***PLEASE NOTE, MY APOSTROPHE KEY IS COMPLETELY NON-FUNCTIONAL. MANY, MANY APOLOGIES.***
I know that there is much speculation about the ridiculousness of my life right now, which Lagusta, Nelson and Katinka were lucky enough to hear all about on Friday night at the Village Tea Room. Yes, the Village Tea Room, in New Paltz, where I was allegedly-but-not-in-practicely banned from by the gentle, radiant, kind, patient, understanding, thoughtful, civil, rational Agnes Devereaux. I guess my $ is still green, even if its whiskey stained.
The long-short (now my slash isnt working, either) is that I have moved back to the bitterly cold NPZ around Xmas time for many, many, many reasons, including, but not limited to:
A) 18,943% unemployment in CA
B) a relationship that wasnt
C) a relationship that was
D) a promise I made to myself
E) a promise that was made to me
F) the reaffirmation of my previously (and staunchly) held opinion that marriage is not for anyone, and is particularly not for me
G) life was too boring due to all the unemployment so, of course, I had to shake it up and turn the whole thing upside-down and dump it on the white carpet and then grind it all in with my feet a little bit
If you want a better explanation then that, too bad. If you're a real-life friend (erm, there's roughly 3 of these), then you know it by heart already and if you're not, then you'll get enough info from here. Sporadically.
So, Ive made a little Mid-February resolution to myself that I will blog more. For 3 reasons.
1. Im unemployed, so when better to take on this little endeavor?
2. Lagusta always yells at me that I do not update my blog anywhere near enough, which is undoubtedly true.
3. My perpetual unemployment has led to the occurrence of many blog-worthy realizations, experiences and anticipations. These ought to be documented, as I can muse on them while being - yup - unemployed.
Therefore, I will give a mini-glimpse into the things to come (in no specific order):
- Things I absolutely need or I will die. Immediately.
- MAC Barbie & Hello Kitty Collections
- SEWING!!!
- EMBROIDERY!!!!!
- PR Party Kicks the World's Ass (ahh, how did my apostrophe just work?!?! WTF?!?!?!)
- How-To FBK (Beginner and Intermediate)
- Various NPZ/Ulster Co. obnoxiousness
- My chiropractor!
- The Oxford Comma
- Lily Ledbetter
But, not now. I have unemployed-type things to go do.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Friday, January 29, 2010
PR Party Hosts "Serious Reform or Just More Shadows? A 'Civil Conversation' on Constitutional Convention," Feb. 2, 7pm, New Paltz Community Center
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Pete Healey - 845-399-3288 - Pete@PRParty.org
Brittany Turner - 916-384-6735 - Brittany@PRParty.org
NYS LEADERS VISIT HUDSON VALLEY TO DISCUSS CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION
Proportional Representation Party Convenes "Civil Conversation"
Proportional Representation Party Convenes "Civil Conversation"
NEW PALTZ - On Tuesday, February 2, the Proportional Representation Party is sponsoring Serious Reform or Just More Shadows?: A "Civil Conversation" About Constitutional Convention. According to PR Party Founder and former Village of New Paltz Trustee Pete Healey, "Our Governor, Lieutenant Governor, State Comptroller and one of our US Senators were not elected to those positions by voters in NYS. There are serious constitutional issues surrounding these appointed, rather than elected, officials. The legislature elected this November will decide on the districts for all state legislators and our congressional delegation for the next 10 years. This legislature ought not be entrusted with that responsibility without a serious reconsideration of our dysfunctional constitution."
NYS Assembly Minority Leader Brian Kolb (R-129th) will be joining Healey to discuss his recently introduced legislation that would, if approved, allow for a statewide referendum on a Constitutional Convention this November, instead of 2017 as currently permitted. The legislation would also prohibit sitting members of the state legislature from serving as delegates to the convention. "There is a growing feeling among New Yorkers that their state government has stopped working for them - that it's grown too costly, unresponsive and disconnected from the lives of those it was supposed to serve. It is time New Yorkers took their state government back - it begins by convening a People's Convention, which is the first step toward restoring accountability," said Kolb. Healey concurred, noting "People rightly fear that the Constitutional Convention could become an insider's game, as is the state legislature. A convention comprised of real people, not legislative groundhogs, is the only way to discuss meaningful reforms."
Also expected to attend are Assemblymember Richard Brodsky (D-92nd) and a representative of Gerald Benjamin, Director of the Center for Research, Regional Education and Outreach (CRREO). Both have been at the forefront of discussions surrounding the potential Constitutional Convention. "Civil conversation" was coined by Brodsky, who has been one of the few Democrats to discuss the possibility of a Constitutional Convention, advocating a slow and tempered approach. Benjamin has voiced pro-Convention sentiments in the Wall Street Journal and Albany Times Union through a series of editorials co-authored with former NYS Governor Mario Cuomo. They will be joined by elected officials, community leaders, activists and residents from across the Mid-Hudson Valley.
