Political Interlude

I promise I'll post some real photos and graduation updates, but right now it's 3 AM and I'm writing to a 16-year-old who penned a guest article for Lemondrop (yeah, those jerks who commissioned me sort-of then didn't follow up). Check it out. (Referring to the title she chose, Palin's comment could never be construed as slander on any level. Please.)

My response in the comments:

@@@

Elizabeth, I sympathize with your position--while I am a supporter of the bill, I suffered plenty of discrimination at the hands of my peers due to my own political beliefs, so I want to talk to you as an equal--you're obviously articulate and I don't want to talk down to you, but I may say some things you don't like.

I was a conservative at a tiny liberal art conservatory in Baltimore, MD of all places--almost unheard of, and it showed in the speakers and events they chose to have, in the open criticism of my opinions. (I actually just graduated less than a week ago!)

Your school's administration reserves the right to do whatever they wish regarding their activities and trips. It's too bad that they chose to involve politics in girl's basketball where I don't really think it is relevant, but I entirely agree that the school has the right to make that decision and deserves no criticism for exercising that right as they saw fit.

However, I suggest you read the bill if you haven't--it's only fifteen or so pages long. http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf

The most important thing to note is that the bill clearly indicates that no person would be asked for "papers" (which actually means a driver's license or something similar, not some trumped-up recall to the Third Reich, speaking of skewed information to serve a political agenda, Elizabeth) without reasonable/probable cause. This refers something as simple as being pulled over--law enforcement is not being asked to seize latinos in the streets.

I know there is a lot of uproar about the possibility of racial profiling. Let me set up a scenario. Having lived in Baltimore, I got plenty of emails from Campus Safety regarding attacks and muggings in the neighborhood. I am not exaggerating--literally every single one of those emails described a black man between 18 and 30 in a black hoodie. If you didn't know, Baltimore is populated mostly by black residents, and how many of those must fit that description! Does that mean the police went out and collared every person that fit that description? Hardly.

It is just a matter of fact that illegal immigration is a very serious problem for the residents of Arizona, and it's a matter of fact that the closest neighboring country is Mexico, which borders AZ. Therefore, it's a logical conclusion to draw that the bulk of illegal immigrants will be Mexican or perhaps Central American latinos.

What I'm trying to say is that this isn't strictly about race, this is about looking for the proper suspect. If I got mugged by the black twenty-something in Baltimore, they wouldn't go looking for a white man or Asian man or latino man, would they?

It's another misconception that this law was passed regarding the economy alone. It's easy to find information that plenty of illegal immigrants pay taxes despite a lack of citizenship (it is actually their healthcare payments where they fall the most delinquent). Apart from the fact that they have entered this country ILLEGALLY, disregarding FEDERAL (and now state) law, there have been an appalling amount of drug-related and sexual crime perpetrated by illegal immigrants, often linked to gang activity. http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51424

This article, written in 2006, reports that there are approximately 240,000 sex offenders who are illegal immigrants. And that was in 2006! Four years ago!

This is a safety issue. This is a health issue. Sexual assault is one of the most horrifying ways to violate a person, US resident or no. This is more serious than any party line. Just consider the ramifications of the law being broken, rather than the one that was just passed.

(Good luck on your other games!)

@@@

(Abby, I will respond to your e-mail! I've just been so preoccupied with finishing up MICA and getting settled at home!)

Hope you're all well!

-A.

Something I must comment on.

There has been a lot of controversy about the recently passed law regarding illegal aliens in Arizona. The Facebook Group "1 MILLION Strong AGAINST the Arizona Immigration Law SB1070" offered a concise, clear definition of the law and it's tenets. Have a look:

Current law in Arizona and most states doesn't require police to ask about the immigration status of those they encounter, and many police departments prohibit officers from inquiring out of fear immigrants won't cooperate in other investigations.

The new law makes it a crime under state law to be in the country illegally. Immigrants unable to produce documents showing they are allowed to be in the U.S. could be arrested, jailed for up to six months and fined $2,500. Other provisions allow lawsuits against government agencies that hinder enforcement of immigration laws, and make it illegal to hire undocumented workers for day labor or knowingly transport them.

That being read: what is the bad part in this law? Is it the ejecting ILLEGAL aliens part? Is it that it establishes a way to keep tabs confidently on who is/is not a documented worker/citizen is the United States? (Another thing to note is that the first sentence of the second paragraph says that the new law means it's illegal, according to the state, to be in the country illegally. Like, you know, the FEDERAL LAW that says the same thing.)

