This land is my land.
An event such as yesterday's is hard to encapsulate fully, for there are so many contexts in which its uniqueness, import and power can be examined. Let me start, then, with the obvious one - the fact that the hand that you see above on Lincoln's Bible is that of an African-American.
Admittedly, I struggled to find a voice to express whatever I was feeling after November 4. It felt like a dream, and as in dreams, articulation and detail aren't always in great supply. I couldn't - or felt that I couldn't - find apt words to encapsulate the moment. But Obama found some in his inaugural address yesterday that led me in the right direction:
Our challenges may be new, the instruments with which we meet them may be new, but those values upon which our success depends, honesty and hard work, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism -- these things are old.But what of the many Americans - people of color, women, differing sexual orientation and religion - who feel that, despite having paid that price of citizenship in so many ways find themselves at times denied that privilege? This land may be your land, they say, but it is not my land. If I am the most responsible and dutiful American imaginable, how is it that I can still be called "nigger" by my countryman for the slightest slight? When I am made to feel like a foreigner in my own country, how is it that I can taste that which is America?
These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history.
What is demanded then is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility -- a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character than giving our all to a difficult task.
This is the price and the promise of citizenship.
Perhaps the election of President Barack Obama is, as he put it in his victory speech in Grant Park, the answer to such a question.
The week after the election, my father's co-worker told him that Obama's victory meant that she could finally "unpack her suitcase". She finally felt that America was home, and that we were not merely Africans in America, strangers to the unencumbered promises of freedom and opportunity that are supposedly endemic to the land in which we were born.
The fact remains that Dr. King's dream, contrary to many of the hastily manufactured t-shirts and posters on sale all over D.C. yesterday, remains unfulfilled. The rise of one man to the highest office in our nation is not, in and of itself, absolution for those who continue to make their fellow Americans feel like they're somehow less than American. This corrosive behavior did not die off with the departure of George W. Bush from the White House and ostensibly, from public life.
Elizabeth Alexander's inaugural poem expressed an important sentiment:
Say it plain, that many have died for this day. Sing the names of the dead who brought us here, who laid the train tracks, raised the bridges, picked the cotton and the lettuce, built brick by brick the glittering edifices they would then keep clean and work inside of.We may indeed be on the cusp of a new world. We can, and should, take Barack Obama's election as a sign of things beginning and not ending. But the obstacles remain plentiful, and often we can get in our own way.
Praise song for struggle; praise song for the day. Praise song for every hand-lettered sign; The figuring it out at kitchen tables.
Some live by "Love thy neighbor as thy self."
Others by first do no harm, or take no more than you need.
What if the mightiest word is love, love beyond marital, filial, national. Love that casts a widening pool of light. Love with no need to preempt grievance.
In today's sharp sparkle, this winter air, anything can be made, any sentence begun.
On the brink, on the brim, on the cusp -- praise song for walking forward in that light.
Whether or not yesterday's inauguration helps you unpack your suitcase, know that everyone in America, by virtue of their birth, should do so as soon as possible - and make themselves at home.
(Cross-posted at 1,369 lightbulbs.)
Advertisement
Amateurish speech, sophomoric 'poetry', which in addition to being senseless, didn't even rhyme, and a 'prayer' with the rhyme of an idiot. Truly pathetic.
January 21, 2009 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
The most difficult response for a human being to endure is shunning. Spric deserves to be shunned. Period. Full Stop.
Scientific: thank you for your response to this singular day. I watch for your posts, and always, always, learn something from them.
January 21, 2009 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
spric? I don't see any sprics around here...haven't seen a spric in days...
January 21, 2009 8:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
yeah.... how right you are.... :)
January 21, 2009 10:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Shunning, is that what you call it? I was of the understanding the proper word was 'segregation'.
Is that how you recommend your fellow posters deal with me? You're segregationists? All democrats, that's for sure. Democrat party has exclusive claim to segregationist history. Makes sense.
For a group who, almost violently, demands inclusion of all manner of Marxists, social and sexual deviates, the Godless amoral, and criminals, this attitude seems powerful hypocritical.
Powerful hypocritical.
