History is Always Happening Around Us
January 19, 2009
Today is officially Martin Luther King, Jr. Day in the United States.
When I was a kid my daughter’s age, it wasn’t a holiday. We had President’s Day - always the 3rd Monday in February, it took the place of the former federal holiday of George Washington’s birthday (February 22nd) and while there were attempts to get it to also celebrate Abraham Lincoln’s birthday (February 12th) the federal holiday apparently still just commemorates Washington. Different states “do” it differently – but that’s kind of how states are.
Whatever the case, since it’s a Federal holiday, it meant that the post office didn’t deliver mail, the banks were all closed, the stores all ran sales, and school kids got an extra day off in the middle of the year.
Somewhere in the middle of the Reagan years (1983) the Martin Luther King, Jr. Day bill got signed into law by the president – setting aside the 3rd Monday in January as a Federal holiday (Dr. King’s actual birthday was January 15th.) First celebrated officially in 1986, I was long out of public school and when it became a reality, all I was thinking about was that “there was no way that businesses, schools, and other organizations were going to go for one 3 day weekend in January and another one a month later in February after they’d already lost January 1st to the post-Amateur-Night-Out hangover holiday.”
I was right and here we are 23 years later with no consistent practice. Some places give their employees MLK day off. Some give them Presidents Day. Some give them neither. A small percentage give them both, but mostly only banks and private schools. There is still no mail delivery – unless you count Fed-Ex and UPS.
The thing is, I was so clueless back then. This holiday? It’s more than a 3-day weekend-no-work-or-school-opportunity. Not unlike every other Federal holiday that has been turned into an excuse to skip Monday at work, it was enacted for a reason. The point is to take a day to think about why we honor the day… whether it’s because of our Presidents, or our War dead (Memorial Day) or any other reason – we’re supposed to think about it.
That MLK Day occurs the day before Inauguration Day this year (January 20th since 1933 and the passing of the XXth Amendment) seems a fortuitous happenstance. Tomorrow, we in the U.S. are witnessing the swearing in of the first non-Caucasian President of the United States of America. I’d like to think Dr. King would be smiling if he knew that.
I know. You noticed that I used the phrase “non-Caucasian” above… Not because I’m trying to downplay the fact that he’s our ‘First African-American President’ but because our soon-to-be President Obama represents more than just the African-American citizens – he represents our European-American citizens (his mother was a Caucasian woman of Irish & English descent) – he represents ALL of our minorities, and our young, our old, our rich, our poor, our educated and our disadvantaged. Even those who can’t stand the fact that he’s becoming our President? He represents you too. Because he’s becoming the President of the United States of America.
I know that most of the world will spend the next 4 to 8 years and beyond calling him “our first black President” – but I also hope that someday, that adjective becomes less impressive than his other achievements. I hope that he just becomes “one of our best Presidents ever” instead of people focusing so much on the color of his skin or his gender or something else that he never had any control over.
As Dr. King said so very many years ago “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” I think he would’ve been impressed by the content Obama’s character – I hope I’m right.
Tomorrow, you can find me hanging out at TotallyHer.com – where I’ll be participating in a Community Service Project to in honor of President Obama’s inauguration. I’ll be spending my time learning from these amazing women:
Liz Strauss, Anita Campbell, Kelly Phillips Erb, Jessica Smith, Kelby Carr, Susan Payton, Miranda Marquit, Elizabeth Potts Weinstein, Kelly McCausey, Char Polanosky, Barbara Jones & Wendy Piersall at:
That is when I’m not trying to help out a bit myself (3:30pm EST / 12:30pm PST) or watching the Inauguration ceremonies with my daughter (12:00pm EST / 9:00am PST).
Because I may not have grown up with Martin Luther King, Jr. Day – but she will… and she’ll have grown up never knowing what it was like wondering when and if we would reach a day where Dr. King’s dream looked like it might come true.
See you tomorrow. When we watch history being written once again… and if you happen to join me here too.
Obligation, Right, and Privilege
November 4, 2008
The three words in the title of this post often confuse people. You will see them consistently misused in conversation.
Let’s get the dictionary definitions right out of the way, shall we? I’m going to use Dictionary.com because I’ve always liked their service (and it compiles definitions from diverse sources.) I’m also not going to cite the ‘full’ definitions, because it would take up too much space and you are perfectly capable of clicking through if you’re so inclined.
ob·li·ga·tion noun
1. something by which a person is bound or obliged to do certain things, and which arises out of a sense of duty or results from custom, law, etc.
right noun
18. a just claim or title, whether legal, prescriptive, or moral: You have a right to say what you please.
