Can't We Just Be Wrong Without Being Stupid?

At one point on Bill Maher's talk show last night, a republican and a democrat were debating whether or not Rush Limbaugh is racist. Frankly, I think the entire debate is pointless anyways; the man is a moron for enough reasons regardless of his views on race. What got me thinking however was when the democrat took issue with the other saying, "this type of intimidation by the black studies intelligencia crowd that intimidates black people who are conservative...". He responded that, "you used a code-word 'the black studies people'. You tried to marginalize African-American studies professors as somehow innately incapable of critical reasoning that attends to every other discipline in the American academy." My question is merely this: Why is it that taking issue with a particular group of people or a particular field insinuates that you perceive something to be innately wrong with them?

Can we not simply disagree with people without the connotation that they are bad, flawed, or lesser people? Can you not say that the African-American studies (or political science, economics, or even english studies) crowd is misguided or even basely wrong without being guilty of "marginalizing" them? If we continue to see others' disagreement in this light, then we cannot take their arguments as anything less than a personal attack, we are unable to do anything but strain against the others' entire point of view. I posit that until society learns to deal with disagreement in beliefs - no matter how deeply we may hold them - without taking it so personally, we will never be able to meaningfully debate these issues of great importance with any success.

Words of Hope and words of Caution

I'm posting two things this morning, one from each side of the aisle. All I ask is that you read them both.


First, a cautionary tale from a man who has seen more than anyone I know:

In 1968 a young man escaped Communist Cuba and a few months later was in America to stay. Manuel Alvarez, Jr. wrote a letter to the editor of the Richmond Times-Dispatch and offered this sobering account of how Communism came about in Cuba [3]:

"In the late 1950s, most Cubans thought Cuba needed a change, and they were right. So when a young leader came along, every Cuban was at least receptive. When the young leader spoke eloquently and passionately and denounced the old system, the press fell in love with him. They never questioned who his friends were or what he really believed in. When he said he would help the farmers and the poor and bring free medical care and education to all, everyone followed. When he said he would bring justice and equality to all, everyone said 'Praise the Lord.' And when the young leader said, 'I will be for change and I'll bring you change,' everyone yelled, 'Viva Fidel!' But nobody asked about the change, so by the time the executioner's guns went silent the people's guns had been taken away. By the time everyone was equal, they were equally poor, hungry, and oppressed. By the time everyone received their free education it was worth nothing. By the time the press noticed, it was too late, because they were now working for him.

Now, I'm not saying that, if elected, Barack Obama will become a communist dictator like Fidel Castro. I'm simply pointing out that in their desperation the Cuban people allowed themselves to be taken in by an eloquent, passionate young leader who spoke of bringing "change" to Cuba.



Secondly, from TalkingPointsMemo.com, reason to pledge to ourselves not to give up on this country regardless of our political affiliation or economic situation:

I have a confession to make.

I did not vote for Barack Obama today.

I've openly supported Obama since March. But I didn't vote for him today.

I wanted to vote for Ronald Woods. He was my algebra teacher at Clark Junior High in East St. Louis, IL. He died 15 years ago when his truck skidded head-first into a utility pole. He spent many a day teaching us many things besides the Pythagorean Theorem. He taught us about Medgar Evers, Ralph Abernathy, John Lewis and many other civil rights figures who get lost in the shadow cast by Martin Luther King, Jr.

But I didn't vote for Mr. Woods.

I wanted to vote for Willie Mae Cross. She owned and operated Crossroads Preparatory Academy for almost 30 years, educating and empowering thousands of kids before her death in 2003. I was her first student. She gave me my first job, teaching chess and math concepts to kids in grades K-4 in her summer program. She was always there for advice, cheer and consolation. Ms. Cross, in her own way, taught me more about walking in faith than anyone else I ever knew.

But I didn't vote for Ms. Cross.

I wanted to vote for Arthur Mells Jackson, Sr. and Jr. Jackson Senior was a Latin professor. He has a gifted school named for him in my hometown. Jackson Junior was the pre-eminent physician in my hometown for over 30 years. He has a heliport named for him at a hospital in my hometown. They were my great-grandfather and great-uncle, respectively.

But I didn't vote for Prof. Jackson or Dr. Jackson.

I wanted to vote for A.B. Palmer. She was a leading civil rights figure in Shreveport, Louisiana, where my mother grew up and where I still have dozens of family members. She was a strong-willed woman who earned the grudging respect of the town's leaders because she never, ever backed down from anyone and always gave better than she got. She lived to the ripe old age of 99, and has a community center named for her in Shreveport.