Obviously there has been fear that this law will encourage racial profiling. Mexico is the only foreign country that Arizona borders. It is a near certainty that any illegal immigrants to be found in Arizona are Mexican/Hispanic. It's like telling a police officer a redhead robbed you and then they bring in only black-haired people to the lineup. Who should they be looking for?

Perhaps it could be an inconvenience for those of Hispanic descent who are legally allowed to live and work in the States, sure, but if you're legal, you have nothing to worry about. This shouldn't be an insult.

There's also been some complaints about having to carry papers, saying it recalls the Nazi persecution of the Jews in the same way. Leaving this sensationalist claim itself alone, the US are not trying to persecute illegals because of their race. We're not trying to hunt down and execute illegals. We're simply doing what we should have done a decade ago and restored this to federal concern.

John had a great parallel for the use of citizenship papers--are we not all required to carry driver's licenses? A police officer has the right to stop any driver for any reason and ask for one's license and registration to assure that the party is driving legally.

I believe that every person who wants to become a US citizen should have the right to do so. It's a matter of completing the due process. Learn about the Constitution, what the US represents (or once represented, some might say), and learn English. Any other country would ask the same of anyone desirous of citizenship. I honestly wish more US citizens understood what their country is about.

I can't abide anyone (from ANY country) coming into America illegally in order to take advantage of tax-free income. I can't abide people hiring illegals knowingly for cheap labor. Have a family to support back home? I sympathize. Now get legal or get out. Why should we be lenient on those who are breaking our laws? That is a very serious question!

Feel free to leave any thoughts/comments/arguments!

-A.

Yeah, basically.

"Today's liberalism may stand on decades of failed ideas, but it is failure in the name of American redemption. It remains competitive with -- even ascendant over -- conservatism because it addresses America's moral accountability to its past with moral activism. This is the left's great power, and a good part of the reason Barack Obama is now the president of the United States. No matter his failures -- or the fruitlessness of his extravagant and scatter-gun governmental activism -- he redeems America of an ugly past."

-From this article.

In other news, I updated my art blog with some colored digital sketches! Woot woot!

It's been a good past couple days--I spent almost 48 straight hours with John, because the water was turned off in my apartment and I like being able to use the bathroom/shower when I want to without walking a block. It's been nice. :) His room actually has light come through his unblocked window. I missed sunlight--although today has been RAINY. Blech.

Hope you're all having a good week so far!

-A.

The Mean Reds.

What a frustrating day.

John and I went to the dentist's office and waited for an hour and a half before they could even SEE me, then were informed that my insurance barely covered half of the procedure, and had to be paid (all $568 of it) up front. >:( None of this was told to me until they were about to prep me for surgery. I had been there for TWO HOURS. Very frustrating and flustering. I made a new appointment, and my parents and I are going to sort out the cost until then.

I was pretty upset--probably more than necessary, but it all just seems to arrive at once. It already feels like a debt I owe, even if I haven't gotten the procedure yet (not that I have another choice)! It's just always got to be difficult. (And I felt terrible for wasting John's valuable time--especially during Midsummer's opening week.)

The worst part was how awful the receptionist-lady was about it. At four o'clock (we arrives at 1:45), my consult was over and we were about to operate. They typically close at 4:30, and I heard the lady being all pissy to the surgeon, who reassured her that it would take less than an hour. She came in and asked me all of the same questions the surgeon had, no doubt with the hope that I'd have eaten something so we'd have to reschedule the surgery. But I hadn't. Lucky for her undoubtedly busy schedule (/sarcasm), I am poor.

At least I get to work my grave shift tonight--no need to miss earning money. And I have Alice in Wonderland--the awesome TV version (purchased in Fells Point this weekend)! It is also John's final dress rehearsal tonight before the show tomorrow! :D I'm so excited to see it!

In other news, Obama signed the Health Care Reform bill that has been shoved through in the past few weeks. Sigh. I've gotten into plenty of online debates about it with my friends, but I just don't have the strength today. It's already been draining enough.

Hope you're all well!

-A.

Bullshit. Just saying.

Brian

I had a professor call me a racist

3:23amAlyssa

OH JESUS

why?

