Obama’s nobel…

…is, as most things seem to be for Generation X, a  mixed blessing, not to mention a heavy one.

Like most people I was surprised. At first, I was pleased, since Obama is the first GenXer to win The Nobel Peace Prize as JenX67 points out on her blog,  referring to noted generational expert Neil Howe.

But true to GenX form I almost immediately felt apprehensive, wondering if this “award” would end up being more of a burden to the point of being an albatross around Obama’s neck, thus hampering his ability to govern effectively. God knows he’s already got enough obstacles to overcome. Another is not needed.

In this particular case I think my pessimism was not unwarranted. No sooner had the announcement been made then people immediately started bashing Obama as well as The Nobel Prize Committee. Of course, this is nothing new. There was similar reaction when it was award to Jimmy Carter and Al Gore. It was probably no different when Teddy Roosevelt won it in 1906 and Woodrow Wilson won it 1919, the only other sitting U.S. Presidents to be awarded the prize.

That didn’t make the ridicule and stone throwing any less bothersome, especially because so much of it was just petty and juvenile. No doubt many of these people were the same to cheer when Chicago, a U.S. city was passed over to host the Olympic games. You know the political resentment runs deep when people cheer against their own country or refuse to take pride in one of their own citizens being awarded something like The Nobel Peace Prize simply because they don’t like Obama. It’s more than just sad. It’s fucked up.

But I suppose these sorts of whiners can’t, nor should they, be silenced. After all this is America. Everyone is allowed their say even if it is no more than reactionary kind of Tourettes.

At least one other American leader, John McCain, a guy who arguably has more reason than most to take a shot at Obama, offered a dignified response, when he was quoted as saying:

“I can’t divine [the Nobel Committee's] intentions, but I think part of their decision-making was expectations. And I’m sure the president understands that he now has even more to live up to. But as Americans, we’re proud when our president receives an award of that prestigious category.”

As per usual McCain is practically a lone voice in the wilderness.

In the end, Obama’s detractors can piss and moan all they like, they can say it is a joke, that the award means nothing — although one can’t help but wonder if they really believe that why are they expending so much energy and hot air saying so; if means nothing then why say anything at all? — but as Christopher Beam suggests in his slate article, though it may in part make Obama’s job more difficult, expectations being elevated even further, it also offers him more clout. Consider that he is no longer just President of the United State Barack Obama, he is now President of the United States and Nobel Peace Prize winnter Barack Obama. That may not impressing the scraming lunatics that show up at town hall meetings NOT to part take in a rational public debate but to shout down those with whom they disagree or Fox News but then they were/are never going to be impressed by their president. That too is fucked up. But what can you do with people who’s behavoir is fucked up? Simple. Fuck em! Because it will mean something on the world stage, which is, at least in part, where our President needs to perform.

add to the list of reasons to leave Michigan

Chuck Moss, Michigan State Rep for District 40,  which of course is my district.

I voted for this yahoo in the last election(2008), even though at the time it seemed like a good idea to chuck every Republican out of office. Of course, as we’ve learned allowing one party to have too much power is a recipe for disaster. Anyway, the dude seemed reasonable enough, I mean for a politician and a lawyer. I know, what was I thinking?

Anyhoo… I might have continued to hold such a view if I hadn’t made the  mistake of sending him an email expressing my discontent over the matter of school budget cuts. It wasn’t my idea, but at the request of the PTA.  These cuts will come after funds from the state had already been set. And this isn’t the first time that Lansing has done this to our schools.

Anyway the response I got was typical political malarkey. Check it:

Dear Chris,

Thanks for writing me about the School Aid Fund budget.  This budget is a Bi-partisan, Democratic/Republican effort to balance the budget.  House Speaker Andy Dillon and Majority Leader Mike Bishop joined hands to get a budget done and avoid a shutdown.  I don’t like all the cuts either, especially to education, but with our revenues down 22% and unemployment at 15%, we face hard choices.