January 22, 2009 10:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
You're too dim to understand that the Democratic and Republican parties underwent an ideological shift on the subject of race. Ergo, assigning today's Democratic Party with the attitudes of 19th-century Democrats is...well...fully appropriate for you.
This is just one of a veritable plethora of reasons why you should be shunned in any discourse on this site.
And, for the record, segregation typically involves a GROUP of people, as a subset, being separated from the larger group. Insofar as your particular subset could be correctly labed "cretinous, racist assholes", you are correct that you are being segregated.
January 22, 2009 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Boyd, Elizabeth, believe me, I understand your frustration, but by merely answering when he speaks, you are feeding him. There is nothing you can say that will change the way he is behaving. He gets off over the attention. As I said on another thread, if y'all want to keep him here so you can practice your debate skills, I can live w/ his obnoxiousness. But if you are hoping to change him, don't waste your breath. He will only leave when the food source dries up.
January 22, 2009 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I respect your view on this. However, I submit that ignorance and hate left unchallenged is legitimized by its very existence.
It's spric's right to post idiotic bile. It's my right to publicly and repeatedly bitch-slap him for it. I'll be exercising my right (and my right hand) until he/she/it gets tired. :-)
January 22, 2009 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
No problem, Boyd! Just wanted to make sure you knew that he won't change! :-) I wasted some of my time trying to point out to him how he was coming across, hoping he would tone it down, but he loves this! We'll either avoid him, or enjoy the back and forth! I hope I didn't come across as being critical, because I didn't intend to!
January 22, 2009 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
You have a classy way of putting things. And, actually, I did take your post as criticism. But it was constructive criticism, so I was not offended at all. :) You're a good soul, stilli, and I always appreciate your views.
You (and others) may well be right about ignoring spric. And, it may well be that spric is simply trolling.
However, I've seen nothing but inanity under that avatar, dressed in all the trappings of ignorance, complete with third-grade writing skills. Until such time as spric actually proves s/he has some cogent, lucid thought, and the basic English skills to express the same, I will assume s/he is a wingnut straight out of Sarah Palin's "Real America". This is not the forum for such a person.
January 22, 2009 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stilli, I think you're a good hall monitor - in the best sense of the word. Keep it up! Some of us are willing to follow your lead. That's pretty much my stance most of the time anyway, but it's good to be reminded. As PCA does at times as well.
Nevertheless, people take their different stands to trolls and we have to be understanding of that - as I think you are.
Nevertheless, carry on with your community task!
:-)
January 22, 2009 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Is that how you recommend your fellow posters deal with me? You're segregationists?"
---------------
I'm afraid you are confusing two quite different things. Suggesting that someONE be shunned (or segregated) because of the way they act is not being discriminatory -- it's having standards! Suggesting that some GROUP of people be shunned or segregated because of qualities that bear no relation to their actions is discrimination.
So, if wwstaebler had suggested shunning all posters who had pink in their avatars, that would be unjust and unfair discrimination and you could rightfully complain. To suggest that one particular poster be shunned because of the nature and quality of his/her statements is simply having discriminating taste. (Which I share, for the record.)
That's long been one of my chief arguments and resentments against bigotry and group discrimination ---- it gives a bad name to discriminating against specific individuals on the basis of their actions or words. And the right to exercise *that* kind of discrimination is one I greatly cherish.
Just so you understand better if things (hopefully) become very quiet around your posts.
January 22, 2009 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
What a lovely display of group socialist amity!!!!
Ideological shift Hah!!!!
One of your most revered Senators had to resign his position as 'grand poobah dragon' or whatever of the KKK to take his seat. Robert Byrd's ideological shift, despite his age, doesn't seem to be complete yet. Didn't he use some pretty unacceptable racial epithets on the senate floor here recently???
Not just hypocrisy, but shameless hypocrisy!!!!!
January 22, 2009 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're getting back to your usual "blithering idiot" standard. But next time, try replying to my comment (as you had nothing to say about Elizabeth2 giving you your latest TPM paddling).
