I was tempted to title this piece, "The Cowardice of Bloggers," but I figured that this might be needlessly inflammatory. No reason to get people angry by calling them cowards just to get a bit of attention. (READ ME because I’m too controversial for words.) I have to admit that the temptation was great, for it seems that one needs to become the Dr. Strangelove of the Blogosphere to get noticed these days.
For the record, before I begin, I should make it clear that I am not suggesting that pseudonyms be banned from web sites. Nor I am suggesting that it isn’t fun and at times useful to use a handle that hides your true identity. Everyone wants to be Clark Kent on some days of the week. And of course there are serious political reasons, for example, retaliation by employers or governments, for hiding one's true identity. No question, there are good grounds for using "pen names." With this string of caveats in place, I now make my case.
The Blogosphere is about to be buried in junk. When exactly it will be totally buried is anyone's guess, but I see the sphere turning into the electronic equivalent of Wall-E's earth, probably before the glaciers melt.
Ervin: Because I can understand the English language. It is my mother tongue.
Sam Ervin during Watergate hearings
I used to feel that way, that I understood the meaning of words. Lately I've been having my doubts. As a young child I was a bit behind in learning to read, and much of what I read in grade-school was dreadfully boring (see Spot run). In Jr High School I read my first novel and I was hooked.
Now I see my language, a wonderful precise tool for communication becoming as squishy as the handling on an Oldsmobile station wagon. For sure some of the blame goes to our current President. If forcing so much water into someone's lungs that they believe they will drown isn't
Torture: the deliberate, systematic, or wanton infliction of physical or mental suffering by one or more persons in an attempt to force another person to yield information or to make a confession
, than I clearly don't know what that word means.
But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.
George Orwell
Writing, typing, blogging, crafting -- I enjoy words. Sometimes I'll edge toward biting, caustic sarcasm and other times I'll slip over to goofy, inane and warped. Once in a while I'll swim through a pool of surrealism and other times I'll delve deeply philosophical, or at least what I'll think of as "deep" and "philosophical." There are the times for deadly serious, sonorous tones or passionate ranting phrase-paintings.
I don't always know what I'll end up with, but I do know when I'm "in the zone" instead of merely tapping out thoughts -- both of which differ from the times I'm simply "zoning." Why does this matter? Because words are how we express ourselves -- they convey thoughts, feelings and emotions. The way we string them together, the manner in which we punctuate the written word or articulate the spoken phrase, all form the basis for one of the deepest forms of communication we have outside of the touch shared between lovers, friends or family. Words are how we define ourselves, our relationships, our culture, our society and our government. And while actions speak louder than words, the two acting together form the basis of something powerful. Combined with knowledge and experience, reinforced by action, the power of words to do good or ill is nearly infinite.
Posted simultaneously on ePluribus Media, DailyKos, Docudharma and Below Boston.
There are words that comprise paper tigers and those which ignite fires; some words are worth fighting to protect, others are not.
Some words forge new nations and ideals amid the forge-fires of conflict, while others are relegated to the dustbins of history as naught but a footnote at most.
There are words, on the page following, which have worth that appears to vary across the depth and breadth of the nation today. Once -- long ago, perhaps -- they were words that could inspire and entice the people of a nation to do great things. Now, however, their fate appears uncertain. I ask, fellow Kossacks, just one simple question: Whither the words necessary to marshal a hue and cry of outrage and demand for restoration, restitution and accountability?
Words, when chosen poorly, can be very offensive. Word choice is a delicate art that must be navigated carefully by politicians. I wanted to post a diary to say that words must also be chosen carefully by us, the Obama supporters.
In healing the wound in our party, there are two phrases that we need to eliminate from our vocabulary.
The first is 'Obama Camp' and 'Hillary Camp'. The time for that is gone. Implying that we are two separate groups is nonsense. We are one group. We are just 'us'. We are The Democrats. This is subtle, but we should err in favor of inclusiveness.
The second phrase that needs to be eliminated, and this has been discussed elsewhere, is the use of Senator Clinton's first name to identify her. Nobody uses Obama's first name in a headline without also including his last name. Nor do they do that for Ted Kennedy, or Joe Biden, or even Nancy Pelosi. Why do people then refer to Senator Clinton as 'Hillary'? While I don't necessarily think that people intend to be derogatory when they do this, there are people who will take it that way. Some feminists see this as subtle misogyny, and for that reason, calling Senator Clinton by her first name is divisive.
Alright, I'm sure you've seen some version of the below video where Chris Matthews asks sausage-brain to explain what appeasement means and protruding-forehead does his best imitation of Lenny from Mice and Men, "The rabbits, George. I want to pet the rabbits."
But I'd like you to skip past "screaming-dude-whose-greatest-college-experience-included-a-beer-bong-and-a-copy-of-Juggs" (I know its hard) in favor of a later moment... starting at 4:07 and going to the end... where Chris Matthews bemoans the denotative meaning of phrases like "appeaser" and "cut-and-run" and "WMD" and "patriotism".
In Obama's Own Words: For Supporters and Nonsupporters: Part II
For Obama Supporters: Enlightenment
For Clinton Supporters: Encouragement
For McCain Supporters: Ammunition
For all those persons who had neither the time nor the
inclination to read over 480 pages of Barack Obama's first book,
here are some quotations taken from that book, "Dreams from My
Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance", by Barack Obama,
published by Three Rivers Press, New York, New York, Copyright
1995, 2004, paperback edition, ISBN 978-1-4000-8277-3 (Original
edition ISBN 1-4000-8277-3). For your information, in 1995,
Barack Obama was 34 years old.
