|
|
|
| |
| |
Monday, October 31, 2005
Traveling in a comfortable car Down a rainy road in the country We saw a ragged fellow at nightfall Signal to us for a ride, with a low bow. We had a roof and we had room and we drove on And we heard me say, in a grumpy voice: No, we can't take anyone with us. We had gone on a long way, perhaps a day's march When suddenly I was shocked by this voice of mine This behavior of mine and this Whole world. --Bertolt Brecht
When you post once a week, the outrages build up. So do the emails: 'Swami, what do you think about Harriet Miers?' 'Do you think Patrick Fitzgerald went far enough?' 'What about Iraq?' 'And Samuel Alito?' Like you, I have opinions on all those topics. Here they are, briefly: Harriet Miers: Not qualified. But that wasn't why Bush pulled her out. A better reason: She was very possibly tainted by some Texas Lottery business that might have allowed a guy to testify who had something to say about Bush's sweetheart relationship with the Air National Guard. (Sounds like a stretch, but this is Texas.) Which could have reminded us what a Favorite Son our President is. Which is worse than a case of cronyism, no planning and executive contempt for the citizenry--hey, that's just another day in our White House. Patrick Fitzgerald: Astute lawyer, great performance. The spin doctors are throwing sand in our eyes the way Libby tried to throw sand in Fitzgerald's, but it's really pretty simple: The prosecutor couldn't find the crime because the lies were so thick, so he brought indictments only on the lies. A solemn, sad day for our country, no matter the outcome: In a time of war, one of the highest officials in the land is accused of committing treason. A random thought kept popping into my head: Tony Blair staked his reputation on these crooks? Iraq: Bad and getting worse. The Financial Times cites a report from Stuart Bowen, the special U.S. inspector-general for Iraq reconstruction: We entered the war with no real plan to rebuild Iraq. Makes everything that follows tragically predictable. I know there are Republicans out there who voted for Bush and may even now support the war; outside of the wingnuts, why do we never hear from them? Samuel Alito: This is all you need to know: In Doe v. Groody, Alito argued that police officers didn't violate the constitutional rights of a mother and her ten-year-old daughter when they strip-searched these females while carrying out a search warrant that only authorized the search of a man and his home.
Here's this week's best video about The War. Watch it. Forward it to everyone you know.
As I've been saying in this space for weeks, most of what is happening now on the national level is out of my control--and out of yours. And I'm looking to feel effective... to be effective. I want to express my opinion in a way that matters. I want to put my energy where it accomplishes something. So I start with where I am: as a domestic creature. I work where I live. Which is a New York apartment too small for Donald Trump's ego where my wife and child cross my path dozens of times a day. I work in the maid's room, just off the kitchen. It pleases me to see the little one walking around with a juice box and a plate of sliced apples and cheddar. It thrills me to see her barrel through a bowl of pasta. And it kills me to know how many American kids are going hungry each day. Last week I saw the kind of news clip that makes me think whatever Scooter Libby and Karl Rove and Dick Cheney have done is small pickings. From Yahoo News: The House Agriculture Committee approved budget cuts Friday that would take food stamps away from an estimated 300,000 people and could cut off school lunches and breakfasts for 40,000 children.
The action came as the government reported that the number of people who are hungry because they can't afford to buy enough food rose to 38.2 million in 2004, an increase of 7 million in five years. The number represents nearly 12 percent of U.S. households. The cuts, approved by the Republican-controlled committee on a party-line vote, are part of an effort by the House GOP to curb federal spending by $50 billion. The food and agriculture cuts would reduce spending by $3.7 billion, including $844 million on nutrition, $760 million on conservation and $212 million on payments to farmers.
"The fact is, our country is going broke," said Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio. "We're spending money we don't have and passing it onto our kids, and at some point, somebody's got to say, 'Enough's enough.'"
