For the past few months, as I have been preoccupied with (ongoing) job searches; housing searches; discovering Texas; learning how to be a married couple living alone, with no roommates! on the same continent! seeing each other for more than 3 hours a day!; my news intact has dropped, greatly. Not enough that I did not know about the protests and crackdowns in Uganda or the DSK case, but to the point where I knew no details and couldn't be bothered to look up any articles to educate myself. The local tv news was not mentioning anything of not, either, though is only to be expected. My own apathy caused me to realize how easily it is to be willfully, even unwittingly, ignorant of the world, the country or the other side of town. No wonder many Americans know nothing of the world around them - it is only too easy to avoid, to not even know about, international or national news. This is only my personal assumption, but I do not think Americans - those not in college - are encouraged to read a variety of news sources. To read the news, at all. Is this how it seems to you?
Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
Sunday, July 3, 2011
Sunday, January 9, 2011
What the F--k! Arizona?
I try not to be an emotional person but as I scrolled through the pictures of the shooting in Arizona yesterday (January 8th) I could not help myself. It is a tragedy on many different levels: a domestic terrorist attack resulting in the deaths of six people, including a 9-year-old girl; an attack on an elected official and member of the judiciary; and an indicator of the extreme hate and violence currently present in American politics. Tea Party supporters and those of the far right have been quick to state that the gunman (Jared Lee Loughner) was not a member of the Tea Party movement; that the Tea Party does not espouse violence; and that the left will blame the Tea Party and far right for the shooting in order to put politics first. Of course, when the Tea Party puts politics first it's a completely different matter:
“While we need to take a moment to extend our sympathies to the families of those who died, we cannot allow the hard left to do what it tried to do in 1995 after the Oklahoma City bombing,” he wrote. “Within the entire political spectrum, there are extremists, both on the left and the right. Violence of this nature should be decried by everyone and not used for political gain.” (from this article at The New York Times)
What needs to be remember now is that, yes, the Tea Party and far right do not officially condone violence or violent methods, but that does not mean they do hold responsibility for inciting violence. Sarah Palin's website included Gabrielle Gifford's (the congresswoman targeted and shot) district in a gun's cross hairs; Glenn Beck has warned that "it is only a matter of time before an actual crazy person really does something stupid" and "the war is just beginning", or, even more darkly, "[we are reaching] a point where the people will have exhausted all their options. When that happens, look out." Seriously, what the fuck? Regardless of whether Mr. Loughner was a member of the Tea Party movement or any other political faction is largely beside the point when violent rhetoric has become par for the course in American politics. It is not sufficient to claim innocence and hide behind the First Amendment: if you encourage and promote violent means to ends then you are indirectly responsible for the violence that may ensue. As my friend Foxy by Nature recently pointed out, the First Amendment does not protect against speech that causes harm to others. The Tea Party movement and far right may not have been directly involved in yesterday's shooting, but that does not absolve them from filling today's political climate with the "vitriol" that led to deadly violence. Until that responsibility is accepted, I do not think the violence is over.
“While we need to take a moment to extend our sympathies to the families of those who died, we cannot allow the hard left to do what it tried to do in 1995 after the Oklahoma City bombing,” he wrote. “Within the entire political spectrum, there are extremists, both on the left and the right. Violence of this nature should be decried by everyone and not used for political gain.” (from this article at The New York Times)
What needs to be remember now is that, yes, the Tea Party and far right do not officially condone violence or violent methods, but that does not mean they do hold responsibility for inciting violence. Sarah Palin's website included Gabrielle Gifford's (the congresswoman targeted and shot) district in a gun's cross hairs; Glenn Beck has warned that "it is only a matter of time before an actual crazy person really does something stupid" and "the war is just beginning", or, even more darkly, "[we are reaching] a point where the people will have exhausted all their options. When that happens, look out." Seriously, what the fuck? Regardless of whether Mr. Loughner was a member of the Tea Party movement or any other political faction is largely beside the point when violent rhetoric has become par for the course in American politics. It is not sufficient to claim innocence and hide behind the First Amendment: if you encourage and promote violent means to ends then you are indirectly responsible for the violence that may ensue. As my friend Foxy by Nature recently pointed out, the First Amendment does not protect against speech that causes harm to others. The Tea Party movement and far right may not have been directly involved in yesterday's shooting, but that does not absolve them from filling today's political climate with the "vitriol" that led to deadly violence. Until that responsibility is accepted, I do not think the violence is over.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Ta-Tas and Handbags
Last night I was browsing my Facebook page in my phone and did something I now regret: I deleted message about "saving the ta-tas" by posting about handbags. I regret this late-night decision because I wish I could provide the entire message for you, but I am sure plenty of other people have already received it or will soon.
I remember enough, though. Have you been wondering about recent status updates? "I like it on the couch." "I like in my car." "I like it on my dresser." Oooo, naughty - except that these people (women) are referring to where they normally have their handbags or purses. Gotcha! And why are women jumping onto this bandwagon? Remember last year, when women were randomly posting colors in their status updates and it turned out it was the color of their bras? All to raise awareness for breast cancer, of course. Well, this year it's all about handbags to raise awareness for, er, Coach?
Haha, no, really, I can only assume it is also to raise breast cancer awareness, because of the "save the ta-tas" reference. Oh, and to make news: "We made news last year with the bra color updates, so let's see if we can do it again! (paraphrased)"
And now you know. I have been casually trying to figure out how purse placement is related to breast cancer, other than both involve women, while ignoring the feeling that "save the ta-tas!" sounds like a rallying cry to protect strippers. Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)