Enough of "Us" versus "Them."

I spent some time and thought on this, so I figured maybe it was worth sharing.  One of my friends posted something on Facebook about how he was encouraged by some of the great results from Tuesday's election.  One of his other "friends" (who is a stranger to me) said that he was disappointed in the results and shrugged it away as the result of "fewer people voting who love liberty and more people voted who love free stuff."  (I'm paraphrasing).  Here was my response to that.

[Name of Person to whom I was responding]--No political party has staked a claim on Liberty. Conservatives do *not* love America, or Freedom, or Valor, or any other positive attribute more than Liberals. We all love Liberty. Liberals love America, too. Liberals defend America, too. Liberals have fought, killed and died for America, too. We continue to do so. We will keep on doing so.

Conservative, Liberal. . .we *all* love America. We all love Liberty. We just have different ideas about how Liberty is best served. There is not a party that loves America and a party that hates America, no matter what some pompous radio comedian might claim. This is the primary point the Republican party needs to accept. Politics should not be about "us" versus "them." If "we" win, what do "we" win? It shouldn’t be about who we agree with or who we don’t, who we identify with and who we don’t. It shouldn’t be an ongoing conflict between camps—it should be a conflict of *ideas*. Which ideas are best and why? If we have to ascribe beliefs to our “opponents” that they don’t actually have just so we can “win,” then we should carefully evaluate whether our beliefs have merit that allows them to stand on their own. If so, we should hoist them like a flag and not fear they’ll be proven wanting. We should be willing (if not eager) to discuss—with specificity—what our ideas are. If not, we should have an open-minded debate about which ideas do have merit.

Any scholar of Constitutional law will tell you that the President of the United States has specific, enumerated, powers. In most matters, particularly those about which we all debate, the President, no matter how well-intentioned, cannot achieve Change without the help of Congress. To me it smacks of the worst kind of disingenuous cynicism to see a President reach across the aisle time and time again, even when he has substantial political capital, only to find a refusal to cooperate followed by a passive-aggressive claim that he is “polarizing.” I find it particularly repugnant when that refusal stems, not from a difference in ideas, but from a partisan political plan of “gridlock.” When politicians run on a platform of “gridlock,” or when a United States Senator openly admits that his goal is not to achieve progress for his state, but to play politics and devote all of his efforts to making sure a President is a “one term” President, then our leaders have lost sight of why they were sent to D.C. in the first place. Politicians should be devoted to service to “We the people,” not to themselves or their own career aspirations. It is insultingly transparent and dishonest to refuse olive branches and efforts to reach across the aisle by our President and then to turn around and criticize the President for “not getting more done,” or to call him a “polarizing figure.” You know who has been “polarized?” The ones who *wanted* to be polarized. The ones who refuse to recognize that there is more that unites us than divides us. The ones who value the “us” versus “them” game more than they value the host of beneficial things that “We the people” can achieve when we can be enlightened enough to put aside our petty differences and work toward a common goal.

Washington--and all of these United States--should be a marketplace of ideas, not a battleground of ideologues. There is not a party of hard workers and a party of lazy opportunists. There is not a party who wants good things for our nation and a party that wants bad things. There is not a party that believes in kicking puppies and eating kittens and a party that opposes it. There is not a party that respects family values and one that hates families. There is not a “party that loves liberty” versus a “party that loves free stuff.” Let’s be adults. Let’s talk about real issues, not imaginary ones. If we allow pundits to craft that argument or to reduce real issues and controversies to that sort of oversimplified, unsophisticated fiction, then we’re losing sight of something important. If we believe in that sort of positive/negative, black/white politics, then we allow ourselves to be reduced to nothing more than children with a schoolyard squabble. We cannot allow ourselves to be manipulated like that. We cannot allow ourselves to lose sight of that which is truly important: The fact that the United States of America is the greatest nation on Earth; that we, as Americans, are empowered to chart our own destinies; that we are Humans first and foremost; that we all are inhabitants of this good Earth; that we are Americans next and, maybe, members of political parties after all of that; and most importantly, that we as Human beings are endowed with incredible potential: for brilliance, for creativity, for innovation, for achievement, for compassion, for empathy and for Love.

