it was a setback for the religious fascists in the far-right Christian community whose belief that God is on their side has always made them especially dangerous. Now, having lost, perhaps at least some of these will be forced to ponder what went wrong. If we're lucky, perhaps some will suffer the kind of crisis of faith that often prefaces a complete nervous breakdown. Either way, it's nice just to ruin their Young-Earth-Creationist-I-Have-an-Angel-on-My-Shoulder day.
It was a defeat for the demagogues who tried in so many ways to push the buttons of white racism--the old-fashioned kind, or what I call Racism 1.0--by using thinly-veiled racialized language throughout the campaign. Appeals to Joe Six-Pack, "values voters," blue-collar voters, or hockey moms, though never explicitly racialized, were transparent to all but the most obtuse, as were terms like "terrorist" when used to describe Obama. Likewise, the attempt to race-bait the economic crisis by blaming it on loans to poor folks of color through the Community Reinvestment Act, or community activists like the folks at ACORN, failed, and this matters. No, it doesn't mean that white America has rejected racism. Indeed, I have been quite deliberate for months about pointing out the way that racism 1.0 may be traded in only to be replaced by racism 2.0 (which allows whites to still view most folks of color negatively but carve out exceptions for those few who make us feel comfortable and who we see as "different"). And yet, that tonight was a drubbing for that 1.0 version of racism still matters.
And tonight was a victory for a few things too.
It was a victory for youth, and their social and political sensibilities. It was the young, casting away the politics of their parents and even grandparents, and turning the corner to a new day, perhaps naively, and too optimistic about the road from here, but nonetheless in a way that has historically almost always been good for the country. Much as youth were inspired by a relatively moderate John F. Kennedy (who was, on balance, far less progressive than Obama in many ways), and much as they then formed the frontline troops for so much of the social justice activism of the following fifteen years, so too can such a thing be forseen now. That Kennedy may have been quite restrained in his social justice sensibilities did not matter: the young people whose energy he helped unleash took things in their own direction and outgrew him rather quickly in their progression to the left.
Tonight was also a victory for the possibility of greater cross-racial alliance building. Although Obama failed to win most white votes, and although it is no doubt true that many of the whites who did vote for him nonetheless hold to any number of negative and racist stereotypes about the larger black and brown communities of this nation, it it still the case that black, brown and white worked together in this effort as they have rarely done before. And many whites who worked for Obama, precisely because they got to see, and hear, and feel the racist vitriol still animating far too many of our nation's people, will now be wiser for the experience when it comes to understanding how much more work remains to be done on the racial justice front. Let us build on that newfound knowledge, and that newfound energy, and create real white allyship with community-based leaders of color as we move forward in the years to come.
But now for the other side of things.
First and foremost, please know that none of these victories will amount to much unless we do that which needs to be done so as to turn a singular event about one man, into a true social movement (which, despite what some claim, it is not yet and has never been).
And so it is back to work. Oh yes, we can savor the moment for a while, for a few days, perhaps a week. But well before inauguration day we will need to be back on the job, in the community, in the streets, where democracy is made, demanding equity and justice in places where it hasn't been seen in decades, if ever. Because for all the talk of hope and change, there is nothing--absolutely, positively nothing--about real change that is inevitable. And hope, absent real pressure and forward motion to actualize one's dreams, is sterile and even dangerous. Hope, absent commitment is the enemy of change, capable of translating to a giving away of one's agency, to a relinquishing of the need to do more than just show up every few years and push a button or pull a lever.
This means hooking up now with the grass roots organizations in the communities where we live, prioritizing their struggles, joining and serving with their constituents, following leaders grounded in the community who are accountable not to Barack Obama, but the people who helped elect him. Let Obama follow, while the people lead, in other words.
For we who are white it means going back into our white spaces and challenging our brothers and sisters, parents, neighbors, colleagues and friends--and ourselves--on the racial biases that still too often permeate their and our lives, and making sure they know that the success of one man of color does not equate to the eradication of systemic racial inequity.
So are we ready for the heavy lifting? This was, after all, merely the warmup exercise, somewhat akin to stretching before a really long run. Or perhaps it was the first lap, but either way, now the baton has been handed to you, to us. We must not, cannot, afford to drop it. There is too much at stake.
The worst thing that could happen now would be for us to go back to sleep; to allow the cool poise of Obama's prose to lull us into slumber like the cool on the underside of the pillow. For in the light of day, when fully awake, it becomes impossible not to see the incompleteness of the task so far.
So let us begin.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Monday, October 27, 2008
A Class Divided
In 1968, a day after the assassination of Martin Luther King, an Iowan school teacher conducted an experiment in discrimination with her 3rd grade class. Please watch this in its entirety with your children. It could explain to many of us why we are where we are and that behavior is directly related to treatment. You can either watch it here or go to Frontline and watch it (my recommendation).
Sunday, October 26, 2008
The Usual (Black Male) Suspect/Redistribution of Wealth
Recently, a volunteer for John McCain filed a police report stating a 6' 4" black man robbed her at an ATM machine in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Ashley Todd, 20-year-old college student from College Station, Texas, said that she was at the machine when she was robbed at knife point. She gave the 'robber' $60 and as he walked off, he noticed she had a McCain/Palin sticker on the back of her vehicle, turned around and hit her in the back of her head. While she was on the ground he kicked and punched her. Finally, the alleged mystery man then turned her over and, with a "dull knife" carved a-get this-backwards "B" in her face (as seen in the photo). She later recanted and admitted the entire ordeal was a hoax.
Obviously, this woman was attempting to discredit the Obama presidential campaign, but it proves, in the spirit of Susan Smith and Charles Stewart, not even a Black Presidential candidate is above a race-based false accusation (by proxy).
The Redistribution of Wealth
I was on my way to work this morning and was listening to KPFK and one of the guests brought up the Obama phrase, Redistribution of Wealth. I admit I've heard this a thousand and one times before since McCain has put so much emphasis on the phrase-but I heard it for the first time this morning. When McCain looks into the eyes of the American people (albeit through the lens of a camera) and says, "Obama wants to redistribute the wealth," what he is ultimately communicating to white Americans is that Obama wants to take wealth from whites and give it to blacks. If Obama doesn't catch this and address it, it might be a serious problem for him come election day!
Sorry to put two separate posts in one, but I felt in some way they were politically related based upon their racial associations.
TPOKW?
Obviously, this woman was attempting to discredit the Obama presidential campaign, but it proves, in the spirit of Susan Smith and Charles Stewart, not even a Black Presidential candidate is above a race-based false accusation (by proxy).
The Redistribution of Wealth
I was on my way to work this morning and was listening to KPFK and one of the guests brought up the Obama phrase, Redistribution of Wealth. I admit I've heard this a thousand and one times before since McCain has put so much emphasis on the phrase-but I heard it for the first time this morning. When McCain looks into the eyes of the American people (albeit through the lens of a camera) and says, "Obama wants to redistribute the wealth," what he is ultimately communicating to white Americans is that Obama wants to take wealth from whites and give it to blacks. If Obama doesn't catch this and address it, it might be a serious problem for him come election day!
Sorry to put two separate posts in one, but I felt in some way they were politically related based upon their racial associations.
TPOKW?
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
McCarthyism Anyone?