19. Sometimes, rights. that which is due to anyone by just claim, legal guarantees, moral principles, etc. (women’s rights; Freedom of speech is a right of all Americans)
priv·i·lege noun
1. A peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor; a right or immunity not enjoyed by others or by all; special enjoyment of a good, or exemption from an evil or burden; a prerogative; advantage; franchise.
Yes, I did pick specific definitions. Every dictionary comes close – but they try to differentiate themselves from each other by using more lines or varying wording. In the end, you have to choose a definition that works for you and go with it.
The emphasis on privilege? That’s mine. I want to make sure that it’s highlighted.
This post is what I consider to be an obligatory post. My moral compass tells me that on this day, of all days, I shouldn’t just be posting about random happenings, products, experiences or what-have-you. I should be posting about today’s election in the U.S.A. Because this is November 4th 2008 and the US presidential election will have an impact not just on Americans, but on everyone else worldwide.
I suppose you expect that this next paragraph will be about voting for a particular candidate. Most blogs I read have endorsed one or the other of the 2 main party candidates. A few have supported 3rd party candidates – and a couple even advocated writing in a candidate who didn’t make it past our semi-institutionalized primaries contest.
I’m not going to do that.
I can’t say that I don’t care who you vote for. That would be lying. But I’m not going to try and influence who you vote for. You’ve either decided long ago, or you are sick of reading all of the ‘vote for X!’ posts like I am. (Or given how late I’m posting this? You’ve already voted.)
But some people in the U.S. think that just because voting in our democracy is a right that it won’t go away. Those people need to scroll back up and read the bolded part of the definition of privilege.
The ability to vote in open elections in the United States is a privilege we enjoy in this country because many more people that you can ever count have fought and sometimes died to maintain it.
If you don’t think it can go away? You are mistaken. Rights aren’t guaranteed to be enforceable, they are just based on principles. In this country? You have the privilege to vote. But more than that? You have an obligation to.
So if you’re reading this and you’re thinking that maybe you’ll just skip it because your candidate is probably already going to win/lose and there will be long lines at the polls and you’d have to leave work early or get home late? Don’t.
Go. Vote.
It’s your right, your privilege, and your obligation. Because if you don’t use it? You could lose it.
And They’ll Tell 5 Friends… And So On… And So On…
October 3, 2008
Jack Leblond just called me out. No I swear, he did.
He wanted to know if I was registered to vote! What do you think? Am I registered to vote? Of course I am. I’ve been registered to vote since 1984. I take my rights very seriously – because the right to vote isn’t just a right, it’s also a responsibility. It’s a privilege and an honor to be a part of a country where I have a say – even if it’s just a small one – in what our government does. I exercise that freedom, that right, that privilege, and that responsibility whenever I can.
But I do so responsibly. I research the candidates, the issues, the positions, and try to vote based on both my values AND what I think is best for the country as a whole.
But here – tell you what, watch this – and you’ll see why I’m telling you DON’T VOTE!!
You know, in theory, I could make a list of folks to call out on this – but I’m just going to throw it at you – so, are YOU registered to vote? If so, link me to your post about this in the comments. If not, tell me why not in the comments, okay? Seriously, I’m interested.
Possibly the Most Important Thing I’ve Read This Week
July 9, 2008
The Blog Post I’m Referring To Can Be Found Here
I’ve been waiting for this to round out a little bit today before linking it… but I think it’s an important matter to bring up.
Aaron Brazell [@technosailor] at Technosailor.com has posted about an on-going issue with Congress and the current attempt to keep their members from using Social Media tools like Twitter and Qik.
Congressman John Culberson (R-TX) [@johnculberson] has weighed in on the issue making it as simple to understand as can be… something that he would not be allowed to do if the Democrat side of the house has their way on this one. There are congressmen & senators using the internet right now just like you and I do. That needs to continue without censorship in my book.
But rather than recreating the wheel – just go read Aaron’s amazing post on it.
Why, Yes, Actually – Girls Can Do Math.
May 8, 2008
The Disclaimer
Okay, before I start this, let me preface it by saying that I’ve deliberated about this post quite a bit before ultimately deciding that I was going to write it simply because it would make me happier to get it out. I’m still uncommitted when it comes to who will get my vote for President next November. Yep – I’m one of those “I keep researching it, but I probably won’t be sure until faced with the actual ballot” people that drive others nuts.
In this election, I’m actually less disturbed than I’ve been for the past 5. It’s only the 2nd presidential election I’ve voted in where I didn’t feel like I had to vote against a candidate. That’s probably why I’m less inclined to post politically-natured blogs than many of my friends.
What I’m about to write will surely enrage some of those friends – at least, some of the more zealous Obama supporters.
