All the moralizing bugged me. I got where it was coming from, but it still seemed kind of extreme.
Taub is hillarious, he's a fantastic character.
I really like Lucas. He reminds me of Oz. But more verbose. I'd like to have Lucas as a friend.
Also, Chase is a pretty, pretty man.
- Mood:
disappointed
Anyways, what I really wanted to post about was my theory about where the season is going. All this talk about destiny, pushing Sam and Dean to fulfill their roles -- I think it's all building towards a big statement about free will. In the theology the show is working off of, that is exactly why God created humankind, to have free will. People are weak and flawed, but they are able to choose to love God, or choose to do anything else. That was what made humankind special, what the angels don't get. That's why God doesn't intervene, because he wants people to turn to him. So all the talk about destiny means squat.
I just had an idea - if they are going to find God, then it shouldn't be Castiel who's searching, it should be Sam and Dean. Because of the whole "take one step towards me and I will take ten steps towards you" thing. God wants to be found, he just wants people (not angels) to look for him first.
Can't wait to see what happens.
The residents of Maine just voted to deny same-sex couples their right to marry, joining California and other states where the whims of the majority have trampled the rights of an unpopular minority.
First off, simply conducting such votes is an affront to fairness and equality. People's rights are not grounded on public approval, but on the fact of their humanity. The general public should not decide who has what rights.
Secondly... wtf? Seriously, why? Why do people care so much whether couples wholly unrelated to them are getting married? It has nothing to do with you. It doesn't effect your marriage, or your life.
It's not the institution of marriage people are worried about. Fewer hetero couples are getting married, if you wanted to shore up marriage as an institution you'd be eager to accept a whole new demographic of people willing to form nice little nuclear families and live the American Dream.
I think there's two ideas that drive the anti-same sex movement:
1) Sex is for making babies, and sex purely for fun is wrong. Since homosexual couples can only have sex for fun, they are evil.
To which I would respond - grow up. Sex is natural, it should be fun. Your impulse to control other people's sex lives is a violation of their personal autonomy, and a projection of your own repressed sexuality. Deal with your issues on your own, and stop bugging other people.
2) Families are the building blocks our society. The enforcement of gender heirarchy starts in the home. The whole system collapses if there's no gender difference.
I think same-sex couples getting married - and having kids (adoption, assisted reproduction) - will be excellent for our society. It will show that the division of labour does not have to be gendered; that men can be nurturing caregivers; that people don't have to accept the roles handed out to them based on their gender.
I don't see why anyone would rather have people shoved into boxes, preventing them from living a full, satisfying life. How could someone be so mean-spirited?
I'd like to tell Maine, and the United States, and everyone everywhere: Live your own life, live it to the fullest - and let other people live theirs.
ETA: This post may be offensive to some people. It's supposed to be. I don't think basic rights are something to be negotiated. If you're in favour of denying equality to people, you suck. Go away, do some self-reflection, figure out why you hate people who are different from the norm, and get over it. The problem here is not that gay people want to get married; the problem is that you want to stop them. Deal with your issues, and leave other people alone.
- Mood:
aggravated
Pretty pictures below the cut
( Yahtzee! )The sad thing is, I'm watching Supernatural with my boyfriend, so I have to restrain my urge to rant on in a fangirly way.
- Mood:
ecstatic
"They shouldn't have been buying houses if they couldn't pay the mortgage."
Uh huh. Sure. Blame the poor. This whole mess is the fault of people with no economic power.
The American economy is based on consumption. The American Dream is a commodity. After 9/11 Americans were told to help their country by going shopping.
You can't have it both ways. You can't base an economy on selling people massive amounts of useless shit, on creating irrational anxieties to be alleviated by the latest snakeoil, on instant gratification and conspicuous consumption, and then complain when it works so well that people shop themselves out.
Socialism never took hold in the USA because workers were paid well and given benefits, they were co-opted into the middle class. People blame unions for the death of heavy industry, but they're placing the blame on the wrong shoulders. It's the corperations, pathologically rational as they are, that are at fault. Guided by the hand of the market, they move to where labour is cheapest. Americans lose good jobs. Wages stagnate, and bad jobs proliferate. People can't keep up their mortgage payments and the stupid level of consumption that drives the American economy without incurring massive debt. And the American consumer market, the largest and most coveted in the world, shrivels. Henry Ford had the bright idea that he should pay his employees enough so that they could all afford to buy a car. Wal-Mart pays it's works enough so that they have no option but to shop at Wal-Mart. But they can't afford to buy a whole lot.
Poor people aren't to blame for the economic crisis. The fault lies with those who ensured that there would be so many poor people.
Halleluliah! Praise God!
It feels like anything is possible. Personally, I've adopted "yes I can" as my motto, and have felt much more pro-active lately. But more to the point - it feels like America is capable of doing good again, of being a source of inspiration. That it's capable of being what it claims to be. That it stands for strength, equality, opportunity, innovation. And it feels like the whole world will be better off for it.
