Tuesday, September 19, 2006

Unbecoming memories

Does anybody remember the big flap which was kicked up 4 years ago over Romney's use of the word "unbecoming"? I hadn't thought about it for a while, but I wanted to revisit it today because it belongs in the inner sanctum of the Gender Politics Hall of Fame. A Google search brought up this 2002 column from Jeff Jacoby. Jacoby is a Conservative columnist but that is irrelevant to my blog. It just happened to be the first result brought back by my query:

[Here] in the Bay State, a place famous for its sophistication and intellectual heft, ridiculousness is no barrier to political posturing. And so we had the spectacle last week of a Democratic candidate for governor, a graduate of Yale and Boston University, pretending to be offended because her GOP opponent had used the word "unbecoming" to characterize something she said during a debate.

Mitt Romney uttered the U-word after listening to Shannon O'Brien insinuate that his pro-choice stance on abortion masks a secret pro-life agenda. It is a suggestion she has repeatedly made, and Romney had finally heard enough. "Your effort to continue to try and create fear and deception here," he said with some asperity, "is unbecoming."

And that, O'Brien decided to claim the next day, was a sexist insult.

"I certainly think he wouldn't use the word 'unbecoming' if he were speaking about a male opponent," she sniffed. Well, he might have. Or he might have used a more accurate term, like "sleazy" or "dishonest" or "unscrupulous." All of which are a reasonable description of O'Brien's phony umbrage -- and perhaps a hint of things to come in an O'Brien administration.

Democratic Primary Day

Once again I am on the road for work on an election day without an absentee ballot. In November 2004, I watched Bush trounce Kerry while sitting in a dismal Marriot Courtyard in Dallas Texas. It was a truly miserable experience sitting depressed and lonely in a hotel room watching the color red spread across the entire surface area of the US map, with blue only nibbling at the periphery. Today is the Massachusetts Democratic Primary and I am in Washington DC, once again watching from the sidelines. I haven’t followed the governor’s race that closely, but as an avid talk-radio listener and a sometimes blog-reader, I probably devote more attention to local politics than most of the people in my mostly-apolitical demographic. If I was at home, I would have watched the debates, but I wasn’t unfortunately.

The three democratic candidates are Tom Reilly, the current Massachusetts Attorney General, and two businessmen: Duval Patrick, a liberal, and Chris Gabrielli, a moderate. I am undecided between Gabrielli and Patrick.

Reilly is the clear-cut loser in the group in my opinion. He really brings nothing to the table and has made enormous blunders. Right before the primary race started heating up, he got involved in a scandal where he impeded a drunk driving case because he was friends with the teenage perpetrator’s father. When the race got underway, he chose a running mate, Linda St. Clair, who qualifications were slim and who was also a tax deadbeat. (This seems to be a chronic problem with Massachusetts politicians.) Reilly’s platform seems to be “I am the only candidate who is not a millionaire”, and “the other candidates wont disclose their tax returns”.

Patrick is an articulate, charismatic guy whose main political strategy seems to be to produce a warm and fuzzy feeling in the electorate. He talks about the “politics of hope” a lot and his campaign motto is “Together we can”. I purposely left the period out of the quotation marks because there is no period or ellipsis or any other punctuation mark on Deval’s bumper sticker. It is up to the reader to supply the rest of the sentence. Many conservative talk show hosts have obliged by coming up with sentences such as “Together we can gouge the taxpayer.” Gabrielli, I don’t know much about, other than that he is rich and has spent a zillion dollars on advertisements. Since I watch little TV other than sports, I am completely immune from the advertising effect. He has appeared on a few talk radio shows and has not impressed me. I listened to him once on the Paul Sullivan show and he made bumbling attempts at humor for five minutes. I grew tired of him almost instantly.