Your Personal Theme Song

So the title pretty much says it all.  You know how certain iconic characters have their own theme songs?  Indiana Jones had one, Darth Vader had one, I guess Malcolm Reynolds had one if we count the theme to Firefly.  (If you don't know what I'm talking about or who these people are, why are you even reading my blog?)

Anyway, I have a new personal theme song.  Nothing deep here, just appropriate.  So don't get all douchy and rain on my song for not being "Art."  My tastes are probably too simple to appreciate a work of art if it kicked me in the crotch.    

Here's my current theme song:

I like it.  It cheers me up just a bit when I hear it on the radio. 

So, do you have a personal theme song?  Or maybe one you used to have?  If so, throw it up so everyone can make fun of. . .I mean, enjoy it too.

Asshole of the Month, April Edition

You know what I hate?  I hate rude people.  People who think only of themselves and who act like they're unique little snowflakes and that the rules that apply to the rest of us don't apply to them. 

 I like to think there's a special place in Hell for people who just park wherever they damn well please.  You ever notice at the supermarket how some people just pull up to the curb, park and stroll right in, bold as brass?  I always want to say, "Oh, hey!  Are you famous!  I'm so fucking starstruck!  You must be really important!  I always have to park in a. . .you know. . .a designated parking place. . ."  (Please fill in the rest of the sarcasm-laden rant here). 

I once mentioned this to some folks from out of state and they were surprised to hear this ever happens.  Either they never go to the grocery or maybe other states actually ticket these assholes. 

Anyway, a picture is worth a thousand words, and all that, so let's take a look at this month's winner:

Alright, it is hard to tell from this picture, but this Red Mercedes with Fayette County Kentucky tags was parked like this in front of the Kroger on Nicholasville road (near Michaels, etc.).  You also can't really tell, thanks to my poor photography skills, but this thing is parked at quite an angle, with the rear substantially farther from the curb than the front.  Now, I have seen worse locations for people to just stop a car and leave it, but this one combines the selection of a non-designated spot, with the added insolence of parking at such a devil-may-care angle. 

Here's another view:

So if you ever see this red Mercedes, Kentucky license number 1450AW, please tell him (or her) that I said "Fuck you, asshole!"

So that's our Asshole of the Month for April 2012.  The winner receives a swift kick in the crotch.*





*Winner must be present to receive prize.  Prizes are non-transferable.  Void where illegal.  Some restrictions may apply.  See dealer for details. 

Memory or Dream?

Have you ever had a memory that you just weren't sure about?  Where the memory seems so separate from you, how can it possibly be *your* memory?  A memory so crystal clear in the visual detail, suggestive of emotions you can no longer grasp, but real as rock?  Where you doubt yourself?  You ask, perhaps that was a dream?  Perhaps this memory doesn't belong to me?  If it was mine, is it wrong for me to *keep* it?  Do you ever feel like a voyeur of your own life? 

Ever have a memory as real as it is elusive?  A memory like a square peg and no matter how many times your mind turns it over again and again and again, it never seems to fit?  A memory that's as noteworthy for how it makes you feel as for how unreal it seems?  Like you're seeing through alien eyes?  Here's mine, called to mind by circumstance and unleashed of it's own will:

Sitting on a plane, left side, window seat (peering out at the concourse, of course.  While the pretty lady explains how buckles work).  Standoffish yellow lights outside.  Large window where folks are warm inside. The Terminal.  Watching.  December--probably? 

Outside I stare.  Important people going places, some hand in hand.  Twinkling lights unfurled for the season or some reason beyond recall.   Where I'm not, hot-glowing tree is like a brand.  Lazy-fat snowflakes fall.  White blots fill the air. 

And I feel.  content.  Happy.  satisfied.  Certain of the future.  Me?  Is this just the way: Snowblots; trees; brands; people; cold; lights; rolled-out; season.  Makes one feel? 

Or was this ever real?

Catchy Tunes with Poorly Enunciated Lyrics

So the other day as I was driving home from work, I heard this song on the radio.  I'd heard it before and I liked it in the sense that it is the type of song one can get in one's head for a few days. 

