Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

JBE concert

First off, a link to an excellent bit of their political commentary.

The concert was inspirational. I'm definitely doing some of these projects:
  • Liberals for Dummies, an honest attempt at outreach across the lines of red/blue
  • Spending the next four years of my life working to see paper trails for all voters
  • Spending the next two years of my life seeing a Democratic governor of Massachusetts elected
Also, my napkin poem got used at the concert! Poem (not very good, but very quickly written):

Red states, blue states
  never meet.
Red channels, blue channels
  remote control flyover
Red people, blue people
  have to meet.

And he used it. I got movies, I'll upload them overnight and link in the morning. I'm pretty damn happy with how it got merged in with the other napkin poems.

Also, during the intermission, my old friend Bob from Rochester called. That was another big boost to my morale. The next four years are going to be the ones where we turn it around. We have to let the red people know who we are, why we are who we are, and how to believe us.


( 13 comments — Leave a comment )
Nov. 4th, 2004 09:34 pm (UTC)
We have to let the red people know who we are, why we are who we are, and how to believe us.

good. and i hope we're also going to spend some time trying to learn, really learn who they are, why they're who they are, and how not to dismiss their beliefs, too. 'cause we're not very good at that right now, which is probably one reason why we're not very good at the reverse, either.
Nov. 4th, 2004 09:45 pm (UTC)
That's fer damn sure.

The one problematic moment I had tonight was during the anthem for red states, with the refrain "six guys, ten teeth, and one brain among them"...

It passed, though, and we got onto the brilliance.
Nov. 11th, 2004 09:11 am (UTC)
6 guys
I thought 6 guys, 10 teeth, 1 brain between them was a DaVinci's Notebook/ Paul and Sturm song, not a JBE. Do you know which group wrote it and which group covered it?
Nov. 5th, 2004 12:58 am (UTC)
Of course, we mustn't make the mistake of thinking that every "red state attitude" must be right.

One of those attitudes is bigotry and homophobia. That's wrong. We don't need to learn how not to dismiss that attitude, we need to learn how to end it. That process is only mid-stream with respect to race, and way far off for homophobia.
Nov. 5th, 2004 09:02 am (UTC)
of course. i suspect most of the "red state attitudes" are wrong, but then i'm a bleeding heart liberal. and the bigotry and homophobia issues are some of the ones i'm most not willing to compromise on. however, the only way we're going change anyone's mind is by talking to them as real people, not shouting at them "you're wrong" and failing to actually have meaningful dialogue.
Nov. 5th, 2004 06:49 am (UTC)
What about the (white?) people
NB: "white" only used because it's the obvious midpoint between red and blue from a political standpoint.

As a moderate, I felt pretty well alienated by both the reds and the blues. Both camps showed pretty strong intolerance for other opinions, and I think jencallisto has it exactly right.

The blue people have been incredibly dismissive of any discussion around the rightness of going into Iraq (I'd rather be discussing why no one is strongly advocating continuing into Sudan right now) or keeping government smaller, while the red people seem to spend way to much time haranguing lifestyles (like I really care what goes on in someone else's bed/kitchen/chandelier) and advocating for powers that the government already has and doesn't need more of.

I'd like to hear more positive reasons for a given candidate, and less of "well, at least he's not the other guy."

But at this point, maybe my rant should move into my own journal....

Nov. 5th, 2004 07:23 am (UTC)
Re: What about the (white?) people
Arguably, we're not going into Sudan because Iraq has drained our resources on a "war of choice" - one that, even if you can argue it was right, you can't argue had to be right *then*.

They made the decision on the assumption it would be easier than it was. Many, many, many people (including the president's own father) tried to warn them of how hard it would be, and they refused to hear the arguments.

And now Sudan is one more victim of this choice.
Nov. 5th, 2004 07:32 pm (UTC)
Re: What about the non-(white?) people
Bah. I think you're on crack here. We're not going into Sudan because the victims aren't white, aren't even close to it, nor do we have any economic interests there.

This isn't an issue about Red v. Blue, or whether we should be in Iraq.

There is a genocide going on over there, sponsored by the government of Sudan, executed by the Janjaweed militias. Aren't we the people who cry out, "Never again!" when we discuss the Shoah?

But back to your argument, your first sentence ("you can't argue it had to be right then") is exactly an example of the point about the edges being dismissive of discussions.

Nov. 5th, 2004 07:24 am (UTC)
Re: What about the (white?) people
Oh, and one other comment, I think "purple people" makes more sense, both for avoiding confusion as to the meaning of the phrase, and to refer obliquely to this map of the US.
Nov. 5th, 2004 07:23 pm (UTC)
one-eyed, one-horned....
Rabbi Pesner agrees with you (he also called us moderates "purple people" in his sermon/open letter to President Bush). It was a good sermon. It made me realize that while as people, we like to identify ourselves in positive terms (small government, pro-choice, equal rights), in politics, we tend to identify things in the negative (tax & spend, anti-choice, homophobe). Maybe that's why people get turned off by both parties.
Nov. 5th, 2004 08:11 am (UTC)
Spending the next two years of my life seeing a Democratic governor of Massachusetts elected

Why? We have an almost entirely Democratic congress. Is it good for a state to be entirely run by one political party without any balance or strengths from the other?

Democrats and Republicans both have weaknesses and strengths. I don't think it is good or safe to eliminate one from the government.

What real influence has Romney had that has hurt the Bay State?
Nov. 5th, 2004 07:38 pm (UTC)
And even if you don't like him...
Why just repeat the same strategy of this election (although "Anybody But Romney Again" at least gives you an ABRA-Cadabra! slogan)? What do you want in a governor, and advocate for the person who can provide that? Just because someone is a democrat doesn't make them naturally a better governor.

Do you want someone who can work well with Kennedy and Kerry to make sure that unfunded mandates don't come down from DC? Do you want someone who will fix one major thing wrong in the system (and which one), or who'll fight every fire that comes up, but not make strategic gains? Do you want someone to restore our name to Taxachussetts, or someone who'll cut spending to keep the budget in balance? Would you rather focus on civil rights, preserving Massachussetts as the leader in equality for all citizens, or someone who is going to work on bringing more business into the state?

But I do really like your other two bullets. I'm one of your dummies. Can't wait to read the book.
Nov. 6th, 2004 08:38 am (UTC)
Re: And even if you don't like him...
Well, the first half of that was going to be to find someone I could get behind... If the Dems run another Shannon O'Brien, then yeah, whatever. But if I can make a difference in the primary, to get someone good on the ticket on our side, then it will be worth pushing hard for that election.
( 13 comments — Leave a comment )