Perhaps it is for the best that I cannot vote today. I can only classify my present state of mind as politically confused, and I am not terribly informed on the candidates. The candidates themselves have made very little effort to inform me. Patrick is definitely an appealing personality, but he does have some “moonbat” qualities (to use a trendy word) which will scare off many moderates, myself included. He is for giving in-state tuition rates and drivers licenses to illegal aliens. I guess I have absorbed enough illegal-alien rhetoric from conservative talk radio that this kind of thing bothers me. I have learned the futility of voting on cultural issues. “What’s the Matter with Kansas?” by Thomas Frank convinced me of that. Tom Frank illustrated the principle of red-state lower and middle class workers voting for laissez-faire Republicans because of abortion, religion, and gay marriage. I don’t want to fall into the Liberal version of this trap by voting against an appealing candidate such as Patrick just because he is for illegal aliens getting driver’s licenses. Gabrielli, even the conservatives have to admit, is a rational, moderate candidate. His campaign has been unimpressive in my opinion. His most successful political advertisement is one in which he demonstrates that he is “one of us” by bringing out his own trash barrels. But he doesn’t make me nervous on social issues.

My Dad is pro-Patrick because Deval is the only candidate who has not made the unequivocal promise to roll back the state income tax from 5.8% to 5%, a referendum that was approved by the voters a few years back. My Dad’s main political issue is that he is anti-tax-cut. He loves to ridicule Bush and any other politician who promises or implements tax cuts. I guess this is because he is in the education business and tax cuts have a direct effect on the ability to run a school. His ideology on this subject has produced a sort-of reactionary effect on me over the years. I am no big fan of taxes, and I am skeptical about their application. For example, I find proposition 2 ½ (the law that only allows property taxes to increase by 2.5% in a given year) a good thing in theory. When I hear about schools having economic troubles the first thing that comes into my mind is that there must be some out-of-control program which is eating up all the money, and that we should curb the abuses. My Dad’s first idea is that we should allocate any amount of tax money so that all programs can be funded. I guess this is the difference between a conservative and a gung-ho Democrat. On the other hand, I recognize that a tax rollback to 5% is far more significant to the rich than the poor or middle class, even if the target of the rhetoric is traditionally the non-rich. The tax cut would only put $200 back in the pockets of the average middle class person and would probably screw us in other ways. The progressive income tax, after all, is one of the principle tools of wealth redistribution that we have. Thus, it appears, I have overcome my repulsion to my Dad’s anti-tax-cut ideology, and have come to the conclusion that Patrick’s view on taxes is correct.

Electability is another important issue, and maybe the most important issue when it comes to primaries. Is there a large group of Moderates out there who would consider voting for Gabrielli but would automatically rule out Patrick as too Liberal? Is race an issue? Does the fact that Patrick has the same skin color as Tiger Woods help him or hurt him? Is there a percentage of the population that would never vote for someone with dark skin? There is so much complexity involved with voting in the two-party system, and so little of it has to do with the merits of the candidates, alas. I sympathize with Ralph Nader’s belief that the two-party system is a terrible system, and that we need to vote exclusively on our beliefs. However, I recognize that the two-party system is here to say and there is a “primary cleavage” which separates the two parties, while all other issues are fluid and irrelevant. (I picked up that phrase while attending a PoliSci lecture at my 10th college reunion).

I suppose I would vote for Patrick today if I went to the polls. He may be slightly less electable, but he is also an appealing figure, whereas Gabrielli is a Moderate rich dude without much charisma. In a race with few ideas on the table – nary a concrete idea has been brought to the table by any Democratic candidate – this type of personality-based calculus is the best we have to go on. I have more thoughts on the governor’s race but I will wait for the primary dust to settle first.

Wednesday, September 13, 2006

Slicing up eyeballs...oh ho ho ho

Thank you, RoxyPop, for pointing out that me and, yes, my pants, are featured prominently in this article about The Pixies by Ben Sisario. I'm so desperate for any connection to the rock and roll world, that I will accept the 3rd hand fame that this connection between my pants and Frank Black confers upon me.