But when I tried to listen to the lyrics, I found them darn near incomprehensible.  I listened very closely.  I made out, "better run, better run, faster than my [????]"  I thought the word that belonged in the brackets was "Brother," turns out, it is "Bullet."  (Had to Google it, of course--fortunately, my cell phone was able to tell me the name of the band and song).  Yes, it is that hard to understand.  In fact, the lyrics are kinda messed up.  I guess it is about a kid who finds his dad's revolver (I guess they still make those), and seemingly wants to go on a killing spree.  *sigh* 

But the tune is so upbeat.  :-(  

Anyway, here it is if you're interested:

So, do you guys have any songs you like that are similarly difficult to understand?  I know this sort of mumbling was practically the trademark of "Dead Can Dance." (Or am I thinking of a different group?)

BTW:  I have no idea what the Hell a "pumped up kick" is, but, apparently, all the other kids have them.  *confused*  

Fashion or Function?

I have no idea how this came up, but I was talking to one of the women with whom I work and we got on the subject of the type of footwear/shirt a guy "should" wear.  First, I didn't realize there were any rules.*  But just for sake of discussion, let's assume there are.

Under this. . .paradigm?  Yeah, under this paradigm, I've been doing it wrong for years.  Well, my whole life, it seems.    She says that the only time it is "okay" to wear running shoes is if you are actually working out, or going to or from same.  Well, this blew my mind.  Although she has never seen me outside of work (where I always wear suits, a la Barney Stinson), I almost always wear running shoes, jeans and a T-shirt (and I add a longsleeve T-shirt when it is cold, and will forgo jeans in favor of cargo shorts/Utilikilts in the summer).  My coworker says that she is embarrassed even to wear running shoes to the grocery store--where she has no problem wearing Yoga pants and a T-shirt. . .with freakin' flip-flops of all things. 

-->Let me interject here that I have a powerful dislike of Flip-Flops.  I hate the name, which--appropriately--rhymes with "slop"--and I think under most circumstances they evidence an absence of care for one's appearance.  I think I mostly hate them because they strike me as the most impractical type of footwear ever invented.  Flip-Flops are the D students of the footwear world.  I submit that they *barely* even qualify as footwear.  Anyway, I'll do an entire rant on them one day perhaps.

She believes that a guy "should" wear an Oxford type shirt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_shirt) and brown "dress shoes" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dress_shoes) (I have to note the hilarity I perceive in the fact that this wikipedia page recognizes 7 "possible" colors for men's shoes.  So. . .the other colors are *IM*possible?  Interesting).  So, even if I'm just hanging out with my friends, I "ought" to be wearing: an Oxford shirt, dress shoes and jeans.  Interesting.  (If this blog were a train, I'd sound the whistle a couple of times and yell out, "NEXT STOP: Fakeville" ("Sorry, ma'am, the train doesn't actually stop at 'Pretentious Heights,' but you can easily take a cab from Fakeville")

What this actually leads me to conclude is that I am more out of touch with Normals than I had previously believed or even suspected.  I suppose this is how Normals see the world?  So, although they think it is awesome when one wears a suit, they think my typical (non-work) appearance is sloppy?  Do most of them really think there are particular things one "ought" to wear? Apparently a sweater ("jumper" for some of you) is also okay.  I sometimes wear sweaters, but never with an Oxford Shirt, which is what I think she was presuming.  I also think that unles your name is "Chandler Bing" you have no business wearing a sweater-vest. 

Anyway, color me surprised.  Apparently I'm something of a "way-too-casual" dresser.  Why didn't anyone ever tell me?  :-)

Anyway, that's a nice bit of frivolity for one day.  Anyone have any thoughts on this?  Agree/Disagree?  Have anything to add? 

[I just remembered, we were talking about some restaurants in town that (apparently) have dress codes which would preclude my ability to enter (absent advance warning).] 

*Barring the obvious social mores when it comes to all things sartorial.

Recycling

This year was the first Valentine's day in years in which I haven't given her anything, given our situation. "My son," however, got her a card in which "he" wrote "I love you, Mommy."  "He" also got her a metal, heart-shaped box of chocolates.  Today I found that Tin Heart empty and in the trash.

I took it out and put it in "Recycling" instead.