But I didn't vote for Mrs. Palmer.

I wanted to vote for these people, who did not live to see a day where a Black man would appear on their ballots on a crisp November morning.

In the end, though, I realized that I could not vote for them any more than I could vote for Obama himself.

So who did I vote for?

No one.

I didn't vote. Not for President, anyway.

Oh, I went to the voting booth. I signed, was given my stub, and was walked over to a voting machine. I cast votes for statewide races and a state referendum on water and sewer improvements.

I stood there, and I thought about all of these people, who influenced my life so greatly. But I didn't vote for who would be the 44th President of the United States.

When my ballot was complete, except for the top line, I finally decided who I was going to vote for - and then decided to let him vote for me. I reached down, picked him up, and told him to find Obama's name on the screen and touch it.

And so it came to pass that Alexander Reed, age 5, read the voting screen, found the right candidate, touched his name, and actually cast a vote for Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

Oh, the vote will be recorded as mine. But I didn't cast it.

Then again, the person who actually pressed the Obama box and the red "vote" button was the person I was really voting for all along.

It made the months of donating, phonebanking, canvassing, door hanger distributing, sign posting, blogging, arguing and persuading so much sweeter.

So, no, I didn't vote for Barack Obama. I voted for a boy who now has every reason to believe he, too, can grow up to be anything he wants...even President.

Livui Librescu

During World War II, a young Livui Librescu found himself interned, along with his family in the Nazi labor camp at Transnistria. In 1978, he fled Communist rule in Romania and immigrated to Israel and in 1984 he and his wife moved to the U.S. A 20 year veteran researcher and lecturer at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, he had repeatedly refused to quit. "He would never concede retirement. He loved his work too much. He was too passionate to quit," his son said. On April 14th, 2007, Livui Librescu fought with Cho Seung-Hui, holding shut a door while the majority of his mechanical engineering class jumped out of the windows to safety below. Though the details are hazy, what is known is that Professor Libresci was found dead on his classroom floor after being shot by Seung-Hui and that his heroism saved many. One student, in a letter to Marlena Librescu wrote, "I saw your husband still standing there. He was holding the door closed and looking over his shoulder to make sure everybody else, was safe. It was the bravest thing I have ever seen and I will always remember his courage."
Monday morning, this nation was forced to acknowledge the wickedness and depravity man is capable of. Pure evil took the form of Cho Seung-Hui that day as he ruthlessly gunned down students and professors guilty of nothing more than a desire to learn. In his actions we witnessed unimaginable loathing towards his peers. 4/16/07 will forever be remembered as a day of darkness.
Through that fog of evil however shines rays of hope, of selflessness, and of the perseverance, that makes us Americans and that makes us human. We have stories such as Professor Libresci's or Zach Petkewicz who barricaded a classroom door and most likely saved the 10 other students with him. I am certain that in the coming days and weeks, we will begin to hear more stories like these. Stories of bravery, of courage, and of self-sacrifice. These are the stories that ought to be told over and over. These are the acts that need to be broadcasted and celebrated by the nation. This is the reassurance we have that we can overcome evil; that there are good men and women out there who will not shrink back from the cowards who would do others harm.
In the coming days, there will be much debate about what could have been done to prevent this massacre and there will be plenty of discussion about what drives a person to become so detached that they resort to cold-blooded murder. These debates are necessary and they help protect against future catastrophe but they are not what I choose to focus on most. I choose to remember April 14th, 2007 as the day when a great man, having known hatred and what it means to fear for your life, choose to stand up to a man of pure cowardice and saved the lives of his students.

What's Wrong with Evangelical Christians and Why are we Destroying America?

This is a really well written blog that I found very similar to my own feelings though much more articulate. Thanks for linking to this Tom.

It Takes Two Parents to Raise a Successful Functioning Child

taken from violentacres.com

...The message is clear: Women are the only true parents. Men are simply paychecks, sperm donors and occasional babysitters.
The thing is, I wouldn’t even hate these trends if they were producing emotional stable, capable, intelligent, well behaved children. But the proof is in the pudding people and this upcoming generation of children is nothing to write home about. Modern day children are narcissistic, lazy, weak, emotionally stunted, neurotic, manipulative, dishonest, imaged obsessed, greedy, obnoxious wastes of human life. You can’t even say their saving grace is their superb intelligence because they’re failing aptitude tests quicker than Mother can yell at their teachers for being ‘unfair.’ On top of all of this, Mothers seem to be in total denial about the monsters they’re raising. Even when confronted directly with their child’s bad behavior, they have a million and one excuses...


read the rest