All Things Persia

I failed to mention that I commemorated the 9/11 attacks with a big dinner in an Iranian restaurant. Love their kebabs. Hate their nuclear program. Lukewarm on their yogurts.

Did you know that Iranians have crossword puzzles in their newspapers? The difference is that the numbers ascend from right to left, and they don’t put the numbers in the squares but along the edges of the grid. Do you think anyone could possibly get good at Iranian crossword puzzles merely by studying the previous day’s puzzle answer every day, and never actually learning the language?

Of course, I couldn’t read the Iranian newspaper, but I saw a lot of pictures of that Iranian cleric who was recenty spouting off about the Zionist Catastrophe. God, I hope the articles were not glowing tributes.

9/13

Monday was the 5th anniversary of the September 11th tragedy. Creepily enough, I had to fly on this ill-fated day – a morning flight from Logan Airport to Washington DC on American Airlines nonetheless. One of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center was an American Airlines flight from Logan to LA. I made the mistake of watching the movie, United 93, on Saturday. If I had the tendency to fear flying, this would have pushed me over the edge Fortunately, I don’t suffer from that malady. Plus, the flight was at 6:15 AM so I slept through every second of it.

It is amazing to me that 5 years have passed since September 11th. Once you reach a certain age, 5 years is a drop a bucket. Even at age 32! It is hard for me to conceive that my son wasn’t alive yet at the time. I once took Calvin shopping at Roche Brothers when he was just a wee lad, and I remember going to the butcher’s counter to buy some nonstandard meat that Corrie ws looking for. The butcher was a really nice man who clearly loved children and he asked about Calvin’s age. I told him he was 14 months or whatever (It’s so great when you still keep track in months) I then asked if he had a child, and he said he had one boy who was a “September 11th baby”. How would youo like to have your pride and joy born on such a terrible day?

On September 11th, my wife and I were in Rochester, NY, at my mother-in-law’s house. We were preparing to drive back to Boston after a funeral. Corrie’s grandmother on her father’s side – a very sweet old lady -- had just passed away and life already had a very sad pall to it already. Corrie’s stepfather had a brain tumor at this time as well. Everything was bleak. I remember sittting on the floor in my mother-in-law’s living room watching the newscast as it happened. I don’t remember if I tuned in before or after the second plane hitting the Second World Trade Center. It’s strange that I don’t remember that, but everyone was so sad at the time, I don’t think anyone felt up to tuning into another tragedy. We met Corrie’s Dad at a café for one final coffee and condolence session before leaving. There were TVs on in the café but they either werent tuned in to the news, or nobody was paying too close attention. Then for an 8 or 9 hour drive home, we listened to non-stop news on the radio.

We waited what seemed all day for the World Trade towers to fall to the ground. We listened to the carnage from the Pentagon. The newscasts were all over the place. The stations were desperately trying to figure out what was going on but there was so much confusion. They kept rapdily cutting from one correspondent to the next, some in New York, others in Washington, some on other stations desperately trying to put the pieces together – interrupting correspondents whenever there seemed to be a more important development from another location. Reporters were in the streets of New York describing wht they saw, but it was mostly smoke and confusion and bewilderment. That smooth gloss and commercial sheen that we are all accustomed to in all our media, whether it be radio or television or print, was totally gone. It was all unknown voices and jarring cuts and panic and nervousness and guessing. There was rumors about other hijacked planes, but it took everyone a long time to put together the story of United Flight 93 crashing into Pennsylvania.

You will remember that there was no official press conference while all this was going on. I don’t think anyone had any idea where the president was. Much later in the day there were reports that he had been whisked away to some safe haven and that he would be making his way back to Washington DC at some point. Corrie and I were stuck in standstill traffic miles before the intersection between Route 90 and the interstate heading towards New York City, listening to all this. The whole experience was fantastic and strange to me, and must have been a million times more “surrealistic” to anyone in New York at the time witnessing this happen. (I put surrealistic in quotes because that seems to be the trendy word for reminiscing about 9/11 even though I failt to see the connection between a terrorist assault on our nation and, say, Dadaist painting.)