The $574 million reduction in food stamp spending would affect families who receive food stamps because they receive other non-cash government assistance. The change is estimated to shut up to 300,000 people out of the program. Well, I know it's really important to funnel money to Halliburton, but really--when one out of every ten American households doesn't have enough money to feed itself adequately, you have to say we've hit the wall. And with fuel costs rising and credit card debt hitting new levels, you know it's only going to get worse this winter. Forty million hungry Americans? Fifty? This is crazy. The poor didn't cause the deficit. Bush and his pen full of pigs did. If anyone should be skipping meals, it's those guys. (Yes, I know I'm always banging on about "Christians" who seem just as cruel as Muslim terrorists--but all the folks sponsoring and supporting this obscene bill seem to me to be white male Republicans who have been married for decades and have kids.) You want to know how out of alignment with the universe George Bush is? Texas--his so-called 'home' state--leads the nation in rate of households at risk for hunger. Yes, over the last three years, more Texans were at risk of going hungry than the residents of any other state. The stats: between 2002 and 2004, 16 percent of Texas households had trouble providing food for their families. And in 5% of Texas households, at least one family member went hungry during those years--the fourth-highest hunger rate in the country. Right there, that's 'compassionate conservatism' in action. But it's not just hard-hearted Republicans who make me sick. It's weak-kneed Democrats. Really, what's the practical difference between the parties? If Senators wore decals of the companies that own them, they'd look like NASCAR racers. So it comes back to what I can do, to what you can do. That is: what's needed is a way of reaching people in need as directly as possible--to do the right thing even if our government won't. I'm a huge fan of Billy Shore, founder of Share Our Strength, an anti-hunger crusade of total commitment and 100% integrity. So I wrote him to ask: Can civilians fix this? What can we do? What can we help you do? He emailed the following: Jonathan Kozol says you should pick battles that are important enough to matter but small enough to win. Childhood hunger is exactly that. Despite the massive, outrageous problem with food insecurity, we can actually do something about feeding chronically hungry kids. A victory in ending childhood hunger in the U.S. is within our grasp. Maybe 500,000 children. That's why we are trying to get on the ground in community after community to find the obstacles to accessing food and nutrition programs, and to then remove them. Well, okay, that's good enough for me. I'm committing myself to feed a lot more kids this year than I have since the glory days of the late '90. I'm going to lighten up on the holiday presents this year. I'm going to cut back on my vices. And, every chance I get, I'm going to lobby you (and others) to do the same. If you want to learn more about Share Our Strength and, possibly, make a donation, go to Strength.org. I believe in choice. You might also consider Second Harvest. And you might let me know what you're doing to make your faith more than some words and songs and candles.
Do you recall how Michael Moore handled the attack on the World Trade Center in 'Fahrenheit 9/11'? To the surprise of those who hate him, he did it very, very artfully. Almost a minute of blank screen, with only sound to tell you what's happening. Sounds of the planes hitting the Towers--sounds you've never heard before--and the human counterpoint: people screaming. Then we see papers blowing in a smoke-filled sky, an abstract image of loss. And music: Arvo Part's 'Cantus In Memory Of Benjamin Britten,' a solemn meditation, with bells and solitary voices and silences between notes. Whoever picked Arvo Part knew what he/she was doing. Because that is holy music--music that speaks, without intermediaries, to the soul. Which is why, when AIDS first swept across New York City in the 1980s, 'Cantus In Memory Of Benjamin Britten'--from the 'Tabula Rasa' CD--is said to have been a great favorite of dying men in the final weeks of their lives. For this music both acknowledges grief and suggests completion. It is, as Part has described it, 'like light going through a prism.' Part's music is timeless. If you must think of an antecedent, try Bach, for Part and Bach both use religious texts, in Latin. And Part, like Bach, favors a structure that, for all its intricacies, is fundamentally simple--a prayer to God. You really ought to listen to a bit of his 'Te Deum'.
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
Not seldom in this life, when, on the right side, fortune's favorites sail close by us, we, though all adroop before, catch somewhat of the rushing breeze, and joyfully feel our bagging sails fill out. --Herman Melville, quoted in Forty Ways to Look at JFK, by Gretchen Rubin
By the time you read this, we may know what Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, has in store for some of the highest placed men (and women?) in Washington. I'm writing at the end of a long week of waiting. Indeed, waiting feels like my primary spiritual challenge. Most of the people I know--and read--are also waiting. For blood. They're cheerleaders for one position: bring the bastards down. I'm not in favor of anything in particular. Not quite true: I favor the Right Answer. Fairness. Justice. But as for what that is, I no longer know what to think--for all I've read, all the 'facts' I've absorbed, I don't feel I know enough. Oh, sure, there's a part of me that wants to see the arrogant humbled. And no Administration has ever been so in-your-face, we-don't-give-a-damn-what-you-think arrogant as this one. And not because these are superior beings--great intellects and visionaries who have finally gained office and now want to build a glorious future for our ailing country. No, these guys have the most dangerous kind of arrogance: the sneering superiority of the deeply stupid, the my-turn-at-the-trough snort of the openly