McCarthyism is a term describing the intense anti-communist suspicion in the United States in a period that lasted roughly from the late 1940s to the late 1950s. This period is also referred to as the Second Red Scare, and coincided with increased fears about communist influence on American institutions and espionage by Soviet agents. Originally coined to criticize the actions of U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy, "McCarthyism" later took on a more general meaning, not necessarily referring to the conduct of Joseph McCarthy alone.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Cousin Nebo-My Alien Relative
Because I have this creative thing nagging me constantly, I have to find new ways to express it. Recently I purchased another laptop and it had this comic strip software on it and I couldn't resist, so here's the first installment of Cousin Nebo-My Alien Relative.
Enjoy!
click photo to enlarge
Enjoy!
click photo to enlarge
Saturday, October 04, 2008
Riddle Me This?
If it is true that the Bush family are historically Nazi sympathizers, why aren't Israel and Jewish people up in arms over this?
Thursday, October 02, 2008
Proof God Exists
I was listening to a talk show on television the other day and I heard one of the guest say, "Well ya' know, there are no atheist in a foxhole" and thought to myself, "Hmmm...there's proof God exists." In reality, that's not proof of anything, but in the world of talk shows, it was hardcore evidence.
For some reason, his words found their way into my conscious at 5:45 a.m. and I had to do something about it. I felt like the premise had to be analyzed-to be dismantled in order to uncover what existed under its hood. The more I thought about it, the more in my mind it reminded me of why religion has been so popular over the years and why so many people have a problem taking an educated look at the stories that make up the bible. Some of them can't really be possible. I have no intention of debating the bible, I believe people should be allowed to believe whatever they choose, as long as it does no one harm. To illustrate what I mean, I'll site one story that really bothers me, and then move on to make my point. In Genesis God created the heavens, the earth, Adam and Eve, the serpent thing happens, they get booted and have a couple of kids-Cain and Abel. Cain and Abel grow up and go out into the land and find wives-Errrrrrrrk!Pump the brakes! Wait a minute, God created Adam and Eve and they had two kids-that's only four people on the planet, remember? During the time Cain and Abel were growing up something miraculous occurred. Someone came out of no where and gave birth to some daughters because the very next thing the two brothers did when they got old enough was to go out into the land and find wives. Where did those wives come from?
I've had this discussion with many a religious person and I've heard answers that range from, "Well, there were other people, God just didn't mention them," to, "Well they were their sisters." I'll deal with the first one first-You know why God didn't mention those other people? Because the bible specifically states that there was nothing, a void, and then the whole shebang was thrown together in 7 days. Then came Adam and Eve, then Cain and Abel. Nothing about any other people. Then all of a sudden there were enough people available so that the brothers could have wives. There's something missing in the story and I can't find anyone who can give me a logical explanation. And don't get me started on the incest explanation. But I digress.
Let's get back to the atheist/foxhole statement. What I've deduced from this talk show guest is that you need fear to prove God's existence. What he's ultimately saying is, "You see, I know how to make a believer out of you atheists-SCARE THE DEVIL OUT OF YOU!" Stick you in a fox hole and, see, you're all fixed now. I can make you believe I'm the man from U.N.C.L.E. if I dangle you from a cliff. In fact, Shug Knight convinced Vanilla Ice that he didn't even write Ice Ice Baby by dangling his ass from the 12th story balcony of a Los Angeles hotel room (he may not have believed he didn't write it but he sure signed a contract stating otherwise). And it's that same fear that has created religious zealots who walk by faith, and not by sight. Incidentally, it was the same fear that made the people in the story, The Emperor's New Clothes see clothes that didn't exist. It took the courage of a little boy to break the ridiculous spell the Emperor's greatness had on his subjects.
It's the same fear that has people believing that Muslims are evil. The same fear that has forced people to keep their mouths shut while the rich in this country loot the coffers. Everyone's trying to hold on to a little bit of what they've had while the rich continue to bleed the line. They've gotten bold enough to ask for $700 billion from Congress and the President right before our very eyes. Why? Well because they know that we are more interested in holding on to a little house on a little plot of land, than taking back this entire country from them. John McCain has 7 houses people-7 houses! And people are losing their homes daily. How could he be so bold as to ask for your vote when he has 7 houses and at least 7 million Americans go hungry, or live on the street, or can't get decent medical coverage or afford healthcare. Incidentally, when he goes to Bethesda, or wherever he goes for medical care, YOU'RE PAYING FOR IT!! See he can get the best healthcare available in the nation at your expense, while you can't buy prescription drugs from the local Rite Aid because he's allowed pharmaceutical companies to increase the cost of your drugs beyond what you can afford to pay.
By now you're probably asking, "Where's the proof that God exists?" Here it is: They are your gods. Who? Them. Those who asked Congress for $700 billion-they are God. They are the merchants of life and death, and have been for quite some time. Think about it-they decide where your money is spent. They can throw it away on a worthless war saying they are looking for a guy that has been dead for god knows how long. Look, if they can find Sadaam in a foxhole out in the middle of the desert and he didn't have a damn thing to do with 9-11, why can't they find Bin Laden? Do they think he's hiding out in those houses in Iraq that troops have been kicking the doors in on now for the past 6 years? Come on people, they are your God. They decide that they are going to let a city of people-Americans-die in a stadium after the levies broke. They decide they are going to offer your asses up as slaves to China by borrowing ENORMOUS amounts of money that they have been lining their pockets with that you and your descendants will be paying back for generations to come. And if you don't, you'll end up speaking Chinese and changing your names, because no one turns their backs on loans that amount to over $1 billion a day for the past 5-6 years. The interest payments alone are enough to bring down a solvent country.
The rich are the gods and everybody knows it-that's why you can't get the common man to speak ill of them. First of all, he wants to be them. Secondly, he focuses his attention on those who are poor and downtrodden and condemns them for being lazy when they work just about as much as the rich. Don't get me wrong, if you work hard, I think you should benefit from the fruits of your labor. But the rich have tilted the game in their favor by taking control of this country's lawmakers and mandating that they create laws that protect their interest, and their interest alone. If an independent country threatens their interest, they send in the military to restore order. There-God exists. Who else is going to have you in a fucking foxhole? Hey, I know, I know, he's not what you expected-but neither was Santa Claus the first time you saw him at the mall.
I have a hard time understanding why God would need to stick you in a foxhole to convince you he exists-or why people who seem to be of decent intellect can't see the absurdity of such a thing. Everything God does to prove his existence has something to do with man doing something to you. Man creates a war, sticks you in a foxhole and you find God. Man throws you in jail for 20 years and in this squalid existence, you find God. I think I now understand God-he is the product of fear. If you're not afraid, you probably won't need him. But man, if you find yourself in a foxhole, you can't miss him. This explains why our nightly (and daily for that matter) news is wrought with things that scare the shit out of you. AIDS (man made), Africanized Honey Bees (I'm still awaiting their arrival), SARS, The British (as in The British are coming-oh wait, they came already...they called themselves The Beatles), Muslim Terrorists, The Russians, UFO's-etc. etc.
Look people, the bottom line is this: one day you'll die. There's nothing you can do about it except make sure you live a good and prosperous life, leave the planet in good working order so successive generation can live prosperous lives as well, and don't overstay your welcome. Death, although it has been vilified, is a good thing, (unless it comes in the form of a bomb dropped from 20,000 ft. or at the end of a bayonet). Death is part of the life cycle and the only way to avoid it is to have never been born. So there's nothing to fear. And if God is waiting on the other side, he'll want to know why you fell for every misconception and misinterpretation of his word introduced by man. He's going to want to know why he gave you a brain and you decided not to use it when you read stories of boys who found wives where there weren't supposed to be any. He's going to want to know why, if you believed so much in walking by faith and not by sight, you never started driving by faith and not by sight.