3:23amBrian

because i wanted to talk about reverse discrimination

Higher-level education, everyone. Pathetic.

ETA:

3:24amBrian

I used Standpoint Theory to explain that working class white males are the least powerful group of people in the US

3:25amAlyssa

(aside, i wrote these about my experience in a multiracial church:http://impressivelyaverage16.blogspot.com/2010/02/valentines-day-and-few-churchycultural.html)

(http://impressivelyaverage16.blogspot.com/2010/02/race-relations-in-religious-and.html)

you might find them interesting

and what did your professor say

actually

explain the standpoint theory first

3:26amBrian

standpoint theory is the basis that the "microphone" should belong to the least privaledged members of society

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standpoint_theory

3:28amBrian

so, her argument is that i was racist and rediculous AND illogical for thinking that whites arent more advantaged than blacks and hispanics (Mind you, I was talking about Jewish/Christian relations)

And she kept hammering me for being stuck up and snobby or something

3:29amAlyssa

that's retarded

3:29amBrian

and i got fed up and shouted back, "You're the racist"

And she said "How do you suppose that?"

3:31amBrian

To which I responded, "You say 'African American' To do this, you presume that A: people of color are all african in descent, and B: they are also American. In fact, people of color come from Oceania, the Middle East, South America, the Carribean, the Pacific Islands, Micronesia, and South Asia to name a few places. You'd also be suprised to know that many people of color are citizens of places such as England, France, Germany, India, Australia, and Russia. Name another coutry, I'm sure black people inhabit that nation."

3:31amAlyssa

SERIOUSLY

yeah, read my entries

i say the same thing

3:32amBrian

"Hence, by this argument, you're racist. By callign me a racist and being a racist yourself, your hipocracy destroys your credibility and thus you must yield in this argument if, in fact, we're following an academic debate style. How do you respond, professor?"

She was floored.

Brian

then

before she could respond i said, "Without gross example, let me ask this class something."

"What does everyone feel when I say 'Cracker' or 'Ghost' or 'Faggot?'"

People dont really respond

Then I said, "How about Nigger?"

3:34amBrian

and everyone freezes. Then I respond, "All of these are terms of hate. Pejorative words used to describe a race or a creed or sexuality. Why doesn't one have the same feeling as the other? This alone proves that more academic study needs to be done in regards to discrimination and reverse-racism"

The best part, theres two hispanic girls in class and the one girl said, "He's right. He's absolutely right. Cracker is just as nasty as Spick."

Alyssa

good for you!

3:35amBrian

And i leaned back. Silence. then changed the subject

Brian

Professor confronts me after class, "Pull that again, and I'll kick you from class." I say, "For what? Opinion? My race? Please do because I'll make sure to stop by the Chair's office to explain how my race makes me unable to express my opinion. Maybe I'll stop by the General Counsels office too."

Then she left.

Hahahahahaha!

Im gonna fail her class so bad

This is offensive to me. That a professor who is supposed to be a leader would be so callous, unprofessional (calling her student a racist, really?), and not to mention power-tripping the hell out of the situation to shut Brian (John's best friend) up. I am SO proud of Brian for standing up for himself. He did the right thing and he represents the correct ideas. We need more people to be thinking this way and spreading that knowledge.

-A.

Race Relations in the Religious (and Mostly Political) Community

This past Sunday, John, Emily, and I got up early and went to a panel of church members talking about the issues of race relations that were raised in church last week (I covered them here). The panel consisted of:

A 60 year-old black man.

A white girl in her late 20s/early 30s.

A Korean-American boy in his 20s.

A black man, born and raised in Ghana, in his 30s.

A biracial woman (very light-skinned), married to the Ghanian, in her late 20s/early 30s.

A biracial woman (medium-skinned) of about 60.

I thought this was a really interesting group, and I was surprised by some things I heard, and very unsurprised by others.

The panel went in the order I put above--the 60 year-old man described his youth before the civil rights movement, described being envious of a biracial friend who could pass as white and swim in the white pool. He took plenty of pot-shots at the 'evangelical right', implying a racist attitude towards Obama by indicating that only a racist would vote for a Palin ticket. Later, he admitted that the fact that Obama, being biracial, had taken a black wife meant a lot to the black community--he admitted that if Michelle Obama were white, he would be treated differently by blacks.