The Press Conference will be held from 7:00pm until 7:30pm at the New Paltz Community Center, 1 Veterans Drive, New Paltz. The moderated discussion about the rationale for and impact of a Constitutional Convention will follow, from 7:30pm until 9:00pm.
The PR Party was founded in 2007 to deal with a number of concerns surrounding the structure and functions of NY's local and state government. Initiating the process for a Constitutional Convention is one of its chief priorities in 2010. Additional information is available at the PR Party website, www.PRParty.org.
###
Monday, November 2, 2009
Wow.
I've pretty much stopped following anything political because, ultimately, it ruins my life. We are so backwards in so many things that there really isn't much point in getting invested in reform because... well, IDK, I'm starting to think people might actually LIKE it this way. I know, I can't really figure out why, but what other explanation could there be for furiously devouring HOPE(TM) and all that goes along with it?
I do a pretty good job of avoiding most of it, but without a conscious effort to close the proverbial storm windows, little bits do manage to sneak into my otherwise insulated, peaceful, self-righteous world. When enough manages to infiltrate my psyche, I have no choice but to turn to the interwebz and complain.
NEW PALTZ BOARD OF EDUCATION
I wanted to bring your attention to a whole bunch of people behaving badly. I don't know if 3 counts as a whole bunch, but it should. I can't even begin to rank the order of absurdity, so "WOW" has been sufficient.
It's also election time! Normally, this would be exciting, but I have no election whatsoever. Nothing. There's a congressional special a few districts over, but when it comes to me I am SOL. Which, actually, is kinda nice for once (but I wouldn't want to make it a habit!). Luckily, I'm bi-coastal, and there's all of the usual shenanigans going on back on the homefront. Two are especially absurd.
PROPOSITION 414 - INCREASED FUNDING FOR THE ELTING LIBRARY
The first is Proposition 414: Shall the annual contribution of the Town of New Paltz provided in its budget for the Elting Memorial Library, a free association library, located at New Paltz, New York, be increased by one-hundred fifty-one thousand ($151,000.00) dollars annually to three hundred twenty-one thousand ($321,0000.00) dollars annually?
This is one of those things that lefties bleed all over. We have to do it for "THE CHILDREN," you see, as "their futures are at stake!"
There are so many things wrong with this.
How incredibly skewed has our perception of reality become? If the library doesn't get an additional $170,000 annually, "the children" will suffer some sort of abstract, but horrific, fate. The thing is, though, they won't. I don't have to point out the MILLIONS (yes, literally, millions) of children who do not have access to a library at all, and the millions more who might have access to 1% of what the Elting Library provides. Now this certainly isn't a good thing; I'm a huge advocate of libraries, literacy and enrichment programs. But honestly? Nobody ever died of a lack of library funding. I'm sorry, but we really can't elevate reduced hours at the Elting Library to starvation or typhoid. It's not a hospital or a food bank; it's a goddamn library.
If the Elting Library disappeared tomorrow, it's not like "the children" would never see another book again. In fact, each school in the New Paltz Central School District has its very own library. What about the summer? Won't "the children" likely perish without access to those facilities? Oh, right, we also have an extraordinary university library that features reference, media, microform, inter-library loan, and even a juvenile and young adult collection! Community access to this resource is available at $20.00 (between 0 and 4 times the amount of Library Association membership, depending on who you ask, for over 5 times the items).
I'm also unclear as to how "the children" benefited from recent upgrades and expansion at the Elting Library. There is no question that improvements were necessary, but to what extent? The Trustees authorized capital improvements that included top-of-the-line EVERYTHING. Then, all of a sudden they were shocked to be faced with cost overruns, and came to the Town of New Paltz with their hands out. They blamed the economy, they blamed the taxpayers, they blamed private funding - not once did they say "Hmm, maybe we didn't need all that copper piping." No, instead it's everyone else's fault for not valuing "the children" enough. The only people guilty of that, however, are the Elting Library Trustees themselves. I'm sure there are many people who lived beyond their means and are now facing foreclosure who would like a similar option; build your dream house (or, in this case, library) and then when you can't pay, don't worry, the government will take care of it and you get to keep the house. At least with families there was the belief that they would be able to cover costs with their own money; the library willfully took advantage of taxpayer support and got away with it, dream house and all.