I've beat this thing to death-gotta go to work
TPOKW
EPILOGUE
Answer me this: Why is it that people give thanks to God on Thanksgiving when it was the Native-Americans that provided nourishment to those ungrateful settlers and who, through their charity, nurtured them through a tough winter and were repaid by being massacred and having their land stolen from them. Shouldn't they be giving thanks to the Native Americans?
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Confucious say, "Man With 7 Houses Does Not Need Another".
Let's keep John McCain from obtaining another house in November. This man is not lying, he is delusional and believes everything he says-including believing he's a Maverick. Those of us old enough to remember know that James Garner and Jack Kelly were the only real American Mavericks. All kidding aside, let's send him back to Arizona, and his fork-tongued side kick Sarah Pack of Lies Palin back to the Russian border. Psst! Do Something!
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Economic Downturn=Less Fake Boobs-It's the End of an Era!
Those of you who know me well know that I have a pet peeve-fake boobs. To me, putting silicone or saline filled bags atop your breast plate is equivalent to gluing fatter rose petals on a rose. You can't improve upon that which the creator has created. Of course there are exceptions-when a woman is born with an abnormality or when she undergoes a mastectomy. In those instances, I believe one should consider restorative surgery. I once dated a girl who was born with one big boob and one small one-she opted to get the larger one reduced. I asked her why she didn't make the runt larger and she said she feared they wouldn't age the same. In similar situations, I could see getting an enhancement, but getting implants because you were born with 32-A's, in my opinion, is just ridiculous.
Breasts are beautiful-period. Bigger doesn't necessarily mean better. If they sag, beautiful. If they get stretch marks, beautiful. If they no longer stand up at attention like they did when you were 16, that's ok-hopefully by the time they've dropped below see-level, you've developed character and a personality that transcends the altitude of your breasts. Women should know, if you got them-men love them. If you strategically place a pair above a knot hole on a tree, you'd find a man in society not above fucking that tree. I, of course, am not one of them but just know that they are out there.
Breasts are powerful enough on their own. They can make a man go deaf and cause his eyes to fixate and only break gaze once they've left the room. At Mardi Gras, a flash of breasts, any old breasts, causes crowds of both men and women to throw beads and erupt into a chorus of YEAHHHH's!!!!!!!!!!!!!. Breast don't need help. But there are women out there whose self-esteem is tied directly to the perkiness of their boobs. In my opinion, the creator made boobs for men and babies (not necessarily in the order of importance-but if you really want to get all chicken-egg about it, the order is correct. You need the man before you get the baby). So many women who get breasts implants claim that they got them for themselves-Poppycock! They don't improve the production of milk, and I don't think you get a stiffy looking at your own-so please, someone tell me what the hell is meant by such a comment. Oh and if you do get a stiffy looking at your own, well, you're not exactly a woman after all now are you?
In my opinion, there is nothing worse than a mature woman wearing a skimpy outfit that accentuates her silicone/saline filled gel sacks. I once saw a woman that was so wrinkled and skinny, dressed like a 17 year old tart. I think everyone in Old Navy that day agreed with me-she looked ridiculous. There wasn't anything sexy about her. She received no cat calls, no whistles, no invitations to dinner. Put her on the arm of any man and he'll chew that arm off in the name of liberation.
With all that said, I guess in some ways I'm a little happy that the economy has had a turn for the worse. Visa/Mastercard will no longer fund these unnecessary attempts to corral youth in a sealed silicone breast baggie-you'll be forced to fund the fiasco solo. And with the saving habits of most Americans and the rising price of housing, gas, and food, I think it's safe to say we've seen the end of an era-HOORAY!! Hooray for the breast as it was intended to be! If the creator wanted every woman to look like Pamela Anderson between the neck and waist, he wouldn't have created Calista Flockhart-and I'm sure that would have made Harrison Ford a very unhappy man. So say goodbye to unnaturally enhanced double-D's and hello to enhancing your personality.
Vive la Boob Natural!
TPOKW
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Black Ice
Here is a brotha that is bringin' it like it should be brought...if only we would listen. We want to stick our heads in the sand like there isn't some sort of system designed to wipe us from the face of the planet-and by ignoring it's existence, we participate in our own demise...speak to us Black Ice.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
T-Wayne
This is hot! The production value is ridiculous. Just when I thought I was a video editor.
Enjoy!
T-Pain - Can't Believe It ft. Lil Wayne [OFFICIAL VIDEO]
Enjoy!
T-Pain - Can't Believe It ft. Lil Wayne [OFFICIAL VIDEO]
Friday, September 05, 2008
Is It Just Me or Does Solange Knowles Look Like Orlando Jones...In Drag?
Hey, I ain't one to celebrity bash (that's if you want to call these two 'D' listers celebrities), but if you put some make up, lip stick, and a dress on Solange Knowles, doesn't she look like Orlando Jones in drag? I don't think I would have gone here had it not been for the nasty response Solange gave to a television host whom she thought mentioned Jay-Z when she was introduced (google that shit, I'm too lazy to post the link).
I don't know if she has talent or not, but I hear the CD sales and downloads are moving like cooling lava.
TPOKW?
Thursday, August 28, 2008
My Baby's Been Bakin'
While I was out slaving over a hot keyboard, Nancy was keeping the Nancy's Kitchen cooking show going on her own. Take a look at the beautiful quiche she baked.
TPOKW
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Jamie Cullum Live! Singin' in the Rain/Umbrella
His performance was too short last night, but this was definitely the highlight of the evening!
Thursday, August 14, 2008
What The Hell???
I don't knock people for having fun-adult fun. To each his own. But to have a baby at the festivities? This photograph is CRIMINAL and everyone in it (excluding the baby) should be arrested and convicted of child endangerment. What the hell is this world coming to?
TPOKW
TPOKW
Monday, August 11, 2008
I've Been Saying This All Along
Why won't we just wake the fuck up? Don't be scurred. There's nothing to fear but fear itself. The truth shall set you free. Yada, yada, yada. WAKE UP!!!!!
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Sunday, July 13, 2008
It's Been a Long Time...
since I left you, without a dope rhyme to step to..... For those of you who remember the infamous Rakim, I just wanted to start off with something that some of you may recall, and others (R. Lawrence) may have never heard of. Be that as it may, I'm blogging again. Why? Because it's Sunday, and I've never been a fan of the day. But lately, I've really been a HUGE fan of Sundays. My significant other (if I can be so blatant as to call her that) and I usually spend the mornings reading the paper and sipping on lattes at a local Starbucks, then we come back to her place and lounge around or hit the beach. Sunday tradition consists of her preparing BLT's for lunch because the both of us are MEGA fans of bacon and she has the sense enough to know that over indulging shortens one's life expectancy, thusly, Sunday is the day of bacon. Our evenings are usually shared in the kitchen preparing dinner. My job is preparing the meat-something I enjoy because I'm able to experiment and try new recipes.
How did I ever become so domesticated? Well, it's simple. I think it's something that's a part of every male, you just have to find someone who won't force you into the kitchen against your will, but who will highlight the finer points of a masculine male who knows how to prepare meat. Yeah, I know I'm being tricked here, but I enjoy it nonetheless. To share the kitchen with Nancy is such a joy for me. It's like team work at its finest. I even help with the cleaning (sometimes).
