Fox News—I Watched and Shan’t again Watch

I watch Fox News on occasion. I do not discriminate; in spite of the fact I think it can be a network full of hacks. I know; I know, but it’s not because it’s a network running political positions contrary to my own. For example, I love and greatly admire George Will, much more so than I like James Carville. My voting record probably falls more in line with Carville’s, but that doesn’t mean I think he states his arguments better than does Will.

My point in that preface is I have never been quite as disgusted as I was this weekend, flipping between stations yesterday. I couldn’t be more serious, I flipped through a Geraldo forthcoming things on his show, and was interested enough to stay on Fox News. In so doing, the lead story was a super-model’s apparent suicide from jumping off a building, where Geraldo’s show had “exclusive footage.” What?! Exclusive footage of someone’s suicide, I turned away immediately; however, there was to be something else that kept me flipping through the station to see if the coverage of that story had concluded. Three times flipping, I saw the profile of the model’s face, lying supine, on the street from the other side of a truck, shot underneath the fire engine’s body.

I could incessantly write about this, but for now I’ll conclude. To write more just leaves me again seeing the image, and thinking about what a relative or loved one would do when faced with something so horrible and tabloid. How anyone can take this channel seriously, makes me wonder so much about our culture.

Some Random Matt Thoughts—A Matt Musing

These past few days, I have been listening to two albums, both of which, years ago, were much loved albums of mine. REM’s “Eponymous” and Radiohead’s “The Bends.” From the last thirty years, both acts are considered hallmarks of independent rock; of that, there is no question. Moreover, “The Bends” has always been a darling of critics. Nevertheless, sometimes it takes going into one’s library and putting those CDs in the car, thereby putting them back in rotation.

Of course, “Eponymous” was a Greatest Hits of REM’s IRS Records work, prior to their becoming a Warner Bros. act. I am noting both of these things due to the fact that realizations sometimes come in the oddest of places, like driving to work. Driving to work today, I found myself repeating “Driver 8.” I used to play “Driver 8” over and over again when I was in the seventh or eighth grade.

The human experience never ceases to amaze me, in the same way that I’ve always found the Smiths lyric interesting, not until recently have I realized my love for the band was driven by the work of Johnny Marr—his composition. For me, the same could be said for R.E.M. While Stipe is an entertaining front-man for the band, both colorful in style and personality, my adoration of their music has been the result of Mike Mills and Peter Buck.

I don’t know if this is significant, other than it seems to remind me this thematic component of this year, I am getting older. Instead of thinking of the lead singer, without being a musician, we have that tendency; I am now noticing and appreciating the scope of bands’ work. I know that sounds altruistic and a bit dopey—also intuitive, but it’s one of those bits of consciousness that never ceases to amaze me. These are those bits, the likes of which leaves us thinking, “it’s odd; it seems so logical now, I am surprised I’ve not before now noticed this.”

Misguided Faith – Means for Control

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/24/evangelical.vote/index.html

It never ceases to amaze me, the way those that speak so highly about faith and the bible in public life cannot academically and respectfully disagree with another person’s challenge to their respective positions. The link above is to a CNN story about James Dobson, stating that: "I think he's [Obama] deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own world view, his own confused theology."

What Obama says in the speech cited from a few years ago is in the article. Please read it, and make your own judgments; however, please think about this. Is it that Obama has an issue with the bible? No, that’s not what he says.

Obama’s problem with the use of the bible in public policy is the same problem I have with it. Prior to faith being intertwined with law, that faith would have to undergo a synthesis, being transmuted from, in this case, the bible, and then written into law.

To whom do we go for such enlightenment? Who are appropriately learned in the scripture to intertwine their faith in our laws? For Dobson, I am sure he would cite maybe not himself, but other religious leaders that could be involved. Of course, who selects these leaders to be those who interpret the bible? What about those of varying faiths?

What if one day, the US, following this precedent became an Islamic state? Would it not then make sense to follow Sharia? I know; I know, the slippery slope argument is a fallacy, but please see the parallel to what Dobson is saying. In essence, opening up the bible to our interpretations and evaluations, for the purpose of jurisprudence becomes an ugly and dangerous thing.

I started to write about Con and Transubstantiation, but held off on it. The point is the argument for incorporating faith in law, when there is a constitutional framework for their separation— for good reason, holds no water. How about this: why don’t we look to the bible, like we look to Greek philosophy for object moral axioms, and apply them to law? Thereby extrapolating these simple and objective axioms into different circumstances, and applying them to case by case by case. Following an agreed decision, citing conventional wisdom and previously decided opinions, we develop a framework of laws… My goodness, I am should be a framer of Early-Modern Constitutional Law, or a philosopher like Locke, Kant, or Mills!

The point is, when someone starts to reinforce their arguments using their interpretation of their translation of sacred texts, they are working to their personal morality. I think I am better off without James Dobson’s idea of Morality; he supports Bush, who put us in a war without substantial provocation.