Ah, the Trustees. Surely, if the library is receiving public subsidies, the public must approve its budget and spending, right? Oh. Wrong. Well then surely the public can elect those making financial decisions about the library, right? No? Well then who, exactly, is the library accountable to? If not "the children," nor "the taxpayers," it looks as if they don't really have to answer to anyone. Of course, you could become a member of the Library Association. Depending on which staff member you speak to, this costs anywhere between $5 and $25 per year and gives you the privilege of voting in the January elections for new Trustees, as well as... well, actually, I think that's all that it really does for you. Oh, and you get to say you're a member of the Library Association when bragging to all of your friends. When I inquired as to the process of nominating Trustees, Pat* was initially apprehensive about whether or not that information was "allowed" to be explained to me. Deciding that it was not a problem, Pat told me that there really isn't a process, basically they just ask someone that they know. As for the election process, Pat told me that usually only 1 or 2 people show up to the election and that they don't really read the slate or vote. The Trustees just sort of assume office. So, those residing in the Library Association clique, are intent on protecting "the children," and while we might not be allowed to know anything about it, we should trust them and fork over $321,000. Are you freaking KIDDING ME?!?!?!?!
We now have another government in a community that is already burdened with FOUR GOVERNMENTS (Town, Village, School, SUNY, in case you're new). I guess a fifth doesn't really mess things up any worse than they already are. Except, similar to SUNY, we have ZERO say in who represents the community in this government and what they do with the money we give them. We hand over hundreds of thousands of dollars annually, to be spent as these mysteriously anointed people deem fit, in the interest of "the children." Too freaking bizarre.
What it comes down to is this: The library is requesting PUBLIC funding for a PRIVATE organization. So, before you vote YES on Prop 414, for the sake of "the children," consider this - if Stop N Shop completely disregarded their budget and just did what they wanted, then realized it was a little too costly, should the Town of New Paltz toss a few grand their way every year? After all, "the children" could starve if hours need to be cut. We're not going to give you shares of stock, or let you have a say in selecting the CEO (well, MAYBE if you wanted to pay for that right, but we're sticking with the same pool of candidates). Of course, disregard the fact that there is Shop Rite and many smaller food stores in the immediate vicinity; we need to support Stop N Shop because... well... do we really need a reason? It's for "the children," goddamnit.
The common sense decision is to vote NO on Proposition 414. As it stands, it's public funding of a private entity. If Elting Library is willing to reevaluate its structure, and allow public governance of that funding, then it might be a different story.
TOWN OF NEW PALTZ HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT
Phil Johnson, incumbent TONP Highway Superintendent, is a bully and shouldn't be managing anyone or anything. His behavior is frequently of questionable ethics and legality and his tenure truly has proven problematic for the TONP (in attorney's fees alone). He is also the only Republican candidate currently holding office (I think there may also be one or two on the Board of Education, but we pretend that is non-partisan). Phil shouldn't be reelected, really. But if I was there, I'd strongly consider voting for him (before ultimately writing in a candidate who is neither Phil Johnson nor Mike Nielsen).
The Democrats are so freaking smug and it's sickening. They have managed to elevate the importance of this race to gubernatorial standing when, really, it's the freaking HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT. Get a little perspective, people. Similar to Town Clerk, being able to add Highway Superintendent to the list of Democratic offices is pretty meaningless. It's not even like the Dems are a cohesive party where that would actually mean something about the values or ideology of the department; they all seem to hate each other and the only thing they have in common is their party affiliation (oh, and their willingness to blindly vote "Yes" on Prop 414 for "the children"). And I don't really know how much ideology goes into a position like that anyways; some, certainly, but it isn't exactly a policy-making operation.
Really, it isn't about the merits of having a Dem Highway Super at all. It's about personality, as usual, where everyone hates Phil and everyone likes Mike. That's even the freaking SLOGAN; "I like Mike," AKA "I don't like Phil." The latter wasn't as catchy, though.
It's also about teaching Phil, and anyone else, a lesson for daring to be anything other than a Democrat. Of course, they're willing to overlook the faux pas of the many candidates who are endorsed on both lines (which I still can't seem to figure out, since the logic was expanding the voter base yet they're running unopposed). But if you dare to be anything other than a Democrat at your core, you've made an enemy for life. And it's become pretty easy. There's only one candidate who isn't a Democrat, so all of the vitriol and nastiness can be channelled into that person. In Phil's case, it happens to be justified. But once they've got a firm grasp on every office in the community, they will turn against each other as they always do and the outrageously obvious fact that these individuals do NOT all belong in the same party becomes painfully clear.
Well, fuck you, Democrats. You're a miserable bunch of people and bully or not, I give Phil a lot of credit for saying the same thing. You guys, seriously, are just being douchebags and it's annoying. While Mike will almost certainly win, and while he probably deserves to, it'd really be nice to see those freaking smirks wiped right off of your faces.