Robert Byrd actually endorsed Obama in the WV primary. And he's spoken with regret about his KKK associations in the past. I dare say that you're upset primarily because Byrd's departure thinned your favorite racist organization's ranks, both in number and in average member IQ.
This would run directly counter to, say, some of the candidates for RNC chair. Chip Saltsman, in particular, would've fit right in with the 19th-century Democratic Party. So, for that matter, would you.
I really wish your mother would quit leaving the bedroom door in the double-wide unlocked. Letting you anywhere near a computer without adult supervision is a massive lapse in judgment.
January 22, 2009 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wake up every morning thanking God for granting the civility to not end every comment I make with a childish attempt at a degrading personal insult.
January 22, 2009 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you're interested in having a civil discussion, fine. Post something with some links and some correct information. I'd be happy to participate.
Until you choose to grow up, you - and your intentionally inflammatory posts - will get exactly the respect they deserve from me. Which is to say, less than none.
January 22, 2009 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Have you noticed yet that spewing your bile in the most situationally inappropriate time, places and manner possible isn't helping with the lingering anger caused by the bullies in middle school or your mommy, your daddy, priest or whoever it was that made you like this?
January 21, 2009 11:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pointing out the emperor is naked is not spewing bile. Get it?? How simple do I have to make it?
January 22, 2009 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your problems are logic, reason and civility. Simplicity is something at which you are an expert.
January 22, 2009 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Everything is simple when you bring it down to the prime factors like I do!!! Your Marxist axioms just can't stand that light of day!!! Can't stand my darned old algebraic logic!!, can you???? tee-hee
January 22, 2009 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, I'm a big fan of logic. I also admire good sentence construction, proper grammar & spelling, and good punctuation.
Which is why I find you about as useless as an appendix - but with a greater cancerous proclivity.
January 22, 2009 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Spric, why don't you drop the leading 'S' and add the 'k'? Then it will be truth in advertising.
Hey, moderators? Can you throw this pinhead out, please? He's not making any sort of reasoned argument, he's just a contradictory, obstreperous asshole.
January 22, 2009 11:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Since when did all poetry have to rhyme?
January 22, 2009 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
If that was 'poetry' you can find gobs of poetry in the financial pages.
That anyone with more than a third grade education could find 'poetry' in an incoherent ramble including 'child seats' is testament to the lack of cultural awareness embodied in this administration.
That ignorant preacher's appalling 'prayer' had more poetic (albeit childish) qualities.
Typical
January 22, 2009 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
OK, dude - I get it. You didn't like the poem. Settle down, Beavis.
January 22, 2009 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Just be honest now. Did it really make sense to you?
January 22, 2009 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, it did. It's only about the most prose-like poem I've heard at an Inauguration. I didn't care for it greatly, but I appreciated the portion that I posted above.
I'm sorry if you didn't follow it or like it, but that's no reason to whine on about it when the poem itself is clearly not the main topic of discussion, either in the post or thread. Seems rather trollish, if not childish.
January 22, 2009 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okey dokey, each to his own.
January 22, 2009 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eat me.
January 22, 2009 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Rec'd.
January 21, 2009 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the picture...it's worth about a gazzillion words...
January 21, 2009 8:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
You hit on something Scientific!!! There are a lot of Americans who feel much more at home now.
January 21, 2009 9:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is the first person my husband has ever wished he were an American citizen - so he vote for him.
Many people now feel at home here. Welcome here.
January 21, 2009 10:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
What????
January 22, 2009 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Scientific:
For the record, you are "merely" black... however, the Native Americans -- whose land this *really* was -- are not mentioned in your blog.
Of course, your race obtained the right to vote in 1866 (14th Amendment). It wasn't until 1924 that the Native Americans became full citizens.
Why do I bring this up? Only to point out that any racial framing to where we currently are, only prevents us from making real progress. To talk about this land being anyone's land misses the point, I believe.
Let us reinvent ourselves, all that occupy this continent, as Americans. Despite all that has been written about him, Obama has never presented himself as anything else. Our strength as a people goes back to that notion of "melting pot" -- and the more ingredients in the pot, the strong the alloy is.