Actually, the budget as adopted decreases the per-pupil state aid by $218, but allows local districts the flexibility to absorb the cuts by reducing or eliminating any other funded (categorical) program except a handful like Durant, special education, school lunch.  In other words, the schools can use the “categorical” money for their own educational priorities, something that school groups specifically asked for.

Once again, no one wants to make any cuts to schools, but when our income goes down so drastically, we have to do what every family does and tighten our belts and live within our means.

Chuck Moss

Of course I get the obligatory thanks for writing which is immediately followed by Chuckie touting the Bi-partisian efforts, as if this is some great accomplishment, when it should be the norm. I love the “joined hands” phrase, as if to conjure images of too best buddies frolicking in a meadow. Then of course I get hit with numbers to set me up for the justification for the cuts, which comes with the rhetorical device of  beginning with “Actually….” an attempt to strike a pose that suggest this is really not as bad as it sounds, and in fact you should be thankful it is not worse. But I don’t think anyone would be thankful for $218 per pupil cut, especially after the district was already counting on this money. Because these dipshits up in the state capitol cannot get their act together in time we, the citizens, have to suffer. Furthermore, Mr. Moss sees no problem in cutting things like special education and school lunches, because the unfortunate children with disabilities aren’t really worth education anyway and there’s no need to provide a hot lunch option to our children.  They should suck it up and brown bag it like he did, it’ll build character.

I found it curious that he does not like all the cuts but he does not explicitly express his dislike for the cuts to schools. This made me wonder, since Mr. Moss lives in Birmingham and has two daughters, do his children attend the public schools. Turns out they do not, although they did. They’re grown now and –  wait for it — that’s right living out of state.  Lucky for them, eh. They got their education, from the same school that my daughter now attends. And then what? Bolted the state, which I can hardly blame them for. After all, we plan to do the same, although in mine and my wife’s defense we paid for our state-school educations here in Michigan and have worked and paid taxes in the state for more than a reasonable amount of time. But I digress, as I am prone to do. The point is, Mr. Moss really has no vested interest in the schools. But I can’t help but wonder what cuts are not being made. Not to mention will this budget include reasonable tax increases to balance the cuts.

In another email, I called Mr. Moss out on this point and he seemed to feel that his daughters having once attended B’ham school gave him some kind of credibility on the matter. Talk about political gobbledygook, a term that Mr. Moss took offense to. He’d have preferred that I call his position bullshit! Why are so many Republicans potty mouths? Or trying to pick up other men in potties. Oooh! That was just so wrong.

Another bit of political gobbledygook that I called Mr. Moss out on was his attempt to endear himself and deflect constituent ire but referring to  us all as a family. He denied this was what he was trying to do, claiming that is the gov’s rhetoric. The gov happens to be a Democrat and so often used by Repubs such as Mr Moss as a scapegoat or someone to pass the buck to. Criticism of the Gov are not wholly undeserved. Of course, that doesn’t make them useful or productive. It is just petty sniping and a waste of time, which is why the solution to the budget crisis here in Michigan has become so dire. Anyway, to further counter Mr. Moss backpedaling, I found this video clips of him using that very same phrase.

Also worth nothing in this video is his mumbling dismissal of cuts that would effect children and seniors at approximately 1:39.

And then at approximately 2:49 he takes a partisan dig at Dems, saying that the stimulus money from Obama is like oil money, and suggesting that the state should not be taking it. Because it is more important to cut school budgets than to accept funds from a President that isn’t of your party.

But is this a good reason to leave the state? No, not alone. But considering it along with other factors, it makes the move easier to justify, not that justication is required.

Memo to Liberals: Quit your whining about Obama’s cabinet choices!

Oh, my: Barack Obama is still more than a month away from assuming the presidency, and already there are reports about “the left” being dispirited about change they no longer believe in.

B-O-O! H-O-O!