So today is Sunday, and here's a list of things I've accomplished:
1. Donated to the Starbucks/LA Times fund
2. Had a BLT
3. Walked the dog (twice)
4. Visited every electronics store in a 10 mile radius (twice)
5. Configured Nancy's wireless network (welcome to the world of wireless baby)
6. Transferred all pertinent software from my Mac to her newly purchased Mac Book (welcome to the world of Mac baby)
7. Lovingly seasoned salmon filets and grilled said filets to perfection
Now I'm about to have a seat in front of the tele and enjoy a meal fit for a king!
Wish you all were here!
TPOKW
Monday, July 07, 2008
Loose Cannon
If you were to poll other societies that Americans deem "ancient" or "outdated" you would probably find that they are societies who have defined roles for each member. Children play a role, men play a role, women play a role. Through the eyes of America, however, we usually take a myopic view of the male roll and label him "overbearing" or "domineering". And in a vacuum, this may be true, but when you juxtapose those adjectives to the responsibility of the male in any society, you might see the necessity in one being a bit overbearing.
I love to use the pilot analogy-at 30,000 feet, you don't want your pilot allowing wanton chaos in his cockpit. Why? Well the fate of the passengers hang delicately in the balance, that's why. A man's role in any society is to protect the members of his family and community. There was a day when invaders would regularly compromise the security of small communes and men were expected to lay down their lives to protect the women and children. Now that we've convinced ourselves that the police are the protectors of men, women, and children, every thing has gotten completely skewed. If you don't believe me, I'd like you to research the average response time for a 911 phone call. Based upon what I've read, the average response time is 8-10 minutes, and we all know that varies depending on the neighborhood you reside. Let's say that you live in a middle-class neighborhood and the response time is 8 minutes. A lot can happen in 8 minutes. One can be stabbed, shot, strangled, and the list goes on. I know people don't like to think about these things but sticking your head in the sand doesn't make them go away. And all of this speculation doesn't take in the possibility that you might not even get an opportunity to call for help.
Men have a place in society and it has nothing to do with just paying child support to women who decide to have children to increase their income or paying alimony for the purposes of allowing some useless societal goiter to suck the life from the members of society.
Over the holiday weekend my brother-in-law and I got into one of our many political debates. His wife, my sister, immediately intervened and attempted to quiet him. We are on opposite ends of the political spectrum and our debates are usually heated. I immediately see red when she intervenes. When did we get to the point where men can't discuss politics? How do we solve societies problems if we cannot discuss them? My mother then piped in and my blood began to boil. I posed that very question to her and she asked me repeatedly, "What problems have you solved?" I'll address that later.
First of all, problems aren't solved from the top down. They are better addressed at a community level. It's easier to kill one ant than an entire colony. But my mother and sister seem to think that the politicians actually solve problems. Well in a way they do, but not for those of us on this level.
(Some) American women have become loose cannons and they are doing more damage than good. And one day we're going to look up and this society will be beyond salvaging and we'll all be able to share responsibility-women for interfering and men for allowing them. I'm often reminded of something an ex-girlfriend once said to me after she railroaded our relationship. I was going over all of the detrimental things she'd done and after it was all said and done she said to me, "Well if you knew the end result of my behavior, why did you let me do it?" The sentence speaks volumes if you read between the lines.
American men have lost their balls. The government has given them the power to excise a man from his rightful position in society and in the family structure. She can decide for the entire family and tear it apart. Sometimes it's a necessary decision. But often times it is because she wants to shirk the responsibility that comes along with raising her family. Or, perhaps, she'd like to chase the latest stud that is giving her attention. Of course he's going to treat her better than the husband, he has a fantasy that he has to create-and she buys it hook, line, and sinker.
Even so-call Christians, whose bible tells them that a man should head his family, ignores the scriptures. Women will circumvent their husband's authority for a pair of worthless, over priced shoes. She'll literally jeopardize her family's security for a pair of shoes. It wasn't always like that, women were once our partners. But along came liberation-and now they are free to fuck up everything they touch. Sure, they're free to vote and burn their bras, but they are also free to loot the very bank account that will keep a roof over their heads to serve the consumer gods. Sadly pathetic.
This isn't an indictment on all women. But their are guilty ones out there who are turning this society into a shit hole of worthlessness. And when it's all over, we'll all be worse off for it. When did we get to the point whereby men can't discuss politics amongst themselves? And we wonder why women weren't allowed in certain quarters centuries ago. If you don't understand what's going, they don't have the sense to keep their fucking mouths shut. And the wealthy parasites who feed on our labor like blood-sucking vampires understand that the common man has no control over their mate-she is a loose cannon and, even though I have no Christian affiliation, I can see the wisdom espoused in those verses that instruct women to follow the lead of their men. If a man is abusing his authority, every man in his community should rally against him-even if it means you kill him. No society can tolerate a tyrant. Innocent people should not be abused-I don't care who the abuser is and he should be eradicated like any other cancerous cell.
As for what I've accomplished-mom, I'll have you know at the tender age of 18 I took on the U.S. Air Force on numerous occasions when I was being persecuted because of the color of my skin-and I won each time. This type of abuse continued until the final attempt in 1985 and I was 21 years old and 5 members conspired against me over a non-incident. It was blown up to be a major incident. And when the smoke cleared, I walked away unscathed. I was pitted against a tribunal who had a combined total of over 70 years of military experience, and all I had was 3 1/2. And when it was over, they were left scratching their heads, wondering how I was able to, with no legal counsel, assistance, or experience, defeat them at their own game.
At the age of 25, I assembled a group of employees and saved a fellow employee who was being unfairly accused of a crime we knew he was innocent of-and we were able to have that employee reinstated along with his back pay.
Later in life, when a company I worked for, in an attempt to fire one employee, retroactively wrote up everyone in the department for tardies that had occurred well over 12-15 months prior, I stood alone and refused to sign the documents-others began to take notice and also refused to sign. The matter silently went away.
At the same company, when our commissions were cut in half, I organized a slow down in production-we literally refused to work. A month later our commissions were returned to their original state.
My life is filled with instances where I've organized and gone against those who attempt to bully those who are considered weak and our political power lies in numbers. But how can you get the message across if you're unable to discuss it? Sadly, I don't ever see things getting better-I'm getting too old to fight. And frankly, what am I fighting for? Those who would benefit from a good struggle don't even have a clue as to what the powers that be have in store for them. As long as they can shop and party, what's the problem.
Noah built an ark once, and by the time the rest of the people got it, it was too late.
TPOKW
I love to use the pilot analogy-at 30,000 feet, you don't want your pilot allowing wanton chaos in his cockpit. Why? Well the fate of the passengers hang delicately in the balance, that's why. A man's role in any society is to protect the members of his family and community. There was a day when invaders would regularly compromise the security of small communes and men were expected to lay down their lives to protect the women and children. Now that we've convinced ourselves that the police are the protectors of men, women, and children, every thing has gotten completely skewed. If you don't believe me, I'd like you to research the average response time for a 911 phone call. Based upon what I've read, the average response time is 8-10 minutes, and we all know that varies depending on the neighborhood you reside. Let's say that you live in a middle-class neighborhood and the response time is 8 minutes. A lot can happen in 8 minutes. One can be stabbed, shot, strangled, and the list goes on. I know people don't like to think about these things but sticking your head in the sand doesn't make them go away. And all of this speculation doesn't take in the possibility that you might not even get an opportunity to call for help.