The Situation
After this week’s primaries – I saw a slew of comments about how Hillary Clinton’s decision not to withdraw from the Democratic race was “proof that girls can’t do math.” Some people were saying it tongue-in-cheek, but out of a sense of outrage that the candidate opposing the one they supported wasn’t doing what they wanted her to do – drop out. I suspect that a few of the more misogynistic folks saying it meant it – but I give my friends the benefit of the doubt on that.
Still, the phrase has rankled since it started popping up on Tuesday night.
For 2 reasons, actually – one, it kind of implies that there are no men working on Hillary’s campaign. Seriously, do you think she’s the only one ‘doing the math’? More than one strategist working on that campaign has done the numbers I’m about to show you – and their gender had nothing to do with it.
Two – anyone who thinks that ‘there is no chance at this point that Hillary will win the needed delegates’ is the one not ‘doing the math.’
So let’s do the math, shall we?
By the Numbers
In the Democratic primary race, there are a total of 4,049 delegates up for grabs, including the super-delegates, which means a candidate needs 2,025 or more delegates to get the majority and win. (source)
Currently, Obama has 1,846 of those delegates – 1,588 pledged and 258 super-delegates who have declared for him. Clinton has 1,685 – 1,419 pledged and 266 super-delegates.
That’s a difference of 156 in Obama’s favor.
Only 217 pledged delegates are up for grabs in the remaining six contests: West Virginia, Kentucky, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Montana and South Dakota. (source).
Those saying Hillary can’t do math are saying that it’s obvious that she can’t win, because Obama only needs 179 of those to meet the 2,025 threshhold… whereas Clinton needs 340 to meet the threshhold – which is 123 more than she could get if she somehow won all those delegates.
But that’s where the ability to math actually comes in. You see let’s work through this:
Obama – 1846 current
Clinton – 1685 current
Primaries – 217 left
—————-
Total 3,748
Okay, so we started with a total of 4,049 delegates possible. If you subtract the 3,748 that will be committed after the primaries – that leaves 301 uncommitted super-delegates.
So between the 217 from the remaining primaries and the 301 uncommitted supers we have:
518 remaining, as yet uncommitted delegates.
Obama -> 2,025 – 1,846 = 179 needed to win nomination
Clinton -> 2,025 – 1,685 = 340 needed to win nomination
out of 518 remaining…
Can Hillary still win the nomination? Sure. Can Obama? Sure.
In fact, it comes down to 1 vote. If Obama gets 179, Hillary’s short by 1 – if Hillary gets 340, Obama’s short by 1.
That’s the math folks.
Now, if Obama manages to win 179 of the remaining 217 delegates from West Virginia, Kentucky, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Montana and South Dakota? (which means getting better than 82% of the vote in those areas – a margin he hasn’t had yet…) Then Hillary is done for. But until then? Don’t expect her to bow out.
As for me – I’ll be undecided until long after those delegates are committed – but I’ll keep doing the math. Because I can.
Edit to Add:
Because someone already misunderstood this…
Obama needs > 80% of the remaining state delegates to put Hillary out w/o super-delegates.
Clinton needs < 20% of the remaining state delegates if she gets ALL of the remaining undeclared super-delegates to win. (301 supers + 39 states = 340)
Warning – there be Politickin’ and Opinin’ Below…
February 26, 2008
Disclaimer – I don’t usually write publicly about this sort of thing… and I don’t intend on letting this turn into a politically oriented blog. But I wrote what follows and it’s my blog, so I’m publishing it. If you’d prefer to skip something that might offend your own sensibilities on the subject, feel free not to read on. I’m sure there’s something fascinating over on the front page of Digg right now that will provide more amusement and evoke less passionate responses for most people. But if you read on, be warned that this is my opinion… if you want to air your own, feel free to post it in your own blog and link back telling people how outrageous and off-base I am, but I reserve the right to edit/delete comments on this one.
I’ve been keeping quiet about this to a point… but when I find a piece of journalism that so vividly reflects my own viewpoint – I’m hard-pressed to keep being silent… even when I know it’s going to royally piss off a few people I like and respect.I have a few close friends who know this, but it will come as a surprise to pretty much anyone reading this to know that Obama scares the crap out of me. I know I should probably be drawn to his stated political positions as they’re sort of close to my own… but every time I see him on television, or someone starts raving on about him, my skin crawls and I can’t help but wanting to scream “shut up!!”Why, you ask?Because the only phrase I’ve had to describe his followers and his campaign is one that sends shivers down my spine.
Cult of Personality.
If you don’t know what it means – think Jim Jones… think David Koresh… think Mao Tse-Tung… think Mussolini… Hell, think Hitler. Or look it up on wikipedia or something.