I felt pretty strongly about all of that, and then I saw this flyer. OMFG, I hate you people. I guess it's mildly clever, but 34UOTEIRLSJDK[0;3APTUWFJOSDGKM9U4GIJRSL. Slightly crooked signs, no doubt the result of snow plows... THIS is what you're so worked up about? THIS has a significant impact on your quality of life? THIS is what you've been pouring time and money into? I know, justify it as some kind of serious threat to public safety and adequate navigation. Perhaps you can even talk about its impact on "the children." Ultimately, though, y'all need some freaking hobbies.
*My pseudonym for mystery library employee.
I do a pretty good job of avoiding most of it, but without a conscious effort to close the proverbial storm windows, little bits do manage to sneak into my otherwise insulated, peaceful, self-righteous world. When enough manages to infiltrate my psyche, I have no choice but to turn to the interwebz and complain.
NEW PALTZ BOARD OF EDUCATION
I wanted to bring your attention to a whole bunch of people behaving badly. I don't know if 3 counts as a whole bunch, but it should. I can't even begin to rank the order of absurdity, so "WOW" has been sufficient.
It's also election time! Normally, this would be exciting, but I have no election whatsoever. Nothing. There's a congressional special a few districts over, but when it comes to me I am SOL. Which, actually, is kinda nice for once (but I wouldn't want to make it a habit!). Luckily, I'm bi-coastal, and there's all of the usual shenanigans going on back on the homefront. Two are especially absurd.
PROPOSITION 414 - INCREASED FUNDING FOR THE ELTING LIBRARY
The first is Proposition 414: Shall the annual contribution of the Town of New Paltz provided in its budget for the Elting Memorial Library, a free association library, located at New Paltz, New York, be increased by one-hundred fifty-one thousand ($151,000.00) dollars annually to three hundred twenty-one thousand ($321,0000.00) dollars annually?
This is one of those things that lefties bleed all over. We have to do it for "THE CHILDREN," you see, as "their futures are at stake!"
There are so many things wrong with this.
How incredibly skewed has our perception of reality become? If the library doesn't get an additional $170,000 annually, "the children" will suffer some sort of abstract, but horrific, fate. The thing is, though, they won't. I don't have to point out the MILLIONS (yes, literally, millions) of children who do not have access to a library at all, and the millions more who might have access to 1% of what the Elting Library provides. Now this certainly isn't a good thing; I'm a huge advocate of libraries, literacy and enrichment programs. But honestly? Nobody ever died of a lack of library funding. I'm sorry, but we really can't elevate reduced hours at the Elting Library to starvation or typhoid. It's not a hospital or a food bank; it's a goddamn library.
If the Elting Library disappeared tomorrow, it's not like "the children" would never see another book again. In fact, each school in the New Paltz Central School District has its very own library. What about the summer? Won't "the children" likely perish without access to those facilities? Oh, right, we also have an extraordinary university library that features reference, media, microform, inter-library loan, and even a juvenile and young adult collection! Community access to this resource is available at $20.00 (between 0 and 4 times the amount of Library Association membership, depending on who you ask, for over 5 times the items).
I'm also unclear as to how "the children" benefited from recent upgrades and expansion at the Elting Library. There is no question that improvements were necessary, but to what extent? The Trustees authorized capital improvements that included top-of-the-line EVERYTHING. Then, all of a sudden they were shocked to be faced with cost overruns, and came to the Town of New Paltz with their hands out. They blamed the economy, they blamed the taxpayers, they blamed private funding - not once did they say "Hmm, maybe we didn't need all that copper piping." No, instead it's everyone else's fault for not valuing "the children" enough. The only people guilty of that, however, are the Elting Library Trustees themselves. I'm sure there are many people who lived beyond their means and are now facing foreclosure who would like a similar option; build your dream house (or, in this case, library) and then when you can't pay, don't worry, the government will take care of it and you get to keep the house. At least with families there was the belief that they would be able to cover costs with their own money; the library willfully took advantage of taxpayer support and got away with it, dream house and all.
Ah, the Trustees. Surely, if the library is receiving public subsidies, the public must approve its budget and spending, right? Oh. Wrong. Well then surely the public can elect those making financial decisions about the library, right? No? Well then who, exactly, is the library accountable to? If not "the children," nor "the taxpayers," it looks as if they don't really have to answer to anyone. Of course, you could become a member of the Library Association. Depending on which staff member you speak to, this costs anywhere between $5 and $25 per year and gives you the privilege of voting in the January elections for new Trustees, as well as... well, actually, I think that's all that it really does for you. Oh, and you get to say you're a member of the Library Association when bragging to all of your friends. When I inquired as to the process of nominating Trustees, Pat* was initially apprehensive about whether or not that information was "allowed" to be explained to me. Deciding that it was not a problem, Pat told me that there really isn't a process, basically they just ask someone that they know. As for the election process, Pat told me that usually only 1 or 2 people show up to the election and that they don't really read the slate or vote. The Trustees just sort of assume office. So, those residing in the Library Association clique, are intent on protecting "the children," and while we might not be allowed to know anything about it, we should trust them and fork over $321,000. Are you freaking KIDDING ME?!?!?!?!