There is nothing new about anxiety among progressives that the candidate they just elected is destined to break their ideological hearts. In his journals, no less a loyalist to John F. Kennedy than the late historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. expressed dismay during the 1960 transition period over Kennedy’s apparent attraction to “a collection of rather respectable and conservative names for the Cabinet.”

However….

Schlesinger concluded that Kennedy was seeking “an administration of conservative men and liberal measures,” an intriguing notion to apply to Obama.

Read full article here.

This strikes me as a good balance. It’s pragmatic.

Radical politics of any kinds is not good. We got that for the last 8 years. What do these piss mouths think, that swinging far in the other direction will somehow put all right with the world? It won’t. It will only cause a host of different kinds of problems.

This is largely a centrist country. Center-right, center-left, whatever. You can argue over that. But you can’t argue that it is near the center somehow.

It’s funny. During the campaign I was maligned with the label left wing liberal, a moniker I would have refuted but didn’t because the right wing Fox-propaganda-guzzling hack that slung at me wasn’t interested in a rational debate, but only to tell me to shut the fuck up. So I did. And Obama won anyway. My point is my politics aren’t that simple. And I don’t believe I’m unusual in that respect. People aren’t just one thing or the other.

Also, I can’t help wondering if many of these disillusioned lefties aren’t Millennials who were expecting some kind of grand sweeping revolution. If it is, there will be no revolution. I know your Boomer parents tainted your thinking with that concept, and for that I am sorry, though mostly I’m just annoyed, as a GenXer who wants to vomit every time I hear some fucking exhippy 60 dipshit utter that phrase. In any case, you’ll just have to get over it. You want revolution, got help overthrow a government in some unstable part of the world. Pakistan comes to mind, but then you’d have to convert to radical Fundament Islamic extremism and you don’t want to do that now, do you?

My point is this: the circumstances we face today requires pragmatism. Revolution will not fix things, it will only make things worse. You can’t change everything all at once.

Obama operates from a position of progressive idealism but moves forward pragmatically. And that is right.

What do Republican(t)s do when they have their asses handed to them?

They dig elbow deep into their smelly crack of tricks and pull out as much political shit as they can and smear smear smear!

Dec. 12, 2008 | Questions are raised. Connections are drawn. Conspiracies are theorized. Guilt is imputed, implied, asserted and very widely associated. And more of the same feckless fingerpointing is exactly what Barack Obama should expect from the Republicans, the right-wing propaganda machine and their enablers in the mainstream media — even after Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich has met whatever fate he deserves.

From the kooky obsession with his place of birth on WorldNetDaily to insinuations about his Chicago pedigree by the Associated Press, all of the attacks launched lately on Barack Obama give off the same familiar smell. Even a quick sniff is enough to bring back memories from a decade ago, when no perfidious accusation against Bill or Hillary Clinton was too crazy to deserve attention.

Read full article here.

A GenX apology to the Baby Boom?

You got to be fucking kidding me?

But no, it is true. That is the form that this article about election night from salon.com takes, beginning thus:

Dear boomers: We’re sorry for rolling our eyes at you all these years. We apologize for scoffing at your earnestness, your lack of self-deprecation, your tendency to take yourselves a little too seriously. We can go ahead and admit now that we grew tired of hearing about the ’60s and the peace movement, as if you had to live through those times to understand anything at all. It’s true, we didn’t completely partake of your idealism and your notions about community. Frankly, it looked gray and saggy in your hands, these many decades later. Chanting “What do we want? Peace! When do we want it? Now!” at that rally against the Iraq war made us feel self-conscious in spite of ourselves. We felt like clichés. We wondered why someone couldn’t come up with a newer, catchier, pro-peace slogan over the course of 40 years of protests. We knew we shouldn’t care that some of you were wearing socks with sandals and smelled like you’d been on the bus with Wavy Gravy for the last three decades, but we cared anyway. We couldn’t help it. It’s just who we are

Read full article here.