Men have a place in society and it has nothing to do with just paying child support to women who decide to have children to increase their income or paying alimony for the purposes of allowing some useless societal goiter to suck the life from the members of society.
Over the holiday weekend my brother-in-law and I got into one of our many political debates. His wife, my sister, immediately intervened and attempted to quiet him. We are on opposite ends of the political spectrum and our debates are usually heated. I immediately see red when she intervenes. When did we get to the point where men can't discuss politics? How do we solve societies problems if we cannot discuss them? My mother then piped in and my blood began to boil. I posed that very question to her and she asked me repeatedly, "What problems have you solved?" I'll address that later.
First of all, problems aren't solved from the top down. They are better addressed at a community level. It's easier to kill one ant than an entire colony. But my mother and sister seem to think that the politicians actually solve problems. Well in a way they do, but not for those of us on this level.
(Some) American women have become loose cannons and they are doing more damage than good. And one day we're going to look up and this society will be beyond salvaging and we'll all be able to share responsibility-women for interfering and men for allowing them. I'm often reminded of something an ex-girlfriend once said to me after she railroaded our relationship. I was going over all of the detrimental things she'd done and after it was all said and done she said to me, "Well if you knew the end result of my behavior, why did you let me do it?" The sentence speaks volumes if you read between the lines.
American men have lost their balls. The government has given them the power to excise a man from his rightful position in society and in the family structure. She can decide for the entire family and tear it apart. Sometimes it's a necessary decision. But often times it is because she wants to shirk the responsibility that comes along with raising her family. Or, perhaps, she'd like to chase the latest stud that is giving her attention. Of course he's going to treat her better than the husband, he has a fantasy that he has to create-and she buys it hook, line, and sinker.
Even so-call Christians, whose bible tells them that a man should head his family, ignores the scriptures. Women will circumvent their husband's authority for a pair of worthless, over priced shoes. She'll literally jeopardize her family's security for a pair of shoes. It wasn't always like that, women were once our partners. But along came liberation-and now they are free to fuck up everything they touch. Sure, they're free to vote and burn their bras, but they are also free to loot the very bank account that will keep a roof over their heads to serve the consumer gods. Sadly pathetic.
This isn't an indictment on all women. But their are guilty ones out there who are turning this society into a shit hole of worthlessness. And when it's all over, we'll all be worse off for it. When did we get to the point whereby men can't discuss politics amongst themselves? And we wonder why women weren't allowed in certain quarters centuries ago. If you don't understand what's going, they don't have the sense to keep their fucking mouths shut. And the wealthy parasites who feed on our labor like blood-sucking vampires understand that the common man has no control over their mate-she is a loose cannon and, even though I have no Christian affiliation, I can see the wisdom espoused in those verses that instruct women to follow the lead of their men. If a man is abusing his authority, every man in his community should rally against him-even if it means you kill him. No society can tolerate a tyrant. Innocent people should not be abused-I don't care who the abuser is and he should be eradicated like any other cancerous cell.
As for what I've accomplished-mom, I'll have you know at the tender age of 18 I took on the U.S. Air Force on numerous occasions when I was being persecuted because of the color of my skin-and I won each time. This type of abuse continued until the final attempt in 1985 and I was 21 years old and 5 members conspired against me over a non-incident. It was blown up to be a major incident. And when the smoke cleared, I walked away unscathed. I was pitted against a tribunal who had a combined total of over 70 years of military experience, and all I had was 3 1/2. And when it was over, they were left scratching their heads, wondering how I was able to, with no legal counsel, assistance, or experience, defeat them at their own game.
At the age of 25, I assembled a group of employees and saved a fellow employee who was being unfairly accused of a crime we knew he was innocent of-and we were able to have that employee reinstated along with his back pay.
Later in life, when a company I worked for, in an attempt to fire one employee, retroactively wrote up everyone in the department for tardies that had occurred well over 12-15 months prior, I stood alone and refused to sign the documents-others began to take notice and also refused to sign. The matter silently went away.
At the same company, when our commissions were cut in half, I organized a slow down in production-we literally refused to work. A month later our commissions were returned to their original state.
My life is filled with instances where I've organized and gone against those who attempt to bully those who are considered weak and our political power lies in numbers. But how can you get the message across if you're unable to discuss it? Sadly, I don't ever see things getting better-I'm getting too old to fight. And frankly, what am I fighting for? Those who would benefit from a good struggle don't even have a clue as to what the powers that be have in store for them. As long as they can shop and party, what's the problem.
Noah built an ark once, and by the time the rest of the people got it, it was too late.
TPOKW
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Thought You'd Get A Kick Out of This
This is some throwback shit from the 80's-real funny. It's Jim Carey's parody of Vanilla Ice.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Cooking In Nancy's Kitchen
This is my new weekly cooking show which really isn't a show at all. It's just me affecting a very bad British accent cooking dinner in my girl's kitchen-something I'll probably be doing weekly.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Matters of the Heart
It seems like just yesterday I decided that loneliness would be my constant companion. I guess it was foolishly pessimistic of me to make such a brash statement at a time of extreme uncertainty. Perhaps I needed some sort of justification for the place I had found myself. I, like most, fear the unknown. And not knowing if I'd ever find the courage to move beyond the present state I found myself in was something I wanted to face bravely. Which probably explains why I took such a solid stance on never dating again. But I'm here to admit I was mistaken.
My older sister, Jennifer, and I were having a conversation one day about the joys of entering certain stages in life. I, now being middle-aged, enjoy being called 'uncle' by, and being an uncle to, my nieces and nephews. I enjoy nature a lot more than I did when I was a young man, and occasionally enjoy a drink to take the edge off what all too often ends up being a stressful day. As a young man, I was too busy doing what young men do to appreciate the beauty of nature. I didn't have nieces or nephews, and I drank mostly to get drunk and party. But with age comes moderation and I now like to take the time to enjoy the precious moments that so many of us take for granted.
When it comes to matters of the heart, I've discovered a new appreciation as well. I believe I've developed a patience that affords me the ability to savor the sweetness of those fleeting moments that mark time in one's memory bank. In case you're wondering, yes, I've found someone who has touched me in ways I've not known possible. I know that sounds like such a cliche, trust me, it is anything but.
Time provides us gifts if we choose to accept them. But we all fear aging so terribly, most of us enter into the process reluctantly; missing out on so much. Who knew romance could be so rewarding being middle-aged? I know the young believe they've cornered the market on it, but they have so much to learn about love, it's almost impossible for them to fully understand the depths of what it may offer. A true indication of this may be found in the high divorce rate. So many believe that the aging process has nothing to offer-but I believe that if you are married and be patient, time has so many gifts to offer you along the way. Instead of jettisoning your mate in search of your younger years with a complete stranger, perhaps we should all consider rediscovering our new selves with the person we are with.
My situation is a little different. The person I am speaking of is new to me. We are both middle-aged and we've somehow found a way to see the world the same way. There are probably a lot of contributing factors, but one thing I know to be true is we focus on one another. I am not saying that we see everything eye-to-eye; we most certainly do not. But we do view partnership similarly. Each moment we spend with one another seems to lay a foundation that we almost effortlessly continue to build upon. We enjoy dining with one another-it seems almost mandatory that, when we can, we do. She enjoys cooking healthy meals for me and takes great pride when I compliment her on her culinary accomplishments. I've been with enough women to know that these days, this is rare.