Sawtooth Relay—The Gr8ful Deadfeet

I have forthcoming pictures, I’ll likely post tomorrow. Nevertheless, I felt as though I should sooner rather than later write something about the experience. This last Friday my team of six, Jay, Nick, Amber, Sparkle, Jerry Garcia, and I drove from Boise up to Stanley, Idaho. The team did so in a classic 1980’s conversion van, with an iPod full of songs and a horn speaker mounted on the front of the van. We were bound to run the Sawtooth Relay.

The Sawtooth Relay takes place from Stanley to Ketchum, Idaho, along Highway 75. The route is a smidge of sixty miles, which are divided among the team of six over twelve runs. For the sixth leg of the relay runs over Galena Summit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galena_Summit), this is an 8701’ summit in the Sawtooth. I had the good fortune of not having to run that leg, but had the pleasure of running about eleven miles of the relay, over legs five and eleven.

If you ever have the opportunity, I highly recommend making it over to Eastern Idaho. Idaho is an undoubtedly beautiful state, and the Sawtooth Mountains in Idaho are pristine—a spectacular bit of eye candy. Winding up in Ketchum, having run through the Sawtooth, one can see why this part of Idaho, where Sun Valley is, is why so many with money spend their time in that part of the world.

The race was a blast; we had an incredible amount of fun. My team was a diverse group of folks, mothers and fathers, a middle-aged native-American, a college student and a near-thirty-year-old bachelor. Of course, to all of those runners there is greater detail, just like there is to every person one chooses to describe via demographic. The point was simple, we were there running the Sawtooth Relay to have a great time and we did.
Pictures to come!

Tim Russert and Blue Collar America

Whilst I am sure many of you have heard a great deal about the passing of Tim Russert this past Friday, I felt the need to write a bit on Tim Russert’s passing. Russert was more than a popular news bureau chief or a great interviewer for NBC News, relative to things political. From my perspective, Tim Russert did something few others continue these days. By that, I mean, in a great many of ways Tim Russert represented the Blue Collar Ideal of our country. Russert did so the way Bruce Springsteen does for music or the way the Tom Clancy character “Jack Ryan” does for fiction. It’s this universal ideal, this archetype about which our culture fantasizes, but no longer follows through in keeping alive.

I say that, in that I come from an area not dissimilar from Tim Russert’s Buffalo, NY. The Quad Cities—Moline, Rock Island, Illinois and Bettendorf, Davenport, Iowa—are a rust belt stronghold, right along with Peoria, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Detroit and more southern parts of Chicago (e.g. Gary, IN, Beverley, Homewood, etc…). Moving to Boise, I’ve often claimed a love for the city's socio-economic diversity, and loving that there is a dimension of “blue collar” work in this city. I continue to believe that; however, seeing the tributes to Russert, and thinking of the way I live, along with my upbringing, I cannot help but think I’ve avoided some dimension of that blue collar lifestyle that I so admire in Russert.

Is it just me, or are our generations losing their attachment to the post-Industrial Revolution remnants of the blue-collar labor ideal? I think our culture, while idolizing it in a nostalgic way, does not embrace it. Don’t get me wrong, I think we still value hard work; however, I think we are looking for components that are not as easily accessible. In other words, I think “elegance” has replaced pure function, and we prefer more synthesized and easily palatable deliveries both with our media and our ideals of ourselves. Of course, with those two things, one could go off the “deep thoughts’ end,” and claim that our social construction has taken us away from the “blue collar,” and for right now, our nostalgia keeps us thinking that mode of delivery is “to the point,” and is “honest.”

Because people like Tim Russert are doing what they do, that nostalgia remains. This is a Chris Matthews meets a voting-for-Hillary Clinton Pennsylvanian Male meets a Reagan Democrat. From a step back, it’s something interesting with which to contend. In short, it makes me wonder where the blue collar daughters and sons are, and what it is they aspire to do. Did the idea of being blue collar dissolve with the Baby Boomer generation? I don’t know. It’s something that fascinates me, indeed.

Confusion: Is It That McCain Is Too Old?

Waking up this morning, with Morning Joe on the TV, as I prepared my oatmeal, I heard nothing but conjecture about Obama’s campaign, and the angle they are taking with McCain. A few days ago, on the Today Show, to Matt Lauer, McCain said,

“not too important” when American forces could come home from Iraq and that, “What’s important is the casualties in Iraq. Americans are in South Korea;
Americans are in Japan, American troops are in Germany. That’s all fine.”

To McCain’s credit, he is analyzing Iraq with a naïve sense of pragmatism, which would be fine were it somewhere in Africa or Asia, but history has shown the contrary; hence, my use of “naïve.”

Due to McCain’s age, I don’t suspect many in the press will use the adjective “naïve” in referring to his comments on Iraq, not in analysis. Rather, we have Obama’s campaign surrogates or John Kerry using the word “confused.” Quite simply, that word is somewhat fitting, in the same way one calls someone’s child “confused,” when they are espousing naïve claims.