We now have another government in a community that is already burdened with FOUR GOVERNMENTS (Town, Village, School, SUNY, in case you're new). I guess a fifth doesn't really mess things up any worse than they already are. Except, similar to SUNY, we have ZERO say in who represents the community in this government and what they do with the money we give them. We hand over hundreds of thousands of dollars annually, to be spent as these mysteriously anointed people deem fit, in the interest of "the children." Too freaking bizarre.
What it comes down to is this: The library is requesting PUBLIC funding for a PRIVATE organization. So, before you vote YES on Prop 414, for the sake of "the children," consider this - if Stop N Shop completely disregarded their budget and just did what they wanted, then realized it was a little too costly, should the Town of New Paltz toss a few grand their way every year? After all, "the children" could starve if hours need to be cut. We're not going to give you shares of stock, or let you have a say in selecting the CEO (well, MAYBE if you wanted to pay for that right, but we're sticking with the same pool of candidates). Of course, disregard the fact that there is Shop Rite and many smaller food stores in the immediate vicinity; we need to support Stop N Shop because... well... do we really need a reason? It's for "the children," goddamnit.
The common sense decision is to vote NO on Proposition 414. As it stands, it's public funding of a private entity. If Elting Library is willing to reevaluate its structure, and allow public governance of that funding, then it might be a different story.
TOWN OF NEW PALTZ HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT
Phil Johnson, incumbent TONP Highway Superintendent, is a bully and shouldn't be managing anyone or anything. His behavior is frequently of questionable ethics and legality and his tenure truly has proven problematic for the TONP (in attorney's fees alone). He is also the only Republican candidate currently holding office (I think there may also be one or two on the Board of Education, but we pretend that is non-partisan). Phil shouldn't be reelected, really. But if I was there, I'd strongly consider voting for him (before ultimately writing in a candidate who is neither Phil Johnson nor Mike Nielsen).
The Democrats are so freaking smug and it's sickening. They have managed to elevate the importance of this race to gubernatorial standing when, really, it's the freaking HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT. Get a little perspective, people. Similar to Town Clerk, being able to add Highway Superintendent to the list of Democratic offices is pretty meaningless. It's not even like the Dems are a cohesive party where that would actually mean something about the values or ideology of the department; they all seem to hate each other and the only thing they have in common is their party affiliation (oh, and their willingness to blindly vote "Yes" on Prop 414 for "the children"). And I don't really know how much ideology goes into a position like that anyways; some, certainly, but it isn't exactly a policy-making operation.
Really, it isn't about the merits of having a Dem Highway Super at all. It's about personality, as usual, where everyone hates Phil and everyone likes Mike. That's even the freaking SLOGAN; "I like Mike," AKA "I don't like Phil." The latter wasn't as catchy, though.
It's also about teaching Phil, and anyone else, a lesson for daring to be anything other than a Democrat. Of course, they're willing to overlook the faux pas of the many candidates who are endorsed on both lines (which I still can't seem to figure out, since the logic was expanding the voter base yet they're running unopposed). But if you dare to be anything other than a Democrat at your core, you've made an enemy for life. And it's become pretty easy. There's only one candidate who isn't a Democrat, so all of the vitriol and nastiness can be channelled into that person. In Phil's case, it happens to be justified. But once they've got a firm grasp on every office in the community, they will turn against each other as they always do and the outrageously obvious fact that these individuals do NOT all belong in the same party becomes painfully clear.
Well, fuck you, Democrats. You're a miserable bunch of people and bully or not, I give Phil a lot of credit for saying the same thing. You guys, seriously, are just being douchebags and it's annoying. While Mike will almost certainly win, and while he probably deserves to, it'd really be nice to see those freaking smirks wiped right off of your faces.
I felt pretty strongly about all of that, and then I saw this flyer. OMFG, I hate you people. I guess it's mildly clever, but 34UOTEIRLSJDK[0;3APTUWFJOSDGKM9U4GIJRSL. Slightly crooked signs, no doubt the result of snow plows... THIS is what you're so worked up about? THIS has a significant impact on your quality of life? THIS is what you've been pouring time and money into? I know, justify it as some kind of serious threat to public safety and adequate navigation. Perhaps you can even talk about its impact on "the children." Ultimately, though, y'all need some freaking hobbies.
*My pseudonym for mystery library employee.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Why We Are Who We Are
Also, since I'm finding the Democrats and, to a lesser extent, Republicans to be even more sickening and offensive than usual, I want to try to keep an open mind here, since I know there's plenty of people who think these dumb parties are our salvation.
PLEASE, explain it to me, because I TRULY do not understand.
Why are you a <>?