If we allow it, time perfects us. But all too often we fight it-longing to maintain a youthful appearance and not disappear into the backdrop of society. I being one who appreciates sometimes going unnoticed, can recognize the benefits. I know what it is like to be amongst a crowd of people and not be acknowledged-inherently, it has its own rewards and if we silence our thoughts and relish in the moments, we can begin to appreciate those rewards.
I don't know how promising my future is with my new friend-and I don't really allow myself to think much about it. What I am learning to do is appreciate each day as it comes, and celebrate it as though it is our last. I don't think I've let a day pass that I haven't told her how much all that we do together means to me. I am genuinely delighted each time she leaves a token of her appreciation somewhere I'll surprisingly discover it. It is an indication of her thoughtfulness. There is so much that could be learned from what we've naturally seemed to have discovered. The young might be amazed at how much they truly don't know about matters of the heart.
If the gods smile down upon me, I believe I would be blessed if the rest of my days could be spent like this; with her. On the horizon I can see my end, and I no longer concern myself with if I'll get there, or when I'll get there. What is most important to me is how I get there, and if my Drugh and I discover a way to travel that path together, it will be a crowning achievement on what has been the most splendid and rewarding life one could ever imagine.
TPOKW
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Is America An Emerging 3rd World Country?
With a war that is costing this nation over $1 billion a day, a housing market that has lost any semblance of a bottom, and oil at over $130 a barrel, I would venture to say...maybe. Months ago I wrote a blog titled, "Who Will Officially Welcome Us to the 3rd World?" and posited that we were well on our way. I'm still as pessimistic as I was then, but now I'm simply hoping that this election will turn things around-but it's unlikely.
The two (op)posing parties have the same agenda-catering to the owners of this nation-not it's labor force. If you don't own a piece of this country-a major piece, then you are going to find it difficult in the future to maintain even a substandard lifestyle. There are those who have seen themselves as a part of the establishment, and voted based upon such a belief. And it is those same individuals who are now recognizing that they too are just a cog in the machine that can simply be shut down, dismantled, or discarded at the behest of someone else.
In 1999 gas prices were $.90 a gallon. And then some of you decided to elect an oil man for President, and by doing so, we've gone from below $1 a gallon to $4, an increase of over 400% in 9 years. Does anyone else besides me see a correlation? But who's to blame? Certainly not the wealthy or the politicians. They've just done what we've allowed them to do-become what we've allowed them to become. The Native-Americans (I still call them Indians), believed that the land belonged to all. But now we all are seeing that we're being excluded from a system that we've helped to build.
The economy knows no discrimination. When you pay at the pump, you don't get a Republican or Democrat discount. There are no discriminating practices when it comes to foreclosing on someone's home. It's simple, you can't pay-you're out. Although minorities may be the first to go when companies decide to lay off its labor staff, but eventually we all feel the sting.
I have a question to pose to those of you who swore that immigrants were taking your jobs-Are they the ones sitting at the desk you once occupied at that corporate call center? Wait, I believe I have the answer to that-no. I also have a tidbit of information for you. When public sentiment was that immigration was destroying the labor market, in a way you were correct-they just used the wrong homonym. Immigrants taking jobs wasn't the problem, it was job emigration-jobs leaving the U.S. to be had by individuals in nations as far away as India, China, and as local as Mexico and Canada. Dell Computer, American Express, and a host of other corporations were able to reduce their overhead by paying an Indian worker a fraction of what they paid a U.S. citizen. During the Bush II administration, these same corporations have enjoyed tax breaks that would comparatively make welfare look like the cost of a McDonald's happy meal-all at the expense of America, and Americans.
What bothers me the most, is that everyone is silent. No one is really standing up and screaming at the top of their lungs about any of this. But I know the reason why-you see, we've allowed them to label us, separate us, categorize us...willingly. African-American; Asian-American; the disabled; multi-ethnic; white; Democrat; Republican; Independent. We were Nascar dads and Stay-at-Home moms. But do you know what they call us behind our backs? CONSUMERS. If you're finding it difficult seeing the problem with the term, allow me to illustrate it for you. Imagine a large sow, (for those of you who've never been on a farm before, that's an adult female pig), laying on her side and beneath her are a dozen little piglets suckling. The sow is the system, you're just one of the piglets. Now let's say that, for whatever reason, the sow loses her interest in the piglets, gets up and allows them to fend for themselves. Some will probably survive, most will not. People, the sow has left the building.
Look, I know this is hard to believe. How could your government do that to you? Well, for those of us whose ancestors were brought here in chains, beaten, raped, tortured, and then set free without any psychological assistance to repair the damage that had been done to our mental (and physical) well-being, we've seen this before. You're just a number and if children are forced to work in sweat-shops for pennies a day-in modern times, how is it that you would think the very same thing couldn't happen here? It's a mentality-a mindset. It's a philosophy, and all it takes is for someone in a position of power to see it as a viable solution to a problem. Yes, it's just that simple. Sure, people are going to hit the streets in protest, but understand this-you're protesting against your sow, and if you piss her off enough, you may never suckle again. They control the food supply, the water supply, and although you'll still have air to breathe, they are making sure that you'll have more than your fair share when you're forced to live out of doors.
But all is not lost. I say look to the Amish. They've lived self-sufficiently for centuries. Never taking more than was needed (over-consuming). Living and working in small self-serving communities, (communism people). Capitalism is for those who control the capital and the resources. In a truly free market it might have worked. But this hybrid economic system we have serves only a small segment of our population-and they have no intentions of sharing. We all were nothing more than just labor, and America a labor camp. And now that we've made them uber-wealthy, they've picked up like a swarm of locust and are descending upon crops elsewhere while the rest of us sort through what's left of what was once a great idea, but is now nothing more than a dream turned nightmare.
The two (op)posing parties have the same agenda-catering to the owners of this nation-not it's labor force. If you don't own a piece of this country-a major piece, then you are going to find it difficult in the future to maintain even a substandard lifestyle. There are those who have seen themselves as a part of the establishment, and voted based upon such a belief. And it is those same individuals who are now recognizing that they too are just a cog in the machine that can simply be shut down, dismantled, or discarded at the behest of someone else.
In 1999 gas prices were $.90 a gallon. And then some of you decided to elect an oil man for President, and by doing so, we've gone from below $1 a gallon to $4, an increase of over 400% in 9 years. Does anyone else besides me see a correlation? But who's to blame? Certainly not the wealthy or the politicians. They've just done what we've allowed them to do-become what we've allowed them to become. The Native-Americans (I still call them Indians), believed that the land belonged to all. But now we all are seeing that we're being excluded from a system that we've helped to build.
The economy knows no discrimination. When you pay at the pump, you don't get a Republican or Democrat discount. There are no discriminating practices when it comes to foreclosing on someone's home. It's simple, you can't pay-you're out. Although minorities may be the first to go when companies decide to lay off its labor staff, but eventually we all feel the sting.
I have a question to pose to those of you who swore that immigrants were taking your jobs-Are they the ones sitting at the desk you once occupied at that corporate call center? Wait, I believe I have the answer to that-no. I also have a tidbit of information for you. When public sentiment was that immigration was destroying the labor market, in a way you were correct-they just used the wrong homonym. Immigrants taking jobs wasn't the problem, it was job emigration-jobs leaving the U.S. to be had by individuals in nations as far away as India, China, and as local as Mexico and Canada. Dell Computer, American Express, and a host of other corporations were able to reduce their overhead by paying an Indian worker a fraction of what they paid a U.S. citizen. During the Bush II administration, these same corporations have enjoyed tax breaks that would comparatively make welfare look like the cost of a McDonald's happy meal-all at the expense of America, and Americans.