I have to say that I’m not so sure that I am ready to apologize for rolling my eyes, but then that’s just the kind of little prick that I am. And it’s really not the point. The point is that the tone of this piece I think captures what is perhaps the epitome of the GenX Journey (yes, I know. that is a real eye-rolling phrase, but I can’t help it) from cynicism to idealism, which of course is symbolized in the path of Barack Obama, as detailed in his autobiography for anyone who cares to read it, resulting in his rise to the most powerful position in the country if not the world.

But when we watched Barack Obama’s victory speech on Tuesday night, we looked into the eyes of a real leader, and decades of cynicism about politics and grass-roots movements and community melted away in a single moment. We heard the voice of a man who can inspire with his words, who’s unashamed of his own intelligence, who’s willing to treat the citizens of this country like smart, capable people, worthy of respect. For the first time in some of our lifetimes, we believed.

And I got to say, it’s a little scary, even while it is astoundingly joyful at the same time. To believe, I mean. Multiple times a day I will just stop and realize again what has happened and my chest swells and my eyes tear up, and I think, no, this can’t be real, I’m dreaming, but of course I am not. I have to remind myself to dig in, it wasn’t a dream, Barack Obama really is the the 44th President of the United State of America, or at least he will be, officially, on Jan 20th.

I’m reminded of the Christian Slater line in the Kevin Costner Robin Hood movie, when he launches Costner and Morgan Freeman over the wall on the giant catapult, amazed that it actually works, he says: “Fuck me, he cleared it!

.

Who Obama should NOT appoint

Interesting article by Timothy Noah on slate.com this morning, detailing his ideas of those that Obama would be advised NOT to appoint to his cabinet.

Right off the bat is Bill Richardson for Sec. of State. This surprised me. I’d been under the impression that Richardson had good credentials. But not according to Noah:

State Department. Do not appoint Bill Richardson, who by some accounts is the front-runner. Obama may feel he owes Richardson because the New Mexico governor endorsed him after dropping out of the presidential race and ended up being called a “Judas” by James Carville. But Richardson took his sweet time before embracing Obama; he dropped out in mid-January and didn’t cough up the endorsement until late March. Richardson’s résumé includes Clinton administration stints as energy secretary and as U.N. ambassador. He didn’t perform either job particularly well. As energy secretary, Richardson rashly accused Los Alamos official Wen Ho Lee of espionage—a charge later proved false. As U.N. ambassador, Richardson didn’t do anything anyone can remember except offer Monica Lewinsky a job three months before the story of her affair with President Clinton hit the Internet. “He has no great beliefs,” observed Slate‘s David Plotz in June 2000, “which may be why he didn’t mind flattering despots.” Richardson has twice broken the world’s record for most handshakes in an eight-hour period. He’s very proud of this. Don’t you find that alarming?

This gives me pause (not that anyone gives a rat’s backside what I do and do not pause for), especially the point about Richardson taking his sweet time about endorsing Obama. Clearly he was biding his time, in case it turned out that Hilary won the nomination and thus the White House. Of course, Richardson is a politcian and those creatures do such things, but if Obama is going to be a “different kind of politician” perhap he should consider cutting Billy loose. Didn’t someone suggest Richard Lugar, Republican from Indiana, for this post?

Noah doesn’t like John Kerry for anything, which is hard to argue with.

Also, I too can’t see Hilary on the Supreme Court.

It seems like a good idea to retain Robert Gets as SoD. Unlike Noah, I don’t really consider him a Bushie. Not like Rummy anyway. And anyway, I wouldn’t think it should be permanent. Eventually Obama could replace Gates with Hagel. I just want Hagel in there somewhere.

This article would be better if it actually offered suggestions for perhaps who Obama should consider. Criticism is fine, but without construction it just leaves rubble in it’s wake. And what good is that?