Every time I see the media waxing lyric about the Senator from Illinois – I get the song by In Living Colour stuck in my head. Not so much because I think he’s fostering it – but because it just is.
Just a bit ago, on Nightline, they were airing the first television report I’ve seen that implies that maybe Mr. Obama isn’t as squeaky clean as his fanatical followers would like to believe. I turned to my husband and said “huh, they’re starting this a little early, aren’t they? I thought they would’ve waited until the general election.”
Because I expected that the media’s love affair with O was going to last a little bit longer at least. I figured it would wait until the Republicans were ready to start dismantling the image.
I was wrong.
Terry Moran managed an interesting report – not that I can quote it all to you, it’s not in my DVR buffer any more and it’s television – no transcript to copy & paste. I’m sure the video will be available on-line soon enough. But the Rezko affair was brought up again… as was the fact that Obama’s association with Rezko seems to have netted him a sweet deal on his home in Illinois – to the tune of $300k less than the asking price of the house. Sure, there were as many “he’s a great guy!” testaments as there were “um, not so much…” statements in the report. But it’s the first non-rah-rah piece I’ve seen in prime time news since the Dem race narrowed down to just O and Hill.
But it’s not really the television story that prompted me to write this – or, not in so direct a manner, that is. I had gone to the ABC/Nightline website to see if they had the Moran report up yet – but came across a story labeled “Obama’s Personality Cult.” How could I not click through on that? Of course the ILC tune was already going through my head as I read phrases like:
Sen. Barack Obama’s “true believers” respond as though they’ve spent their whole lives out in the cold, at rally after rally, a few people literally faint at the sight of him. “I’ve never seen anything like it,” said Los Angeles Times reporter Joel Stein. “People are crying, rending their garments. It’s a cult. But it’s a fun cult.”
A fun cult? Politics isn’t a cult to me. Government should never be a cult. You want to separate church and state? Then get your ‘faith’ and ‘hope’ and ’sermons from the mount’ out of your politics and start asking the tough questions. Quit telling me “he’ll get us out of Iraq!” ask “How does he plan on getting us out of Iraq?” Quit telling me “he’s for change!” ask “what kind of change? How will he implement it? How does a President make those things happen rather than the Legislature?” Quit telling me “he’s a great speaker!” and start listening to see if there’s substance in the pretty words and stirring speech. Ronald Reagan was a great speaker – did that mean you didn’t have to listen to what he was saying? No.
Drop the idol-worship. If the guy is going to be a good president? Great… but quit pushing him as a Messiah. He isn’t.
Why we won’t be “voting” tomorrow on Super Tuesday
February 4, 2008
This is a moderate household – both GeekDaddy and I are fiscally conservative and socially liberal – we agree on most issues. But in the end, he leans just a tad more to the left and I to the right. So I’m the registered Republican while he’s the registered Democrat of the household.
It works for us.
That said, tomorrow is Super Tuesday and it’s the first time that Colorado has been in on the process this early. Along with 24 other states, we are trying to decide which candidate will represent our party – or at least get our delegates votes when the official party Convention happens.
Here’s the thing – rather than “voting” – both Colorado’s Republicans and Democrats have opted to go the precinct caucus route. That means, in briefest of terms, that neighbors get together and cast their votes. For the Republicans, it’s a one-person, one ‘preference’ vote thing. Show up, sign in, wait for a bunch of hoop jumping, cast your vote, and leave. For the Democrats, it’s unfortunately a bit more involved and multiple votes can be taken as well as delegates being named.
This, of course, takes place a 7 p.m. in two very separate locations.
So – our options become to try and get a last minute babysitter (ain’t gonna happen) – who of course isn’t someone of voting age themselves – so that we can each participate, or to decide which one is “more important” so that one of us can go and the other can stay home with our child. Honestly? We don’t believe that either one of us has “more important” beliefs than the other.
This is ridiculous. But more than that, it’s probably not all that uncommon. Even in cases where the parents are both in the same party – limiting this decision-making process to a specific time & place causes people to have to face the decision of who gets to go participate in the decision and who gets left out of the process.
There’s a reason that polls are left open all day long on the day of normal voting – it’s so that we can find a way to get there and be heard. This archaic form of precinct caucuses is a relic from a time when men voted and women didn’t. And it’s high time that our politics started reflecting the modern world.
Instead – we’ll just have to hope that our “neighbors” find a way to resolve this issue in their own households… or that those without children do a good job of deciding for us.
Still, I’m generally disgusted with the stupidity of the party representatives on both sides who saw fit to make the participation of their “neighbors” so complicated as to make it unlikely for most.
Makes you wonder if they can’t get it right for the average citizen at this level, how are they expected to get it right at higher levels…
or Subscribe by Email!!