What bothers me the most, is that everyone is silent. No one is really standing up and screaming at the top of their lungs about any of this. But I know the reason why-you see, we've allowed them to label us, separate us, categorize us...willingly. African-American; Asian-American; the disabled; multi-ethnic; white; Democrat; Republican; Independent. We were Nascar dads and Stay-at-Home moms. But do you know what they call us behind our backs? CONSUMERS. If you're finding it difficult seeing the problem with the term, allow me to illustrate it for you. Imagine a large sow, (for those of you who've never been on a farm before, that's an adult female pig), laying on her side and beneath her are a dozen little piglets suckling. The sow is the system, you're just one of the piglets. Now let's say that, for whatever reason, the sow loses her interest in the piglets, gets up and allows them to fend for themselves. Some will probably survive, most will not. People, the sow has left the building.
Look, I know this is hard to believe. How could your government do that to you? Well, for those of us whose ancestors were brought here in chains, beaten, raped, tortured, and then set free without any psychological assistance to repair the damage that had been done to our mental (and physical) well-being, we've seen this before. You're just a number and if children are forced to work in sweat-shops for pennies a day-in modern times, how is it that you would think the very same thing couldn't happen here? It's a mentality-a mindset. It's a philosophy, and all it takes is for someone in a position of power to see it as a viable solution to a problem. Yes, it's just that simple. Sure, people are going to hit the streets in protest, but understand this-you're protesting against your sow, and if you piss her off enough, you may never suckle again. They control the food supply, the water supply, and although you'll still have air to breathe, they are making sure that you'll have more than your fair share when you're forced to live out of doors.
But all is not lost. I say look to the Amish. They've lived self-sufficiently for centuries. Never taking more than was needed (over-consuming). Living and working in small self-serving communities, (communism people). Capitalism is for those who control the capital and the resources. In a truly free market it might have worked. But this hybrid economic system we have serves only a small segment of our population-and they have no intentions of sharing. We all were nothing more than just labor, and America a labor camp. And now that we've made them uber-wealthy, they've picked up like a swarm of locust and are descending upon crops elsewhere while the rest of us sort through what's left of what was once a great idea, but is now nothing more than a dream turned nightmare.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Exhaustion-Running on Fumes and From My Demons
I'm tired. Really fucking tired. Why? Because I'm too stupid to go to sleep. Rest is what I need, but instead I'm appeasing my demons and blogging. Yes, I have demons. Little brown ones that sometimes manifest themselves in the form of midgets. Why midgets? Because when I was a kid, the Oscar Meyer Weiner man came to town and he was a midget. My little sister was afraid of him because she'd never seen a grown man that small before. At the age of 4 she knew something wasn't right about him. First of all, he drove into town in a giant hot dog. She cried when he disembarked. I wanted to kick his ass for making her cry, but my mother warned me that he was a little man and I was boy. And even though when we eventually squared off we were eye to eye, he could take me-she knew it. Realistically, I don't think she wanted us to fight because she didn't want to end up in the local papers for kicking the midget's ass-victorious perhaps, but lacking the glory one garners when they defeat an opponent. Sort of like when an aging Muhammad Ali was defeated by the toothless Olympic gold medal winning Leon Spinks-lackluster to say the least.
So, we let the little man leave town. But there's still that picture of me and my two sisters posing in front of old man Kirkpatrick's grocery store next to the midget. Is midget politically incorrect? I'm too tired to give a fuck. It's not like one could take me now. Besides, midgets have come a long way. Look at Wee Man. He's in a movie. I'm regular sized, I've never been in a movie-well maybe not one you'd want to see. And what about Bridget the Midget? See, she uses midget, so I guess I'm cool (not that I was worried or anything. Like I said earlier, I'll kick a midget's ass). But back to Bridget the Midget. As you may know, she's a porn star (that term is so loosely used). I've actually seen her in action but there was nothing sexual about a naked woman with two little stubby legs in the air being penetrated by a full-sized adult male. It was comical at best. And quite frankly, I don't like to mix my sex with comedy. That's equivalent to eating in the bath tub. But I watched. Not to the end...what the hell do you think I am, a freak?
Anyway, like I said before, I have my demons. They aren't always midgets. Sometimes they appear to me as women with three eyes...short women with three eyes....MIDGETS with three eyes. What the hell is it with me and midgets? Perhaps I have a repressed Napoleonic complex that needs addressing. There is that picture of my two sisters and me posing with the Oscar Meyer midget. My little sister was taller than me. Perhaps I feared never growing and ending up a 4-foot tall black midget who's only means of support was to travel from small town to small town in an oversized hot dog on wheels being threatened by little boys who would swear on a stack of bibles that they could kick my ass.
I need sleep.
TPOKW
So, we let the little man leave town. But there's still that picture of me and my two sisters posing in front of old man Kirkpatrick's grocery store next to the midget. Is midget politically incorrect? I'm too tired to give a fuck. It's not like one could take me now. Besides, midgets have come a long way. Look at Wee Man. He's in a movie. I'm regular sized, I've never been in a movie-well maybe not one you'd want to see. And what about Bridget the Midget? See, she uses midget, so I guess I'm cool (not that I was worried or anything. Like I said earlier, I'll kick a midget's ass). But back to Bridget the Midget. As you may know, she's a porn star (that term is so loosely used). I've actually seen her in action but there was nothing sexual about a naked woman with two little stubby legs in the air being penetrated by a full-sized adult male. It was comical at best. And quite frankly, I don't like to mix my sex with comedy. That's equivalent to eating in the bath tub. But I watched. Not to the end...what the hell do you think I am, a freak?
Anyway, like I said before, I have my demons. They aren't always midgets. Sometimes they appear to me as women with three eyes...short women with three eyes....MIDGETS with three eyes. What the hell is it with me and midgets? Perhaps I have a repressed Napoleonic complex that needs addressing. There is that picture of my two sisters and me posing with the Oscar Meyer midget. My little sister was taller than me. Perhaps I feared never growing and ending up a 4-foot tall black midget who's only means of support was to travel from small town to small town in an oversized hot dog on wheels being threatened by little boys who would swear on a stack of bibles that they could kick my ass.
I need sleep.
TPOKW
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Too Soon?
When two people with a mutual interest in one another meet, millions of questions crowd the mind. I wonder what he/she is like in bed? I wonder if we'll make it past the first date? I wonder if..... If you're anything like me, you try to predict if and when it all will end. But if things seem to be progressing smoothly, we often find ourselves faced with the is it too soon dilemma.
There should be some sort of progression chart that you can refer to when you want to know if you're progressing too quickly. Of course, all situations aren't the same. Sometimes you meet that perfect person, hop in the carpool lane together, and fast track the relationship to a painful and bitter end. Sometimes things do workout. We have no way of knowing, it's just a chance we all have to take while we pursue companionship in a world full of people who find connecting difficult.
Who determines whether a couple is moving too soon? I think we can all agree that meeting someone in Las Vegas and awaking married the next day is too soon. Talk about living for the moment. I've been known to do some wild, outlandish things, but I can assure you that I would never meet someone in Vegas and marry them the same night. Perhaps sleeping with someone on the first night is way too soon, but we've all done it (I suspect). But that goes beyond the scope of a relationship and relates to some entirely different agenda.