This "Part II" covers Chapters 9-14 of the book.
[PRELIMINARY NOTE: I have CAPITALIZED WORDS that I want to
emphasize. These words were NOT capitalized by Obama].
After last night, I went to bed strategizing. I want primary season to be over.Obama needs something to cause a little controversy for Hillary and put her on defense. I think her words about obliterating Iran need some further discusssion.
This ad might just do that. It would play to Obama's strengths, not be too negative, but be hard hitting. Hillary has tried to use Obama's ability to speak as a weakness thru out the whole campaign, constantly throwing out that he is "just words". This ad would be a good way to turn it back on her.
Not expensive to shoot and something that would get a lot of air time and discussion on tv.
Open with video of each
George Bush- Bring it on
John McCain-Bomb, bomb, Iran
Hillary Clinton-Obliterate Iran
cut to Obama looking into the camera.
Obama-It's going to take a cool head and a
different kind of words to get us out of
Iraq and restore our reputation in the world.
Words do matter.
The flap/nonsense about Obama's bitter remarks hinges, I think, on what is meant by "cling." The choice of most media sources has been to pare the comment down to Obama saying that people "cling to guns or religion," and the way it gets quoted makes it sound like Obama is suggesting that they should not be clinging to these things. Indeed, in modern usage, we tend to use cling in this subtly pejorative way. In last night's forum, however, Obama argued that cling in scripture has a different kind of meaning.
you know, you have funny eyes.' I was shocked he said that to me, Mom, really surprised by that."
My 25 year old daughter came over to my place so we could watch the David Wilson film on MSNBC together. Suddenly, we found ourselves in the middle of a conversation we had never had before.
J has hired a nicely diverse group of workers while in her management capacity. She told me last night that they have started to refer to her as "the white girl." She said that they make many assumptions and cliches about her and her "privileged" upbringing. She then confided in me that it is painful to her, but she tries to respond in the spirit of good humor, despite the ache in her heart. J went on to say that it bothered her they would presume certain things because of her white heritage from me, things that were not true, but it bothered her even more because it denied utterly her paternal heritage. You see, although I'm of Irish lineage and, yes, white, her father is a Native American.
Yesterday, a few hyper - politically correct folks (I assume Anglo non Spanish speakers) were tossing donuts for use of the "sexist" and "perjorative" words "chico" and "chica". Evidently, they think it's Spanish for "chick". Culture bound, anyone?
For the record, "Chico is generally referred to name of a person. It is mostly a male’s name. It is a Teutonic origin. The name chico means a free man. . . . Diego "Chico" Corrales, Chico Marx (an actor), Chico Buarque (Brazilian singer and writer), Chico DeBarge (R&B singer), Francisco "Chico" Aramburu (Brazilian footballer) and Chico O'Farrill (musician). . . . Mostly this is a term that is offered as a friendship kind word towards a male. It is mostly used among Spanish speaking people."
http://www.blurtit.com/...
Forty years ago Friday a young presidential hopeful — who had joined the Democratic primary race little more than two weeks before — was facing a steep uphill battle as the Party had fractured into quarters.
The Kerner Commission had recently concluded that "our nation is moving towards two societies — one white, one black — separate and unequal." More than 50 Americans were dying each day in Vietnam.
Just days before, President Lyndon Baines Johnson had thrown in the towel, saying, "I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party," thus leaving Vice President Hubert Humphrey as the favorite of the stunned Party establishment.
For seven long years we have heard the voice of a president who cannot help but mangle almost every sentence that comes out of his mouth. The reason that it is so painful for him to get his words out is that there is something else stuck in his throat that he keeps wanting to say. What he has really wants to say is: "Fuck all y’all."
And he keeps sharing this message through his actions as he proceeds to fuck up every piece of this once great country that he can. Plain and simple, he hates people and the only ones who are still on his side are as sick as he is. Blame his mother. Call him a spoiled brat. But we all know the type, the schoolyard bully who, no matter what he says, is always just looking for an excuse to throw a sneaky punch. And who the fuck cares how he got that way?
But Obama is a whole different order of human being, and many people are still trying to put a label on him, to explain who he is, simply because he is so different from what we are used to.
And if we do not find our own way to more fully answer this question, the Republicans will answer it for us. They'll say he's just a big talker, he's not tough enough...
Every day since you dropped out that you have failed to stand up and support either Democratic candidate, that very endorsement becomes less and less courageous, less significant, and less admirable. Remember the words you spoke during your campaign.
Oh this is good. This is so very good. I may be the first to catch this one. Check it.
Hillary has been blasting Obama, claiming his foreign policy credentials come down to a speech he gave in 2002 in opposition to the Iraq war. In the process, she has elevated and allied herself with John McCain, an extraordinary move for someone who wants to be the Democratic nominee.
So what is Hillary Clinton's foreign policy experience? The Chicago Tribune has written a story focusing on her primary claims of influence.
I find it interesting to note that all of the words Patrick/Obama mentioned are in an idealistic vein.
"I have a dream."
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."
"We have nothing to fear but fear itself."
Of course that was the point, as the bit was meant as a justification of Obama's fundamental appeal to idealistic sentiment. It makes people feel good to hear such words, and believe they are true. I'm all in favor of inspiration, of the Spirit of '76.
Still, I find it hard to believe that we can be true to idealistic sentiment when we can't even, as a nation, be true to the words supposed to serve as our fundamental laws. Words like:
Article I Section VIII:
Clause 11: The Congress shall have Power To declare War