The white girl had nothing that important to add (unsurprisingly), but she managed to make herself look pretty dumb by talking about how special other races had it for being called "Latin-American" or "African-American" or "Asian-American", while whites are just, well, "White". SIIIIIGH. She mentioned the 'privilege' of being taught by teachers who wanted to see Dr. King's dream through--I agree with her sentiment, but she misspoke. It's not a privilege. It's the way things are meant to be.

She also indicated that whites should make more of an effort to understand the other races and cultures around them. I appreciate her meaning, but why is it the whites' responsibility alone? Because whites are the only ones that "don't understand"? If we're trying to spread peace and understanding, we should all be learning about each other, regardless of culture. Either way, I'm more inclined to look at people as individuals.

The Korean boy was the one that made the most sense to me in a lot of ways--he actually approached the subject from a Christian perspective, which none of the other panelists did. He acknowledged that we should treat President Obama as a brother-in-Christ, and pray for him no matter our politics. He also made the very important mention of Obama's campaign, run on the concept of faith and being a 'messiah' and 'savior'. "Obama is not our savior," he said seriously. "We know our savior is Jesus." Amen to that.

The biracial woman and her Ghanian husband both talked about reverse-racism--the woman suffers it at the hands of the Baltimore community. Her father is black, but she easily passes for white. She doesn't get the "How you doin'" that indicates the bond of being black when she walks down the street. Her husband echoed this--when he first came to the US, his black classmates criticized him for acting "so white". The only thing that irked me about their testimonies was the woman's hope that one day a black president with a black upbringing will be elected, "a black president who night not speak the way Obama does." What I take from this is that she means "speaks like a black man", maybe she means using ebonics, etc. This really frustrates me. Anyone who speaks that way sounds uneducated. Anyone could (and has) said the same thing about a Southern twang, haven't they, in the cases of Clinton and Bush?

The last panelist, the 60 year-old biracial woman, shocked me (and everyone, I think) with her response. She admitted how scared and uncomfortable she was to do the panel, and how hard it was for her to go up and say that she didn't vote for Obama.

I know, I was stunned, too.

She was moved to tears by this. She didn't talk for long--just indicated her fear and how alienated she felt from her peers, from everyone. :(

After the panel was over, I went over to the woman and assured her that I understood her position (being a conservative at MICA, or in my age group at all is practically a felony)--John backed me up, and she was really gracious and offered us her card. Her name is Carol, and she works at Hopkins in the Art Applied to Medicine program. What a dear. :) And brave. I've already felt the pressure of not voting for Obama at my age--can you imagine the pressure of not voting from your own RACE? Carol told us about a co-worker who'd said, "But he's biracial too--you have something in common!" She nodded fervently when I said (rather incredulously), "IT DOESN'T MATTER!" People, people.

It was a positive experience, and John and I may go back next week (if we're not still in Sewickley) for the youth panel.

In other news, I asked Facebook for some advice about my wisdom tooth extraction (my consultation appointment is on March 29th--so far away! I'm in pain!). I got some interesting responses:

Love you all--hope you had a good weekend!
-A.

Valentine's Day and a few churchy/cultural musings

Last year's Valentine's Day was a huge disappointment (even in Italy). This year made up for all that and more. :D

John and I went to church yesterday morning, then grabbed lunch at Sofi's Crepes with Emily and our neighbor Maggie before John had to go to rehearsal for Midsummer. I did laundry, showered and dressed for dinner before meeting John to go to P.F. Chang's in the Harbor. We caught the Light Rail and made it in time for our 6:30 reservations, which ended up being closer to 7:30 reservations due to delays. BUT, we got a super-awesome cushy VIP booth, so that made up for it. :) We got egg rolls (YES) and I got almond and cashew chicken, which was delicious, and John and I shared a banana spring roll dessert with pineapple-coconut ice cream. YUM! It was a really fun and relaxing dinner, and I just love him! :D

Nora (Robin's squeeze) and Dewey (Nora's elder brother and JEN'S recent romantic interest) also visited this weekend. Nora came to my performance at Coffeehouse of Luurrrve (I sang "I've Never Been In Love Before" from Guys and Dolls) and John, Jewey (as we nicknamed Jen/Dewey), Emily, Colin, Katie, Nora, Robin and I all gathered at our place to play Balderdash (for about three hours!) afterwards! Super fun and super silly. :D We'll just say--geese, swans, kakkerlak (kyaa-kur-lyaaaak), and The Stuff: DO YOU HAVE IT?