I think we all worry that we're moving too fast but I've yet to meet the person who can produce a document that will tell us when and how we should proceed. We all seem to know when it's too soon, but I have yet to hear what the opportune time should be. The toughest one of all seems to be when you utter those 3 words that always seem to seal the fate of a relationship. Once you say "I love you", it seems like the die has been cast and you either spiral into bliss or, in the not-so-distant future, someone's going to be needing a lot of Kleenex. Hearing those words is like winning the gold medal in the Olympics. Prior to hearing them you're in training. Up every morning at the crack of dawn. You eat right and keep the snacking to a minimum. You're in great shape-destined to take the gold. And then you take the podium...center stage. Over the loud speaker you hear the American National Anthem. It is your crowning moment. You bend at the waist and someone places atop your head the Caesar wreath and then the gold medal. You've done it! The moment you've been waiting for. It's the Olympic equivalent to hearing, "I love you."
You return to your home town a hero! Everyone says they knew you could do it. Everyone says they knew you back when. Who needs to train now? You've reached the pinnacle. All of sudden, you're partying to the wee hours of the morning-everyone wants to buy you a drink....how could you resist? Your waistline begins to expand, your endorsements dry up, and the honeymoon's over. It won't be long before TMZ eulogizes you.
I don't know what it is about hearing those three words that causes us to claim victory, but we always do.
I wish I had the answer because I know that we sometimes sabotage relationships by attempting to adhere to this imaginary timeline that no one has seen. I don't know what constitutes too soon, but I know the ramifications of being too late. Think about it, can you ever arrive to work too soon? Not according to most bosses-but you can definitely arrive too late. Is it ever too soon to begin investing for your retirement? Absolutely not! If you find a financial analyst who says otherwise-fire him on the spot. Is it ever too soon to do your Christmas shopping. Arguably yes, but consider the alternative. It's 12/24/(year whatever). I'm preparing to hit the malls-they close in 3 hours. I'm so stressed that if my blood pressure was measured in dollars, it would be considered a small fortune. I'm driving like a maniac. Running red lights and cursing anyone who'd dare drive the speed limit during my time of crisis. I hit the parking lot and, just as I suspected, parking is damn near non existent. I hit one department store and I have no intentions of leaving until I've purchased everything I need. 3 hours later I emerge the victor and promise myself to never again criticize those who shop too soon.
When it comes to relationships, who has the answers? Is it quite possible for two people to meet, let things flow naturally, ignore the warnings from those uninvolved parties who seem to be trying to rain on our parade, and have a successful relationship? I think so. We have to ask ourselves, how much of that advice can we attribute to jealousy? Too soon just might be a way for someone to throw a monkey wrench into what might otherwise be the beginning of a perfect relationship.
It's probably best that we develop our own too soon barometer. We should be reasonable and resist the urge to deviate from the plan when we've been inspired to move quicker. Even still, once we've waited the allotted time, it doesn't mean we should move full speed ahead. It just means that we've gone beyond the required waiting period and we can now consider moving forward. We should also use the time to evaluate the situation, but not over think things. All to often I am guilty of over analyzing a situation and ultimately killing the spirit of the relationship. This is beginning to sound like an advice column and that was not my intent. Perhaps what I'm trying to say here is that we should make our own determinations as to what is considered too soon, and what isn't. What may be too soon for someone, may be too late for someone else.
TPOKW
There should be some sort of progression chart that you can refer to when you want to know if you're progressing too quickly. Of course, all situations aren't the same. Sometimes you meet that perfect person, hop in the carpool lane together, and fast track the relationship to a painful and bitter end. Sometimes things do workout. We have no way of knowing, it's just a chance we all have to take while we pursue companionship in a world full of people who find connecting difficult.
Who determines whether a couple is moving too soon? I think we can all agree that meeting someone in Las Vegas and awaking married the next day is too soon. Talk about living for the moment. I've been known to do some wild, outlandish things, but I can assure you that I would never meet someone in Vegas and marry them the same night. Perhaps sleeping with someone on the first night is way too soon, but we've all done it (I suspect). But that goes beyond the scope of a relationship and relates to some entirely different agenda.
I think we all worry that we're moving too fast but I've yet to meet the person who can produce a document that will tell us when and how we should proceed. We all seem to know when it's too soon, but I have yet to hear what the opportune time should be. The toughest one of all seems to be when you utter those 3 words that always seem to seal the fate of a relationship. Once you say "I love you", it seems like the die has been cast and you either spiral into bliss or, in the not-so-distant future, someone's going to be needing a lot of Kleenex. Hearing those words is like winning the gold medal in the Olympics. Prior to hearing them you're in training. Up every morning at the crack of dawn. You eat right and keep the snacking to a minimum. You're in great shape-destined to take the gold. And then you take the podium...center stage. Over the loud speaker you hear the American National Anthem. It is your crowning moment. You bend at the waist and someone places atop your head the Caesar wreath and then the gold medal. You've done it! The moment you've been waiting for. It's the Olympic equivalent to hearing, "I love you."
You return to your home town a hero! Everyone says they knew you could do it. Everyone says they knew you back when. Who needs to train now? You've reached the pinnacle. All of sudden, you're partying to the wee hours of the morning-everyone wants to buy you a drink....how could you resist? Your waistline begins to expand, your endorsements dry up, and the honeymoon's over. It won't be long before TMZ eulogizes you.
I don't know what it is about hearing those three words that causes us to claim victory, but we always do.
I wish I had the answer because I know that we sometimes sabotage relationships by attempting to adhere to this imaginary timeline that no one has seen. I don't know what constitutes too soon, but I know the ramifications of being too late. Think about it, can you ever arrive to work too soon? Not according to most bosses-but you can definitely arrive too late. Is it ever too soon to begin investing for your retirement? Absolutely not! If you find a financial analyst who says otherwise-fire him on the spot. Is it ever too soon to do your Christmas shopping. Arguably yes, but consider the alternative. It's 12/24/(year whatever). I'm preparing to hit the malls-they close in 3 hours. I'm so stressed that if my blood pressure was measured in dollars, it would be considered a small fortune. I'm driving like a maniac. Running red lights and cursing anyone who'd dare drive the speed limit during my time of crisis. I hit the parking lot and, just as I suspected, parking is damn near non existent. I hit one department store and I have no intentions of leaving until I've purchased everything I need. 3 hours later I emerge the victor and promise myself to never again criticize those who shop too soon.
When it comes to relationships, who has the answers? Is it quite possible for two people to meet, let things flow naturally, ignore the warnings from those uninvolved parties who seem to be trying to rain on our parade, and have a successful relationship? I think so. We have to ask ourselves, how much of that advice can we attribute to jealousy? Too soon just might be a way for someone to throw a monkey wrench into what might otherwise be the beginning of a perfect relationship.
It's probably best that we develop our own too soon barometer. We should be reasonable and resist the urge to deviate from the plan when we've been inspired to move quicker. Even still, once we've waited the allotted time, it doesn't mean we should move full speed ahead. It just means that we've gone beyond the required waiting period and we can now consider moving forward. We should also use the time to evaluate the situation, but not over think things. All to often I am guilty of over analyzing a situation and ultimately killing the spirit of the relationship. This is beginning to sound like an advice column and that was not my intent. Perhaps what I'm trying to say here is that we should make our own determinations as to what is considered too soon, and what isn't. What may be too soon for someone, may be too late for someone else.
TPOKW
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)