What does it mean to you to be a <>?
What do you get out of being a <>?
Would you ever change your political affiliation and, if so, under what circumstances?
What are 5 things about being a <> that you believe make it substantially different from other political affiliations?
How often do you disagree with the leadership of your political affilation, if ever? What do you do if/when you disagree?
I wrote an article in a similar vein for the New Paltz Times a while back, although I think even that requires some revision at this point.
PLEASE, explain it to me, because I TRULY do not understand.
Why are you a <
What does it mean to you to be a <
What do you get out of being a <
Would you ever change your political affiliation and, if so, under what circumstances?
What are 5 things about being a <
How often do you disagree with the leadership of your political affilation, if ever? What do you do if/when you disagree?
I wrote an article in a similar vein for the New Paltz Times a while back, although I think even that requires some revision at this point.
Health Care, SRSLY?!?
Who are we thanking, and for what??? The Obama logo suggests we are, in fact, thanking the golden boy himself, but... HUH?!?!?!
So I'm getting really aggravated at the stupid viral Facebook status message about health care. If you haven't seen it, I'll paste it below for the sake of recordkeeping, but UNDERSTAND THAT I AM NOT ENDORSING IT!
"No one should die because they cannot afford health care, and nobody should go broke because they get sick. If you agree, please post this as your status for the rest of the day."
Sigh. How can we be so misguided? It breaks my heart. So, of course, I put up a status message expressing my disdain ("believes in it, supports it, wants it to happen, but recognizes that the approach being taken is counter-productive and essentially sabotage. no number of dedicated facebook statuses will change that.") and all sorts of crankiness ensues.One friend, a fellow Green, used the status as a basis for opening conversation with some friends who are not as engaged in the issue. OK. I guess I can deal with this, even though I don't really see the point. If you're in need of an introductory health care conversation via facebook this late in the game... um... yeah. Plus, I've never known a conversation that accuses the opposition of essentially being murderers to lead to a lot of enlightened soul searching, but who knows.
Another, this one a Democrat, hasn't participated in the homogeneous status posting but felt resentful and attacked based on my obvious disgust with all things big D. This one is kinda complicated. Instead of being offended by my hatred of this sham of a party, shouldn't she be offended by what her party has done? I'm hugely offended, and I'm not even a member!Does she really believe in these issues or does she believe in the collective solidarity of standing for absolutely nothing? If it's the latter, well, whatevs, but if it's the former, she should be outraged and, more importantly, she should be doing something about it. Why not work to change the structure and absence of any values exhibited by this party for decades? Why not refuse to donate to, volunteer with or vote for another one of these lying imbeciles until "hope" and "change" actually become meaningful? Better yet, why not just walk away?
The majority of people endorsed and elected by the Democrats are manipulating and defacing whatever ideological remnants still guide the party, assuming there are any at all. Registered Democrats would be much better served by coming to terms with the fact their party's promises are hollow. They need to start supporting the issues and candidates who are actually worth something instead of clinging to a party that doesn't seem to espouse much of anything.Another friend, this one from my hometown, embraced the "to hell with them all" mentality and suggested I let her know once I have that up-and-running. Which is exactly right. Because the "third parties" aren't doing much of a bang-up job, either.
Then, as if the status updates weren't enough, a Democratic elected official from my former county of residence posts a link to a petition, begging Obama to please support a single-payer option. The first line actually reads, "We worked so hard for real change." And the whole thing appears to be sponsored by the Obama campaign itself (or else someone is seriously engaging in trademark violations). WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
So, let me get this straight.1. Barack Obama campaigns on a platform that includes a public option for health care, available to all Americans.
2. People "work so hard for real change" and Barack Obama is elected President.
3. Barack Obama and the other Democratic hacks take the public option "off the table."
4. We beg the people we elected less than a year ago to do what they said and keep the promises that they made during their campaigns....
Is that about right? When they refuse to "listen" (aka do what they said they were going to do in the first place), was it because we didn't have enough people at the rallies? Was it because corporate dollars somehow controlled the debate, and our elected officials can't be expected to allow their promises to stand up against the pressure? Was it because we didn't get enough facebook statuses or signatures on the petition supporting it? Or is it because we've elected a bunch of liars and can't admit that all that "hope" and "change" was BS?
We obviously can't rely on the two major parties, and third parties are sidelined due to a combination of systemic ineffectiveness, disorganization and general fluffiness. And that's assuming that we even have real third parties, rather than just branches of the existing two, which I'm really beginning to question (but that conversation is for another time).
Now what?This entire mess just reaffirms the fact that it isn't a problem with partisanship or corporate interests or lobbyists or apathy or any of the other junk excuses that we come up with. The disaster that we know as the American political system is completely upside down, backwards, inside out and knotted up. It's a super unfunny joke and we should scrap it and start again. Yeah, that seems really complicated and challenging, but at least it's proactive rather than waiting for the inevitable catastrophe guaranteed by the existing system.