As I said, I woke up early yesterday, and John, Emily, Maggie and I went to church. The sermon itself was fine--about Jesus growing to learn and know His Father and His purpose, etc. However, there were two testimonies about 'Unity Month' in the church. The first was from a Korean woman who didn't really experience a racially-diverse church until she and her husband went to Paris for his job. When they came back they found Faith Christian Fellowship (where I attend), and knew that's where they wanted to belong because of it's diversity. Fair enough.

The second woman grew up quite sheltered--lived in Colorado, college in western Massachusetts. She decided to attend medical school in Baltimore, which was obviously a huge change. She started attending FCF and obviously found herself more integrated with non-whites. Okay, cool. BUT, then she used the phrase 'racial reconciliation', and spoke about how she realized we (as in, "we whites") have to repent for what our forefathers did to the slaves. "Our country was built on the backs of slaves and Native Americans," she said. "We need to stop overlooking and sugar-coating that aspect of history." She closed with, "Happy Black History Month!"

I was pretty annoyed by the whole testimony. Another thing--our bulletins explained Unity Day, and this sentence appeared: 'For youth who have grown up in a generation sheltered from the legal racism of our past, was the Obama victory a big deal?"

Firstly, it is important to remember that the US did own and use slaves for a hundred years before the Civil War. It is part of our history, and we teach that history in order to acknowledge that wrong to subsequent generations. I've never felt that the participation of slaves in the founding of our country was overlooked or underrepresented. In fact, I would say that that's an aspect of history we concentrated on. In my (Northern and mostly white) elementary and middle school, we absolutely observed Black History Month. It didn't make a big difference to me then--I was brought up to look at people as equals no matter what. (A side note--I despise the phrase 'African-American'. The first part of this article [vulgar though it may be] describes my thoughts on the subject exactly.)

As I got older, I heard about the movement to pay restitution to black families in our recent history (like, in the last thirty years), and it made me realize that it was a step backwards for anyone (of any race/color) to dwell on the mistreatment of blacks during slave times. Those who perpetrated those offenses (not to mention those who suffered them) are long dead. And not only that--private organizations were BOYCOTTED due to their connections to slavery. I'm talking as recently as 2005. Was the Emancipation Proclamation not enough of an apology? Freedom wasn't enough? I mean, I'm Irish--can I ask for reparations for MY ancestors being mistreated at the turn of the century? Can I boycott the places that denied them jobs until they apologize for their long-dead managers? What about Chinese History Month? Indian History Month? No? But I digress.

I do believe that racism is still alive and well--I'm not an idiot. I'm aware that several groups (racism does not belong to blacks, as it is unfortunately thought to) are being mistreated and prejudiced against in the US. However, I am a firm believer that this is an exception to the rule now.

The recent election is a whole other issue--the fact that it was so important that Obama was black (half-black--he's as black as he is white, people) was pretty sickening to me. WHO CARES IF HE IS BLACK? The important thing is if a politician is ready, competent, and if he or she in the best person for the job. Age, sex, and race/color DO NOT MATTER.

Obama's election could be an indicator that the US has reformed enough, and is 'ready', as a country, for a black president. Or, perhaps, we never had a more competent political option from another race/color in recent memory (Jesse Jackson? Al Sharpton? UGH.). Or perhaps, some people were voting for him because of his race and color. This CNN exit poll shows that the LARGE majority of every minority voted for Obama, including 95% of black men who voted voted for Obama, and 96% of black women. I think that it is just as bad to vote for Obama because he is a person-of-color as it is to vote against him for it. I could have cared less that Obama is half-black--I didn't vote for him because I think he was the absolute wrong choice.

It think it's time to stop singling out any race/color. The color of our skin is simply aesthetic. We are made equal. By paying more attention to one over another, we're moving away from equality and towards racism--however good our intentions may be.

I mentioned the testimony to my sister--her response was telling:

Lauren: Ahh, Black History Month. The most useless month of recognition...Me and my BLACK FRIEND FROM AFRICA were talking about that the other day. (Her emphasis--the friend is 'Jabbie', her neighbor from Sierra Leone. From Wikipedia: "Unlike most African nations, Sierra Leone has no serious ethnic or religious divisions. People often married across tribal and religious boundaries.")