All of this is perfectly understandable. Right now, for Obama’s campaign to use the word “naïve” would open the door to Obama’s relatively short tenure in national politics. Rather than using “naïve” or “confused,” in my humble opinion, they should switch to “strategically flawed,” for the same line of attack. By all means, they are working to do that, but McCain’s comments are so absurd, it’s hard not to speak to quick pejoratives, as that is what comments like this deserver.

I look most forward to a live debate on the subject. I would love to hear Obama utter the words, “Senator McCain, you are wrong. Let’s step back and game this. Right now, we have 100,000+ troops in this country, one we invaded on a cause, which was later demonstrated to be false. There is a region that has theological and culture division from us, whose activists and terrorists are using the above premise, the invasion, to justify terrorism and anti-Americanism. In the meantime, we have not caught or killed Bin Laden. What strategic benefits to maintaining an occupation in Iraq do we have?”

The quick and dirty of it is that while McCain’s age is something to avoid outwardly discussing, his ideas and beliefs in foreign policy are antiquated. McCain is still thinking in terms of “us versus them,” which would be fine; however, “them” is something much more amorphous than it was when it was the USSR. In short, we are fighting a culture, one which uses our “fight” as justification for further violence. While I am not saying we stop being violent towards those trying to kill us, I am suggesting, we work differently than treating our current enemies as Nation-States. This isn’t the Cold War, nor do we have a draft.

Realizations

I realize that this has been all over the media, and if you read this ever you are probably expecting me to make comments akin to those of Tim Russert or Tom Brokaw last night. Obama’s completion of the primacy season with the presumption of his nomination, as a candidate for President of the United States, will be viewed as among the most historically significant occurrences to have taken place during our lifetimes.

Again, if you’ve watched the news in the last twenty-four hours, you may have already heard this realization. Whether you are for or against Obama, you think he is too Liberal, or you feel his position on the War in Iraq is wrong, this is a milestone for Western Civilization.

Barrack Obama is the first person of color to be in the running for the top job in a Western Democracy. We have progressed beyond the EU, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, all of our peers, in this respect! In the spirit of full disclosure, I have been a fan of Obama’s for quite a while, as I am sure if you are reading this you know. Nevertheless, this is something about which I cannot help to write with excitement.

What is quite lovely about all of this is, in addition to the aforementioned statements or race, his positions are not those of the lunatic fringe. No, rather they are those of most Americans alive and voting.

In spite of what will be sold by McCain’s campaign, he is averse to affordable guaranteed healthcare for our citizens.[1] For the war in Iraq, I will not espouse McCain wants us to remain in Iraq for another hundred years; however, he has given no indication towards a clear exit strategy. On the economy and petroleum, in both cases, the two respective issues are intermingled. In fact, Iraq, Petroleum and the Economy are all, in multiple dimensions, connected to on another. McCain’s policies are a continuation of what is not working.

In essence, assuming Obama’s campaign is run correctly, the choice between the continuation of the worst presidency in our history and Obama make the choice seem rather easy. At this point, the question goes to running mates. I sincerely hope that Obama avoids nominating Hillary Clinton. While it could be a path of least resistance, there are others equally qualified and great for that which Obama could use. From my perspective, Joe Biden, Richard Lugar, or Christopher Dodd, they are all top tier candidates. While there is no gender diversity with that, I cannot see Obama being a candidate for change with Hillary that close to the presidency, with Bill that plugged into it as well.

[1] With friends who have survived cancer, the idea that for-profit companies could prevent them from being insured as private citizens repels me from the argument that government guaranteed healthcare is a step towards socialism or “big government.” If that were the case, our allies Canada, the UK, France, Norway, or Germany would all be socialists. In none of those cases is that true.

Fascinating Excursions

I often wonder if iterative self-analysis or self-assessments are consistent across the board. I relate that, because as I sat down to aimlessly play on the internet, in the midst of my workday, I went to LinkedIn. I spend a lot of time on LinkedIn, since I moved to Boise. Part of me wonders if LinkedIn is an escapist outlet for re-establishing connections and correspondence that one wouldn’t otherwise do.

For those of you not familiar with LinkedIn, it is, in essence, a social networking site, similar to Facebook or MySpace. The exception to LinkedIn is that it is for “professionals.” Rather than the aforementioned websites—Facebook or MySpace, LinkedIn is work-acceptable, in that it enables one to keep in contact with current or former classmates or colleagues.

I digress, except to say that as I was going to LinkedIn today, I wondered, “are you going here so often whilst at work, because it is escapism? Is this an avenue to keep in contact with former colleagues, or is it also another means to keep up-to-date with how people are and what they are up to?”

For right now, I have to admit, I think it is a bit of both. While I used to play around on MySpace, I don’t find myself nearly as interested in the site any longer. I would say that is largely the case in that I am growing older, and my friends now, at this age, don’t belong or play on MySpace. Rather, nearly everyone I know, who are professional in some context, are alive and well on LinkedIn.

Wow, I just came full circle to find: one, my friends and I are grown up; two, I “escape” every once in a while; three, I am too up on current events to occupy more time than I do at home with the media.

Quick question: Is iterative self-analysis predicated on an idiosyncrasy, or is it on too much alone time?