January 22, 2009 2:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
By the way, I should have said "full citizenship" in this comment, rather than "the right to vote". I also acknowledge that there is a difference between the legal reality and the practicality of something. However, the Natives didn't even get the legal reality until 1924... many years later.
January 22, 2009 3:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, Ct. You know, "melting pot" is kind of passe. ;) A lot of schools use "salad," today, which I think is just awful. I get the idea behind it, but salad? Come on.
I prefer mosaic, which people may have started using when Carter said, "“We become not a melting pot but a beautiful mosaic. Different people, different beliefs, different yearnings, different hopes, different dreams.”
The idea is that rather than all blend together to form a homogenous group (through assimilation), we complement each other, each pieces of the puzzle, keeping our own individual characteristics and cultures while contributing to the greater patchwork beauty of the nation as a whole.
January 22, 2009 6:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mosaic is a beautiful image. :)
January 22, 2009 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, well, regardless of the 'new thinking', I don't think "salad" is the correct metaphor...although it shows we are probably going back to an ag culture over a manufacturing one accurately. ;-)
People today want to claim cultural individuality, but as George Carlin says: being born Irish (or fill in your favorite ethnicity) isn't an accomplishment, therefore there is nothing to be "proud" of.
As humans are social animals, there is nothing to prevent us from identifying with our country -- that is an amalgam of the various cultures and thoughts of the immigrants who have come here. That "Tower of Babel" story is in the bible for a reason...
It's a deep lesson: to reinvent yourself (which America allows you to do -- it's truly the definition of the American dream), you have a price to pay: you must identify yourself as American, not your point of "origin". (Note the quotes since most people really are American and not immigrants.)
January 22, 2009 8:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's really funny how you don't know me at all.
For the record, my grandfather is Native American (Sioux), and many relatives on the other side of my family were Iroquois, Irish and Spaniards. As a result, I have some Native features and my hair is nearly straight.
Being "merely" African-American in this day and age is not quite as simple as you would have us believe.
January 22, 2009 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
{begin snark}
What? You mean, we don't all look alike?
And what's this nonsense about non-African heritage?
What a shame. And here I had you looking just like Huey in real life. How intellectually dishonest of you to have an avatar like that.
{end snark}
January 22, 2009 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Heh.
January 22, 2009 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's true. I don't know you, Scientific. But I was responding to your post, and not to you. Your post was clearly racially identifying you as black... and my point is that things are far more complicated than.
And it's also true that you don't know me or my racial heritage. So making assumptions goes both ways.
I appreciate that some will look at you and think in terms of your dominant skin color. We should all strive to simply look at each other as "Americans"... but that also means that people shouldn't identify themselves in terms of racial heritage any more than than identify themselves in terms of what hand they write with. (I didn't vote for Obama because he was left-handed, for example, any more than I voted for him because he looked black.)
January 22, 2009 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I made exactly zero assumptions about you, guy. Stop projecting.
And I'm glad you voted for Obama for his qualifications and not his heritage. But that doesn't mean that people should identify themselves, in part, by their heritage just because you think they should.
January 22, 2009 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your heritage should be "American".
Nothing comes for free. And this is the crucial point.
Also, we are away from my original point: if we talk in terms of heritage identification, then this land is no one's land -- except to those Natives.
January 22, 2009 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I've made zero assumptions about you -- which is why your claim that "I don't know you" is a non sequitor. I'm not projecting, I'm merely showing you how the non sequitor works in reverse. Apparently you see it quite clearly given your response. Neither of us like having words put into our mouths.
January 22, 2009 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
On the contrary,
In Oklahoma, the civilized tribe Indians in the southeast always enjoyed the same civil rights as the majority population. But only after the 1964 civil rights amendment passage could the Indians of the plains counties buy liquor legally, or drink beer in beer joints.
You would not believe the benefits to these aboriginal cultures this 'right' has wrought in the ensuing years.
January 22, 2009 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Little Big Nowhere Man...don'tcha just hate it when you drop yer fishing line in a certain pond and you don't get a nibble?
January 22, 2009 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Catch my limit ever day!!!!!
January 22, 2009 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seems that's all you're here to do.
