24 June 2012
But I am not actually writing about typing. I am writing about change. Real change, the sort than changes the game not just the score, takes a very long time. I can also be imprecise. This morning I saw an old news report from 1973 on Gay Liberation. Forty years have passed, and the struggle is not won. Yes, progress has happened, but every step forward has been resisted, and in some ways the more progress gay folk make the more intense the resistance from some. We could say the same about race, which is far better than it was a century ago but still is a major force in our society.
And if it is taking an excuciatingly long time it is because these are game change movements. They make the whole show different, for everyone, and that means those who prefer the game as it is must redouble their resistance because such changes seem to them not game changers but game enders.
What is hard for those working for change is to see that change always takes a very long time because everyone is involved. Those who do not want change have to resist. We all would, and have, and will. Seeing the resistance of others is part of the process of change, it is hard, and seeing it as inevitable is essential. Those who seek change should expect resistance, honor it, and yet continue.
It's a bit like childbirth. It takes a long time, involves pain and uncertainty, and no baby ever cooperated with the process. But the result is good for everyone in the end. Mothers know that, even if babies don't.
17 June 2012
A term that generally means jerk, but actually refers to a female sanitary device (I hate to be more explicit) has become a favorite among left leaning critics of the political order. I ran into this morning in a piece about a Tulsa employer who is overtly rejecting non evangelicals as employees, which is an illegal form of discrimination. He writes,
"The idea that they can act with impunity toward the law by trumping the civil rights of others is typical of these Fundamentalists. Fortunately, for Mr. Wolfe, these particular douchebags acted in a way that ended up with them getting caught."
My problem is with the highlighted word, not the story itself. And not because it is coarse, but because it is misogynistic.
This week our esteemed speaker of the Michigan House of Representatives silenced a duly elected member for using the word 'vagina' on the floor. She was literally ruled out of order and prohibited from speaking on the floor for a whole 24 hours because of her indecorous language. Fortunately, there is a lovely uproar about this. Read the story here.
But how good are those on the left if they use the above term as an epithet? I have heard it bandied about on "The Daily Show" and seen it in commentary on various news sites. And that's only because other terms are still too coarse to be used in public discourse, two of the worst of which are also female centered words.
Folks, it is time to listen to the lady and show a little RESPECT. If the worst words we have to utter have something about women in them, we need better words...
11 June 2012
09 June 2012
Sometime ago, a couple of years at least, I used this auspicious banner to suggest that lawyers ought to donate a portion of their professional time to public legal service (pro bono as they like to say, showing off their knowledge of Latin – meaning an assortment of phrases unique to legal jargon but don’t expect them to translate the Aeniad).
It turns out that the chief judge of New York State said something very like that on May 1, as referenced in this article - Better Pro Bono Plan - NY Times.com
Now, far be it for me to boast, but it also turns out a new book by the former president of Dartmouth College (!) argues, as have I for years, for a national service program.
Do the math, ok? I anticipated both the chief judge of New York and an Ivy League College president. Of course, I could also say I guessed the winner of every presidential election since 1968 (often to my dismay) a month in advance but there is no objective evidence for that. So look back in the growing record and see what’s coming. And when it happens, tell them you read it here first.
01 June 2012
We all remember when the Clinton campaign said “It’s the economy, stupid” reminding themselves that this was most powerful force in the election. Now, both parties work with that dictum, only that it is has been modified to read, “It’s (what I tell them) the economy (is, because they’re) stupid.
Today we started with: the “Worst U.S. Job Data in a Year Signals Stalling Recovery - NYTimes.com” And by noon the Speaker of the House was on the air saying,
That plan is as curious as it is simple, according to Paul Krugman (who I know is disreputable in Republican circles. But since I linked you to their thoughts, it seemed only fair to offer another vantage.)
Now, here is my key thought today:
Those who are battling with each other over this issue do not have differing view of the economy, but see different economies.
We are watching a kind of religious crusade, yes I mean that very word, where one side believes the other is wholly, entirely, and completely wrong. Mind you, I do not believe it is a symmetrical zeal. One is far more intense than the other. You figure out which…
And in such conflicts, collateral damage is irrelevant. Zeal allows one side literally to scorch the earth to win. If actual people (innocent civilians we used to call them) suffer that is the price that must be paid to insure the righteous prevail.
This leads me to wonder, cynically, if one reason the economy is sputtering now is that some economic movers and shakers are willing to let the economy suffer until the election in order to shape the outcome. So much wealth and power reside in so few, and they have so much as stake because they are so powerful and few, that it actually makes rational if despicable sense for them to keep the economy as weak as possible for now.
If the result is a stronger conservative government, they win. If the result is a weaker conservative government they can let the economy sink even further. In either case, they have nothing to lose.
I hope I am wrong, but that I can even think it tells me how odd our nation is right now. Who ever thought “American Exceptionalism” might mean something like this?