Me: What did he say?

Lauren: He said that whenever they specially recognize black people then it's not equal, because they're trying to promote black people when they should be just like everyone else.

_______

Well, there you go.

Apart from the moral implications...

It's been interesting to observe the commentary on not only the gross actions taken by John Edwards in the face of the revelation about his affair, child, Andrew Young's looming book release (The Politician, February 2010) and Game Change, but on the standards of political coverage on this and other scandals, some true, some false.

For example (from here):

"The book Game Change, on the 2008 presidential campaign, continues to be in the news because people are fascinated to find out what was going on. Imagine if a book came out reporting the blockbusting news that during the campaign Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin's unmarried teenaged daughter had been pregnant. Or that Palin's ex-brother-in-law was fired from his job as a highway patrolman in Alaska. Who would buy that book? Nobody, because we all know that, along with a whole lot of intimate details about the extended Palin family, because that was considered news during the campaign.

What wasn't considered news was that John Edwards was very openly having an affair with a Rielle Hunter, who was supposedly videotaping segments of his campaign. But as everyone involved in the campaign knew, the real reason she was traveling with the campaign had nothing to do with videotape, or at least not the videotaping she was doing during the day.

The campaign staff knew; the reporters covering the campaign knew because it was obvious; and the National Enquirer reported the affair and reported that Edwards was the father of Hunter's baby.

Now for a presidential candidate to father a child with a supposed member of his campaign staff during the campaign is still big news, and when the story finally came out it cost Edwards his political career. All they had to do was follow the money. Hunter didn't have a real job with the campaign and the campaign paid her over $100,000.

But none of the mainstream reporters would touch it during the campaign.
...
By comparison, on the Republican side there is no level that is too low to go. The result is that a rumor that John McCain had had an affair with a Capitol Hill lobbyist was on the front page of The New York Times. It was a front page story despite the fact that after devoting a team of reporters to the rumor for months, all the reporters could come up with was that some McCain staffers said they thought McCain spent too much time with this attractive female lobbyist. That's front page news. The fact that Edwards fathered a child with a woman who he had hired ostensibly to videotape his campaign is not news. The fact that Elizabeth Edwards ripped off her own shirt at an airport in an argument with John Edwards is not news."

Hm. Solid points. I would say, while I know this is a right-leaning columnist, a person from any party should be able to see the bias in this. (It's interesting to note that I saw nary a Tweet about the whole debacle. John Edwards was not a Tweeting topic. Astounding.)

Either way, it's disgusting to realize the levels some people will stoop to. Even before I read the excerpt from Game Change, I was mortified at the idea that a man would not only commit adultery against his ill wife and children (who are absolutely victims too), but father a child. And not only father a child, but DENY his paternity, knowing full well that it is his. Despicable.

(And what about birth control? Considering Edwards' support sex education which includes instruction on how to acquire and use it, he's not really holding up his end.)

After reading the excerpt, I was appalled. Appalled at the recklessness, carelessness, and sheer egocentricity of this man. Naturally, I can understand that this testimony could very well be exaggerated, but it is still an amazing set of events to be revealed.

Now, as a Conservative, it was not even possible for me to consider Edwards as a leader of this country in politics alone. Political leanings aside, this situation positively murders any ounce of credibility in his personal character. Don't get me wrong--politicians from both parties have made utter fools of themselves

In other news, the plans set in motion on the subject of health care reform have been put on hold since Scott Brown's election. Brown officially ended the super-majority in the senate, reclaiming filibuster-rights for the Republicans. As far as its supporters, this puts the state of the health care bill originally set to go through to Massachusetts in jeopardy. We'll see where this ends up.

This is the most I've commented on politics publicly (ish) ever. I like it.

-A.

We won Massachusetts.

It's nice to see a little balance being restored to the government.

As for Coakley, I only just recently heard about the 2005/2007 Winfield rape case. I don't recommend researching it if you're squeamish. I appreciate the stress of Coakley's job and the sheer volume of complaints she must receive, but it seems impossible to me that a case of that level--that DISTURBING level--could be overlooked because he showed up to court on time. Just makes me sick.

But I need to get back to my own work!

-A.