January 22, 2009 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm here for the purpose of education and enlightenment. The fact I derive a bit of pleasure in it is a separate issue.
January 22, 2009 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
And yet the big one still keeps getting away.
January 22, 2009 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Spric,
You are truly an ignorant soul. I suggest you read this and let the shine of enlightenment penetrate your crusty darkness.
Ignorance is not a crime, unless it is willful. I've taken you to the waters, now it's your turn to drink.
January 22, 2009 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's true I'm here to teach, instruct, and inform. But I learn things here too. You can learn something from fools if you're smart enough.
January 22, 2009 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Once I heard someone suggest we refer to ourselves as a salad. An alloy makes everything one and the same. A salad allows everything to be itself and part of the whole. Similarity is not required and almost anything goes into a salad.
That being said, I want to be the dressing so I can get all over everything! What fun! :-{)>
January 22, 2009 2:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
You are mistakenly conflating individuals with a culture. Indeed, our culture is an amalgam of many... and that's what gives us our national identity.
January 22, 2009 3:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Should have kept reading down!
January 22, 2009 6:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have the sense you are of the habit of keeping reading to a minimum in any event.
January 22, 2009 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
One is not "of the habit". One is "in the habit". Correct usage would be as follows:
"The TPM poster spric is in the habit of making illogical, faulty, nasty, racist, bilious comments on any thread he/she/it enters."
January 22, 2009 11:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Excellently well said. His/her/its grammar is as faulty as his/her/its logic.
January 22, 2009 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
All those accusations are pretty subjective, but give me one example of anything I've posted which is even remotely racist.
January 22, 2009 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm afraid I can't produce anything remotely racist from you, as you're too thick-headed to be subtle.
However, your "innate savage" comment about Joseph Lowery yesterday (the whole comment, not just those two words) will suffice for an immediate demonstration of your racist bent.
Forgive me if I don't look for other, older (s)pric droppings. It takes time to clean up all the new ones.
January 22, 2009 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Talk about weak!! How?,,, in the hell?,,, is 'innate'?, or 'savage'?, or 'innate savage'? have anything to with any particular one of the human races???
January 22, 2009 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
The whole comment, dude. The...whole...comment. Not just those two words. But then again, that's what wannabe Klansmen like you do - find the "top not come down" in a verse and build a sermon of hate around it. Hurry - your sheets should be dry soon.
January 22, 2009 2:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
You the one lifted that out of the post, not me. Sorry you couldn't substantiate your argument.
January 22, 2009 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
You asked for one example of a racist post by you. I referenced a post you made about Joseph Lowery. I specifically mentioned that the entire post reflects your racism, not just the two words I used from the post in question (for the purpose of identifying the exact post; I can't go looking for it right now).
Your response asked what about those two words could be called racist. In the context of the whole post, your question answers itself. The fact that you refuse to address the post in its entirety is prima facie evidence that you know you're busted.
Argument substantiated. Troll flushed. QED.
January 22, 2009 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Veiled racism is racism nonetheless. If you weren't such a coward, you'd type it out loud. Little Big Nowhere Man With No Honor. Carry the name you earned.
January 22, 2009 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now, I was working during the Inauguration, so I don't know the speech (I haven't read the full text yet, daresay I'll get around to it); but from the above quotes, I don't know that spric's -wrong-.
Point is that what inaugural poetry is read is far from critical to the meaning of the moment. I think Maya Angelou is terrible but I was very impressed by Bill Clinton (and remain so; I voted for him only once, having not yet been eighteen in 1992. I would be honored to do so again).
The important part isn't that Obama botched the oath of office, or that he picked a pedestrian poet, or that expectations for his Administration would currently require him to don a cape and tights to be fulfilled.
The point is, this guy can communicate with other human beings, seems to have a head on his shoulders, has surounded himself with smart people, and gives every indication that he might to a better job than his predecessor.
And that's change I can believe in.
January 22, 2009 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Far too much time spent on this thread cleaning up troll droppings.
Just step around.
January 22, 2009 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree and I am done starting now.
January 22, 2009 3:06 PM | Reply | Permalink