greedy, the what-are-you-gonna-do-about-it cackle of the proudly corrupt. Some of you will read a line like that and go right to the default response: 'Jesse's just another liberal Dem, or worse.' Fine, have it your way. But let me ask: What kind of 'patriot' are you? The smart kind? If so, you're as heartbroken by what you see as I am. Or the stupid kind: 'My country, right or wrong.' I wonder: Are there really people--beside the True Believers and the folks whose money is tied to Washington largesse--who really think that things are going well? In Iraq? With the President's latest Supreme Court choice? With...well....more or less anything that originates in the Oval Office? I'm not making the case for the Dems here. I'm just trying to make sense of what seems to me to be reality--a reality that has me reeling. More, it has me terrified. There is nothing scarier than to realize that you don't have much control over your destiny--and that the people who do are stupid. I don't mean: not quite as bright as we are. I mean stupid like the jerks who sat in the back of the room in high school and made cutting remarks as their contribution to the educational experience and, in the halls, got off on lunging at you as if to say: I could so easily pound the crap out of you. I mean: jaw-droppingly stupid. Terminally stupid. The kind of stupid you hope likes to play golf so you won't have to see it much. A former colleague liked to say, 'You can't fix stupid.' Sad but true. It's only bright people who know how very much they don't know; the stupids are quite happy with whatever is in their brain pan. They see the world as a simple place, and they proceed accordingly. And because many people find thinking even scarier than public speaking, they get considerable support for their ridiculous views, and they have some success, and they think, 'See. I am right.' We have about three years more with such people. Careful what you wish for, friends. Sure, take Cheney out--who comes in for him, Andy Card? If Harriet Miers doesn't make it to the Court, maybe she can head the Justice Department in case Gonzales is needed elsewhere. Okay, this is Beliefnet....let's look for the spiritual component. Well, I could work on my compassion for these idjuts (because who needs it more than someone so blind he doesn't grasp how much we all need it?). Or my humility (it's not a good idea to go through your days, as people like me tend to do, thinking, 'You know, even I could do better than these jabonies'). Or I could just sit back and watch Patrick Fitzgerald dispense the prosecutor's role in the parade of justice. I could watch the assertion of something that's been...misplaced of late: the rule of law. In a secular country--which this used to be, and may yet be again--the law is the closest we come to a state religion. It's the glory of our system, in its promise, at any event: 'equal justice, under law.' So I'm praying for Patrick Fitzgerald. Praying he does the right thing. That is, the fair thing. That is, the thing that restores a bit of dignity to the tawdry spectacle playing out in Washington. Because I do believe that truth is cleansing. That sunlight is healing. And that a good example just might be contagious.
Military Funerals. Paul Fusco, a great photographer, was appalled by the war--how the government lied to start it, how the dead were being hidden. So he started going to the funerals of soldiers. And, discreetly, photographing them. If you have tears left, you'll shed some here. And you'll want to hold this number in mind--2,000--and remember where you were when we reached that number of American casualties. Because we reached it... today, Tuesday, October 25.
And hold that memory. Later, we'll hear the trumpets blow taps for 3,000. And 4,000. And 5,000. Because once you start wasting lives, it gets to be a bad habit. And of course, if you're stupid, you can't admit you made a mistake around about death #100.
A million dollars for seven vehicles in Iraq. The newest model was from 1996; the oldest was from 1994. Someone made some money on these. Wasn't me. Wasn't you. We just pay for these screw-ups.
George Bush's Texas gubernatorial campaigns paid Harriet Miers a total of $163,000 in legal fees, most of it for work done during his 1998 re-election bid. That's a great deal of money. And Bush was leading by about 30 points. Do you not wonder: What did you do to earn it? Or maybe this: What, as head of the lottery commission, did she not do?
Texas officials paid Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' family more than $100,000 for a small piece of land in 2000--10 times the land's worth--despite the state's objections to the way the price was determined. And you wonder why she reveres Bush.
There's so much more--I've got an inbox full of mail that tells the same story. But you get it, don't you? The CEO is an incompetent. And values filter down. Given enough time, we'll all lose ten or twenty IQ points.
In mid-December--at the height of the Serious Movie Season and in plenty of time for Oscar consideration--the new version of 'All the King's Men' will show up at your multiplex. It stars Sean Penn as Willie Stark, the crude backcountry politician who starts off a hero and ends up a demagogue, Jude Law as the idealistic reporter who becomes Willie's apologist, and Kate Winslet, James Gandolfini, Patricia Clarkson, Mark Ruffalo and Anthony Hopkins. That's a lot of star power. The film presumably asks the same two questions posed by the 1949 movie--which won Oscars for its director, Robert Rossen, and its stars, Broderick Crawford and Mercedes McCambridge--and the 1946 novel, which won the Pulitzer Prize for Robert Penn Warren and is generally considered the greatest of all American political novels. One question is a simple one: Can an honest politician stay honest and succeed? The other is more complex: Can good come from evil? Put another way, can a politician who wants to help his people do corrupt things to gain and maintain power without corrupting himself and tainting whatever he does manage to accomplish? Trust me: You want to read or rent All the King's Men.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home