Overheard at BBU: My New Love. :)

Guy 1: so when do you think a baby is made?
Guy 2: um when sperm meets egg.
Guy 1: so you think abortion is wrong?
Guy 2: FUCK YES, if people will spend a million dollars protecting the eggs of some random endangered bird the least they could do is protect the eggs of our women!!!!

FREAKING TRUE. And hilarious. :)

Surprising, if too late.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2008-10-28/so-long-obama/2/

SHOES. OMG SHOES.

Okay, my horror since Tuesday night has subsided.

I got SHOES. Not just any shoes. Birthday shoes. Nine West, five-inch platform Vasca pumps. Shoes that have, in fact, appeared on Gossip Girl. They are gorgeous, dahling, and I'll have pictures soon. They are the closest thing to "Fuck me" heels I've ever acquired. :)

This is a short update, I know, but there's not much else to tell.

Love you!

-Alyssa

ETA: Me, Robin, and Robin's best friend Sam (who is visiting with his lovely girlfriend Jessie) did really well tonight at the Epic Pop Culture Battle. We got second place, which means a pint of free ice cream, $40 to the Ottobar (where I met The Doctor who blew me off. Twice.), and free bus tickets to NYC whenever we want! :) Pretty cool, if I do say so myself.

ETA2: I have a warm spot on the back of the left side of my ribcage. :)

...

Well. There it is.

:(

Election '08

I know you all voted--at least, I'm pretty sure. Ab? Bri? And I DEFINITELY know we didn't always agree. No matter the outcome, I love you guys and have only the utmost respect for you.

(But if Obama does win I'll still cry and be glad I'll be in Italy when he's inaugurated.)

But seriously. You guys are awesome people, and I love you so much! :)

I hope you all voted, and I'll talk to you when we have a new president elect.

xo,
Alyssa

P.S. Gossip Girl, anyone? Amazing? Blair/Chuck win and Jenny is a moron? Anyone? :P

Also, because I am an IDIOT, and didn't mention this is my initial Patriot speech.

I voted for the first time! :D

It feels so good to do it, and I don't know why I didn't post about it when I sent the ballot out last week. I mailed it alongside a letter to Letta (and for Robin, a 'letta' to Letta. :P), because she's finishing up boot camp soon (she graduates on Halloween, appropriately). :)

As most of you can probably guess, I voted for McCain (duhr, because all of you have known me for more than two hours). I spend the bulk of yesterday morning watching Fox and MSNBC and the rallies going on around the US. Watching it more than reenforced my vote, especially that Biden interview in Florida. 2:18 is the climax, but you can watch it all and have a pretty good idea of the situations.



While the anchor was (VERY) blunt in her questioning (and a little less polite than I would prefer, but this is politics), it's very interesting that Obama's camp has subsequently cut off all interviews with that station until the election is over. Really guys? Are the questions all that surprising? Maybe it's because the media has been kissing your ass this whole time, glossing over the crap.

The bulk of Obama's presentation in Denver was making snide comments and it was just sort of sickening to see that meanness there. Don't get me wrong, there's been negativity from both campaigns, but Obama wasn't just pointing out an inconsistent record or misstep, he was just being petty and condescending.

Another interesting point brought up over the course of the morning was the likelihood of a Democratic Executive, Legislative, AND Judicial branch. No checks, no balance. Very, very scary thought.

Anyway, have to get to the Ceramics studio--love you guys, talk to you soon. Muah!

-Alyssa

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." -Thomas Jefferson

Alyssa puts on her 'Political Hat'.

(This is more for me, but feel free to comment.)

Since seeing the trailer for Oliver Stone's 'W', and the subsequent news commentary, I've decided that people want the President of the United States to be a superhuman. (Perhaps I've reached this conclusion very late.)

Not only should he do everything to please everyone all the time while in office, he should never have had any past indiscretions. It seems that the Western world, in tormenting George W. Bush for his college days/National Guard enlistment, is indicating that the President should not be a human that makes mistakes. (Not that his National Guard enlistment was a mistake at all--it's just portrayed as one.)

I'm not proud of the fact that George W. Bush was a frat boy and did things that, oh, wait, EVERY NORMAL COLLEGE GUY DOES. But that was a long time ago, and, then again, it's not really my responsibility or my business to feel embarrassed/proud of it anyway. It doesn't have an impact on the job W has done, or on my respect for him.