We have so much diversity, so many different views, such high stakes that we simply cannot count on a two-party-majority-but-only-by-a-little-electoral-W-T-F-is-the-point-college-but-it's-how-we-were-founded tradition. THIS IS NO WAY TO GOVERN, PEOPLE! Maybe it made sense when the population of the country was 3 million people, but so did slavery and property laws and a bunch of other really dumb ideas that obviously sucked. Why we invoke tradition so fervently to protect a system that is blatant in its disservice to absolutely everyone is beyond me.
Wayyyy back in the day, when we had our first kinda-sorta-real elections in the US, there were two parties: the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans. Well, guess what. We still have the Democratic-Republicans, but they've split into two wings of the same party. Aside from a few issues and a few approaches, there really aren't tremendous differences between the two (you get a prize if you can come up with one that is actually, truly, really, really, really meaningful). To top it all off, Democratic-Republicans used the terms interchangably, calling themselves Democrats, Republicans, Democratic-Republicans, and, yes, even Federalists and Federalist-Republicans! Ok, so we let a bunch of really confused people set up a really confused system.
Instead of continuing to try to create differences where, really, few exist, maybe we can try letting everyone have a say and work with the differences that are actually there? Maybe, instead of basking in the glory of shutting out thousands and, even, millions of American citizens from leadership opportunities in our governments we could try letting everyone have some representation, mixing things up a bit and see where that gets us. Maybe we should just consider the merits of a system based in proportional representation, where the proportion of votes cast for parties and candidates determines who governs. It seems to make sense and it's gotta be a helluva lot more productive, transparent and honest than the gig we've got going now.
Dontcha think?
Saturday, June 27, 2009
The Girlfriend Experience
I just watched The Girlfriend Experience and loved it.
If you want to watch it, don't read further, because I may have spoilers. I've been combing over the IMDB and critical reviews and am finding that most people completely missed the point, acting in the same manner that they consider to be the film's downfall.
I'm not a film critic and can't get into the details of cinematography or soundtrack, although all enhanced the film and were critical components. The Girlfriend Experience wasn't about "The Girlfriend Experience," where an escort provides personal services beyond sex to her client. It may be a particular brand of GFE, where the escort provides a blank slate for clients to project themselves onto, but that isn't the common understanding. Instead, the film offers a glimpse into the daily life of one escort in a realistic manner that avoids both the black-and-white moralistic judgments or trendy romanticism that tend to characterize all films dealing with sex work.
Most of the negative reviews criticize Sasha Grey's real-life work in pornography, flat acting or failure to act as a girlfriend to any of the men she engages with, including her boyfriend. I found the acting to be far from flat; instead, it was delicate and nuanced, depicting a 22 year old beauty who is not only in complete control of her life but also unsure of what life actually is. She's good at her job, knows what needs to be done to move forward in her career and is also subject to bad decisions, with regard to both work and also her personal life. She could be anyone.
Ah, yes, but she's not. Because she charges $2,000 an hour to have sex with strangers. The film, however, contextualizes sex work as it should be -- a job, just like any other, with good days, bad days and indifferent days. Leading up to the 2008 Presidential Election, we see each character dealing with apprehension over politics, the economy and sex. And we see those same individuals who are so quick to judge falling prey to the same opportunistic tendencies that they attribute to someone like Chelsea. Because they don't cross that line, selling themselves isn't the same game. But it is.
One of the most striking interactions is between Chelsea and her boyfriend, Chris. She certainly appears to provide GFE to her boyfriend, albeit probably unknowingly, yet Chris is also offering his own brand of BFE. At one point, he lashes out, proving her suspicions that he detests her career and finds her spiritual beliefs silly, without any recognition of the fact that he is a willing participant in their lifestyle, underwritten by her career and guided by her values. This argument shows the unwillingness of either character to truly respect and appreciate the other, highlighting the fact that each has a selfishness that will ultimately compromise the relationship. In Chelsea's case, her selfishness relates to her honesty, with herself and her partner, and her desire for personal growth and fulfillment. In Chris' case, the selfishness seems focused on having a beautiful, successful girlfriend and a beautiful, successful lifestyle in an apartment financed almost wholly by Chelsea's profession. While both may be selfish, only one comes across as shallow and it isn't the hooker.
The lack of explicit sexual interactions between Chelsea and her clients is notable. It allows the film to explore an important part of their interactions, which is rarely the sex and more often the customer service. In only one instance does Chelsea appear to provide the true GFE, in an interaction with a man who she doesn't even have sex with. She tells him what he wants to hear and this is helpful to him. In each instance, she offers something beyond sex that, while perhaps not exemplifying extraordinary GFE, is something that each man is seeking. In some instances, it's enough, in others it isn't, but Chelsea rarely finds herself sacrificing her boundaries in order to go that extra step, although she does come dangerously close at least twice, and not without consequences. Any time a career is so reliant on interactions with other people, an individual will walk that very fine line and encounter some difficult situations as a result.
