Tuesday, April 29, 2008
I love the messenger. But I do not love the message. It feels like aggression. I do not enjoy being preached at for what I already believe: I know that difference is magnificence. I would like to celebrate that rather than be preached about it.
I do not enjoy being told I do not love and respect B.B. King
I do not enjoy being told I cannot keep a beat. I love all the beats. I am them; they are me; we are they.
I do not enjoy being told that there is an innate difference between the races. As a minister I expect you to know all the beats of humanity and then some. While I enjoy your showmanship and ability to break barriers of propriety, I care not for the content. I like the style but not the message.
We are the same - the soul knows no color. when you feel joy it is the same joy I feel. When you feel sorrow, it is my sorrow. When you catch the sacredness it is as when I do - that is the human community. It is the same sacredness I feel. When you know God it is as when I do. We are ultimately the same and if what you meant is that we must recognize the differences and appreciate them so that we may reach our humanity, then I agree with you Reverant Wright. but you seem to stop short and revel in the differences. Many of us are past being afraid of differences and we are searching lovingly for our community.
Drop this admonishment about pronunciation. We all crack jokes about Irishmen from Boston and Oilmen from Texas, particularly the Texan from Connecticut and his fake accent. America has done the opposite with Black America: We embrace the oddity of the black language, imitate rappers, fall easily into the rhythms, the kids dig it, and black music has been American music for a century. Even Oprah sounded black when she unveiled her political choice last Autumn. We love the beat. Why parlay in the currency of opposition and division when styles and beats give us so much more than division?
So I do not really mean "don't love the messenger." Actually, I love you. But I don't like the message. The message needs be higher, better, nicer, freer, fun-er. And not all-about-you. Or all-about-me. We're all struggling with what it means to be a human being. We all need to take responsibilty for that, each of us, and to know that this is the spirit of community which is America.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Next, the medium: The media
Third, the candidates: McCain backstage; Obama & Clinton frontstage with US
Finally, change, the moment, happenstance, the NOW. POW!
1 3 individuals want 1600: The Decider, Commander Guy.
11 3 are mediated thru media, a message from the past about the future delivered thru a box: squared off.
111 We are America. We are The US. 3 candidates meet us, hear us, speak for us, guide us, hear us again.
1111 Change, the moment, happenstance, luck, looming, flooding pressures, moment to moment, day to day, crisis to crisis, ceremony to ceremony, routine to routine.
A week in the campaign is a month, a month a year. We forget what engaged or enraged us days ago. Our optimism of a fortnight ago seems like an untarnished photograph from way back. We judge these 3 candidate stars on what we hear about what they say about the past, what we hear about what they say about the future, what we feel about when we see them in the media-sphere and what we think they feel about us -- and upon "what's happening" - the now.
We need new rules to remain a civilized society.
- "drop" exchange down to a conversational level - disengage from conversation-as-confrontation.
- allow a candidate to explain a past relationship with an issue or group, formulate a current stand, and specify how it varies from opponent. Opponent gets to restructure the question or to say that is or is not how it varies.
- Ask candidates to imagine a future to indicate what might shift their priorities, tactics, or even strategy.
Questions about character and likeability are legit. Yes or no? We have to like what we are looking to as a leader for 4-8 years. We want to anticipate the branding and the brand of cronyism. Do we get to open the doors, rev it up, check out the compartments and even kick the tires? Do we expect voluntary "full-disclosure" from our candidates as to who they are? What if full-disclosure is "bull-disclosure?" Then can we kick?
Full disclosure includes: one's close advisors, mentors, mega-buck supporters; one's favored books, socio-political theories, operational practices and relationship to God. We expect our candidates to reveal for themselves - or otherwise the media will do it for us and to us. The candidates must stand up and tell us who they really are. If accusations and questions cannot tell your story, then you tell your story.
This race is a mythic battle, grand scale drama, theater of huge proportion. Will it be a serial tragedy or a burst of hope on the Broadway of a new world? I am ready for each candidate's monologue, written by herself or himself, delivered fireside, allowing me to see if I want him or her as friend, leader, and inspiration and channeller of change.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
- Obama does not take oil money ;-
- Obama did not vote for the war: nor did he vote against it. He didn't vote.
- Obama has hope instead of experience - he didn't make experience on his foreign relations committee.
- Obama is of "the people", with holes in his soles - but his wife reportedly wears an ankle length white mink
- Obama said a couple years ago that he needed more experience: a well financed media campaign now is the experience
- Obama is religious; he goes to church: but only when it's good (didn't inhale).
- Obama wants single mothers to have to buy their children health insurance: - pony up, girls!
- Obama to have exec meetings on CSPAN for all to see: closed door meetings elsewhere.
- With Obama everything's going change
- Obama will then have total transfromation into action figure. I saw one on a dashboard already.
Vote Obama: Vote for Words. Or for retracting words. Either way: Words work. Or they don't. but that's ok you can expect mistakes.
Friday, April 4, 2008
ll We pretend to talk about issues when it is all emotional. The complexity of issues renders most of us ignorant. Caught are we in thought communities. For those for whom Hillary can do no wrong, Hillary can do wrong—and still be right. For those in love with Obama, wrong is not an option since he already said he might be sometime. Think of your best friend. Now, someone says something bad about ‘em: you snap. You cannot hear.
ll Words matter until they make it so other words don't matter. With words cracking as they have been, wild enough to get people suspended for wielding them, why continue to speak as if rational when it is all emotional? What we are caught in the grip of? Some of us want to stand up and shout, “I love him!” Others, “I love her!” Some want to add, “I can’t stand her.” Others, “I can’t stand him.”
ll Which side are you on? Love your candidate or hate the other? Loving yours is fine. Hating the other is hate.
ll Which candidate can lead us in discussion? Awoman.