In fact, I think he has done an admirable job, he's followed through and protected the US, even when he's being spit on by his own country and most of the world. Frankly, I think he's doing what is necessary to keep our country safe. I don't know everything that's going down--I trust my leader to keep his country's best interests at heart. It's sad that all people see are rising gas prices.

No one enjoys war. I don't really get it when people imply that the Right WANTS this war oh-so-bad. Who wants war? It's not about wanting war, it's about the necessity of war, or, even removing the world 'war' from the equation, the necessity of protecting one's country, one's people, and the ideals held by them. (My mom brought up an interesting thought the other day: What would've happened after 9/11 if Gore had been President? Eep.)

Okay, enough about W, and a little more about the candidates at hand.

John McCain wasn't my first, second, or third choice as far as the Republican candidacy is concerned, but with his military background and overall experience, he's a valid choice considering our country's current occupation of the Middle East. He's not as conservative as I would like, but, unfortunately, I'm not so much voting FOR McCain as I am voting AGAINST his opponent.

Barack Obama has proven himself to be well-spoken, smooth, and charismatic, and has gathered himself quite a following. His campaign focuses almost wholly on 'Change'--assumedly, that indicates going as far in the opposite direction as possible from the last eight years. For the majority, dissatisfied with the Bush terms, those were the magic words, and his supporters have delicately avoided his church group affiliations and his complete lack of experience. (Think on this: Obama has been a senator for about 150 days--subtract the number of days he's been campaigning, and you're left with his collective, active senatorial experience. Scary.)

To beat the dead horse for a moment, Obama's church group (which he has since "renounced", surprise, surprise) is one that is "commit[ed] to embracement of the Black Value System" and "Pledg[ing] allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System". (This is taken from the [now edited] 'About Us' page for Trinity Church. The removed section is here: ) I can't imagine anyone endorsing a white candidate who was "commited to the embracement of the White agenda", can you? Not even including Rev. Jeremiah Wright's inflammatory anti-American remarks.

Granted, Obama has since publicly disengaged himself from Trinity. But, I find it hard to believe that after twenty years of attendance, contribution--and not to mention the mentorship of Wright to Obama--Obama has no stock in Trinity's message at all. But, that's all been glossed over. It makes me terribly uncomfortable that America has chosen to nominate someone as inexperienced as Obama, just to escape "The Bush Legacy".

Up until very recently, Obama had said barely a thing about his own personal platforms. Sure, he said "Change" a lot, and quite eloquently, and drew thousands to himself.

American voters, lucky for American politicians, tend to be idiots.

Don't get me wrong--this isn't across the board, and surely Americans had and have the capacity to elect brilliant and capable men. Unfortunately for this election, one man is quite a bit more brilliant (in the diamond sense--both men are clearly intelligent), and the other is quite a bit more capable. But, as Americans always do, we choose popularity over practicality.

I'm not thrilled at the tactic McCain's camp has employed in his latest ad. The ad is, admittedly, somewhat sensational, and almost in bad taste. It compares Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton in terms of celebrity. But, beneath the sensational surface, I think there's another point to be raised. Obama, perhaps, is similarly capable of the Presidency as Britney is capable of singing well/being a mom/keeping her cooch covered, or as Paris is to doing anything intelligent.

Okay, that's harsh, but Obama's lack of experience, paired with the hero worship he's recieved since clinching the ballot nomination, has made me seriously uneasy. Not to mention his obvious ambition for this Presidency--less then one hundred days as a senator before beginning his run for office. Sheesh. I've also heard people describe him as some sort of deliverer. Yes, as in Messiah-like.

*Shudder.*

It just gives me Revelation-type shivers. Geesh.

Okay, that's enough playing-pundit from me today!

Not much new--I have about ten days free from Lauren and KJ, as they will be at the Jersey Shore.

I had dinner with my mom's parents the other night, and they want to help me get to Florence, which is great. I also found out that my ex-stepgrandmother's third (current) husband (got that?) was best friends with my grandfather (her second husband)! Obviously there was an upset once Susie and Peter got married--actually, my grandfather punched Peter out--but I thought it was fascinating! I always thought they were strangers to each other!

My dad also told me today that his mother wrote a letter before her death, detailing each child's disposition, from her point of view. Dad has a copy somewhere, and he's going to find it for me. I can't wait. I've always been so curious about her--she died when my dad was 10 or so.

Okay, Tribond time!

See you guys soon!!!!!

Love you!

-Alyssa