Many reviewers have focused on the final scene before the credits as being a sad, repulsive and pitiful commentary on Chelsea and her decisions, but I found the contrary to be true. The film isn't a grand and striking commentary on escorts. It simply reaffirms the idea that for Chelsea, this is a job and one she does well. For her clients, it has the potential to be so much more.
I'm not done formulating my thoughts on the film and I consider that a good thing. Highly recommended, especially for those interested in watching with an open mind and a willingness to see everything in shades of gray.
If you want to watch it, don't read further, because I may have spoilers. I've been combing over the IMDB and critical reviews and am finding that most people completely missed the point, acting in the same manner that they consider to be the film's downfall.
I'm not a film critic and can't get into the details of cinematography or soundtrack, although all enhanced the film and were critical components. The Girlfriend Experience wasn't about "The Girlfriend Experience," where an escort provides personal services beyond sex to her client. It may be a particular brand of GFE, where the escort provides a blank slate for clients to project themselves onto, but that isn't the common understanding. Instead, the film offers a glimpse into the daily life of one escort in a realistic manner that avoids both the black-and-white moralistic judgments or trendy romanticism that tend to characterize all films dealing with sex work.
Most of the negative reviews criticize Sasha Grey's real-life work in pornography, flat acting or failure to act as a girlfriend to any of the men she engages with, including her boyfriend. I found the acting to be far from flat; instead, it was delicate and nuanced, depicting a 22 year old beauty who is not only in complete control of her life but also unsure of what life actually is. She's good at her job, knows what needs to be done to move forward in her career and is also subject to bad decisions, with regard to both work and also her personal life. She could be anyone.
Ah, yes, but she's not. Because she charges $2,000 an hour to have sex with strangers. The film, however, contextualizes sex work as it should be -- a job, just like any other, with good days, bad days and indifferent days. Leading up to the 2008 Presidential Election, we see each character dealing with apprehension over politics, the economy and sex. And we see those same individuals who are so quick to judge falling prey to the same opportunistic tendencies that they attribute to someone like Chelsea. Because they don't cross that line, selling themselves isn't the same game. But it is.
One of the most striking interactions is between Chelsea and her boyfriend, Chris. She certainly appears to provide GFE to her boyfriend, albeit probably unknowingly, yet Chris is also offering his own brand of BFE. At one point, he lashes out, proving her suspicions that he detests her career and finds her spiritual beliefs silly, without any recognition of the fact that he is a willing participant in their lifestyle, underwritten by her career and guided by her values. This argument shows the unwillingness of either character to truly respect and appreciate the other, highlighting the fact that each has a selfishness that will ultimately compromise the relationship. In Chelsea's case, her selfishness relates to her honesty, with herself and her partner, and her desire for personal growth and fulfillment. In Chris' case, the selfishness seems focused on having a beautiful, successful girlfriend and a beautiful, successful lifestyle in an apartment financed almost wholly by Chelsea's profession. While both may be selfish, only one comes across as shallow and it isn't the hooker.
The lack of explicit sexual interactions between Chelsea and her clients is notable. It allows the film to explore an important part of their interactions, which is rarely the sex and more often the customer service. In only one instance does Chelsea appear to provide the true GFE, in an interaction with a man who she doesn't even have sex with. She tells him what he wants to hear and this is helpful to him. In each instance, she offers something beyond sex that, while perhaps not exemplifying extraordinary GFE, is something that each man is seeking. In some instances, it's enough, in others it isn't, but Chelsea rarely finds herself sacrificing her boundaries in order to go that extra step, although she does come dangerously close at least twice, and not without consequences. Any time a career is so reliant on interactions with other people, an individual will walk that very fine line and encounter some difficult situations as a result.
Many reviewers have focused on the final scene before the credits as being a sad, repulsive and pitiful commentary on Chelsea and her decisions, but I found the contrary to be true. The film isn't a grand and striking commentary on escorts. It simply reaffirms the idea that for Chelsea, this is a job and one she does well. For her clients, it has the potential to be so much more.
I'm not done formulating my thoughts on the film and I consider that a good thing. Highly recommended, especially for those interested in watching with an open mind and a willingness to see everything in shades of gray.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Congratulations!
I want to offer my sincere congratulations to the NPHS Class of 2009. These kids are absolutely incredible and I have been so lucky to get to know many of them over the past few years. I have never met such a fun, talented, intelligent and inspiring group of people and I wish everyone the very best in their future endeavors!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