9-11 was, for me, a very disillusioning event, and not because George Bush was reading books to kindergardners when the terrorist attacks happened, and didn’t respond for 10 minutes. (Sorry Michael Moore) Bush showed no signs of being Winston Churchill on that day, it is true, but my disillusionment went in the other direction. The next day, after getting back to Watertown, I called a friend of mine who lived in New York. I wanted him to give me some kind of perspective on what was going on in the City. My college friends are for the most part an artsy, and lefty set, but it hadnt even occurred to me that this worldview would be the lens through which they viewed an attack on the United States which killed 3000 people (At the time the estimates were closer to 5 or 6 thousand). I distinctly remember my friend’s main concern about the 9/11 attacks was not the geopolitical magnitude, or the human tragedy. His biggest concern was that, all across America, people were going to start picking on the Muslims. That immediately seemed like an odd concern to have at the top of the list. As time went by, the fact that he said that nagged at me more and more. I mean I wasn’t expecting any profound thoughts on the attacks. Certainly, this blog entry does not indicate that I have any profound ideas after 5 years of reflection. Nor did I expect anyone to be able to conceptualize and make mental sense out of the worst foreign attack in American history overnight.

What was I disillusioned about? I guess that at that moment I realized what ideology is. I realized that people have a set of ideas and core beliefs that they carry around with them which prevent them from responding to events with the appropriate perspective and level of humanity. I realized that “Liberal values” are every bit the ideology that “Conservative values” are. I realized that ideology can cause people to squander their “moral capital” on unworthy subjects. Of course, nobody humane wanted there to be a pogrom against Muslim children or Middle Eastern convenience-store workers the day after 9/11. But, to have the population of Muslim Americans on the top of your list of concerns, the day after 19 Muslim hijackers killed 3000 people and sent our country into a state of mass chaos, is wrong. It is flat out wrong. Of all the concerns and anxieties that one could express at that moment in time, the concern that shitty, racist, bigoted, conservative, Christian Americans would commit the sin of mistreating the Muslims in our midsts is ill-chosen. One needs to respond with anger. One needs to express outrage and sorrow. One does not immediately fall back on cliched Liberal views that American history is nothing more than a wicked majority mistreating the minorities. One should not have the moral failings of Americans in mind when an unprovoked attack on our soil knocks down the World Trace Center and smashes the Pentagon. That is a kneejerk, unhumane to respond to an event like 9/11.

And yet, we see it all the time. There have been endless variations of “we deserved it” in the last 5 years. I think that 9/11 shone a light on the biggest moral weak spot of the Left. No Liberal leader has expressed a convincing appreciation for the magnitude of the Jihadist threat, or proposed a reasonable response to it. I’ve lost touch with most of my moonbat friends from college, but I am sure that most of them would express a similar sentiment as my friend did.

Our political situation is such a mess nowadays I don’t even know what to think anymore. Was it always this way? or has the reverberating echo chamber of the modern hyper-media caused it to increase exponentially? I am a talk radio listener which is a difficult thing to be when you are doing business travel, because the talk radio hosts in other places always sound so horrendous compared to what you are used to. Today, I listened to endless rounds of babble in which Liberals accused the Bush administration of “politicizing 9/11” and the Conservatives issued counter-charges of treasonous behavior.

I feel bad for the young people of today who don’t remember a time before the Internet and other communications technologies turned this world into a Tower of Babel. How can they possibly be expected to achieve any kind of clarity on the world around them? My wife’s students were only 10 years old when 9/11 happened. Most of them were bored by the bombardment of media coverage and probably have no conception of how profoundly it has remade the geopolitical position of the world. Anyway, Corrie teaches in Newton, a rich liberal bastion. Most of them are probably trained by their parents to believe that George Bush is the real threat. Perhaps it is for the best that the class quickly moved onto a discussion of Frederick Douglass. African Slavery is a subject which their worldview allows them to digest.