After a week of cheeriness over Obama's election, it's starting to sink in that the Bush years are finally over! Eight years of buffoonery and total disrespect for the rule of law, resulting in the needless deaths of thousands upon thousands, eight years of turning American into what has been called the world's richest Third World country - over! I remember the disappointment when Bush was first elected. And my dismay when he was re-elected. At the time I though, "well, on the bright side, in four years he'll be gone once and for all." And now that time has come, and not only is Bush on his way, but Barack Obama is going to be the next president!
I keep thinking, "our president." I've been watching the race so closely, reading on-the-ground reports from campaign volunteers and all that, it really feels like he is my president. When you think about the impact that the USA has on the world, it's understandable that people would think of him that way. I can only hope that he will inspire some real political leadership in Canada, and exert some pressure on our government to take some action with regards to climate change. The recent Canadian election was such a waste of time, and after all the anti-democratic, anti-equality shit that Harper has pulled, I can't believe that the Liberals managed to mess things up so spectacularly. And the Conservative platform was such garbage too; I mean, Senate reform?!? What could be more irrelevant? But enough about depressing things. Hope and Change!
There's no doubt that President-elect Obama will face massive challenges. But I really do have faith in his abilities. He has already proven that he can bring people together, and inspire them to action. And in his statements, he's shown that he has deep, multi-faceted understanding of people and the problems they face - his speech on race is the perfect illustration. He didn't want to simply condemn Rev. Wright's statements, he wanted to understand where they came from, and how that source could be fixed. It seems like Obama doesn't approach problems with an ideology that he forces them into, but like he comes at problems from a variety of perspectives, and thereby arrives at the best possible solutions. Not only that, but he seems very much at ease with himself, his memoir shows that. He doesn't have any hang-ups or chips on his shoulder to get in the way of governing.
I also deeply admire Michelle Obama. She's intelligent, assertive, and personable (and yes, she is my new role model). It seems like if Barack ever sets a foot wrong, she'd be there to set him straight. They clearly have a very close, very genuine relationship; I don't recall ever seeing such a couple on the political stage.
I feel affectionately for Joe Biden too. I wish he were my uncle, or something.
I do have reservations as well, of course. Around foreign policy in particular, I think Obama is too belicose in his language. Afghanistan doesn't need any more militarization, it's not accomplishing anything except the killing of civilians. The mission needs to be massively restructured towards nation-building. As for Iran, that seems like a conflict that is all about rhetoric and grand-standing; any solution would have to allow Iran to save face.
But for the most part, I'm optimistic. Now that America will be led by someone intelligent and thoughtful, someone who cares about the quality of life of the average American, it seems like the future holds so much promise. Last week was an historic election. But it was just the start of an exciting new era.
- Mood:
hopeful - Music:Yes We Can
I only have two words to say: Kick. Ass.
- Mood:
excited
This takes the cake. Bush is really a president who thrives on fear.
Iran could very well intend to build nuclear weapons. In fact, I don't doubt it. However, that point is a long way off. The current situation in no way warrants the type of language that Bush is using. There's still plenty of time and space to try to improve the situation peacefully. With dialogue. And cooperation.
'Cause, honestly, the USA has done more to spur Iran on than to restrain them. The fact that Israel is a regional military super-power, and a nuclear power, is enough to make Iran feel threatened (and not to blame Israel, I'm just trying to be objective here). Then Bush abandons nuclear non-proliferation, which destroys the credibility of the movement. He abandons multi-lateralism, and any checks it may have supplied on the exercise of US military might. And then the US invades Iraq, and doesn't appear to be going anywhere soon. Oh, and then there's the amped-up rhetoric against Iran, not just from the media (which is often mistaken as expressing the views of the government) but from the president himself. And don't forget the background factors, that the US is generally threatening and imposing in a cultural and economic sense.
I think it's clear that from Iran's perspective, they didn't start anything. They're responding to the clear and present threat of American power. Bush's rhetoric won't get them to back down, it just confirms that the US is a threat to Iran, and that Ahmadinejad is justified in his hostility towards the US.
Moreover, Bush's comments imply that the US will go to war with other countries merely because they're neutral on the issue of Iran and nuclear weapons. There's no world war if the US bombs Iran. There's a world war if other countries get drawn in as well. World Wars aren't started by powerless countries attempting to gain power. They're started by already powerful countries trying to gain more.
The worst thing is that Bush's World War III isn't an impossibility. Hieghtened rhetoric and jingoism contribute to leaders being in a war mentality, and merely being in a war mentality makes war more likely. That's what happened the first time, everyone was expecting to go to war with each other, and then it happened. Here you've got a fear-mongreing, militaristic United States, and a fear-mongering, militaristic Russia, jockeying for position in the Middle East, each with militaristic proxies in the area (Israel and Iran), and a backdrop of violence and insurgency. It's a scary set-up.
I just saw him yesterday. Gonna talk with him tonight. And see him on Friday. But right now, I miss him. :-(
I just finished an assignment. Like, the very minute it was due. So now I don't want to do more work. At least not for a little while.
I'm waiting for the final round of the Lerner's Cup moot court competition. It should be interesting to see. See what winning teams do. I didn't get past the first round, but the feedback I got was very positive. One judge said I was "authoritative." I never thought my public speaking style would be called authoritative. It's cool. I feel like I'm making real progress in my public speaking abilities. :)
I’ve been pretty busy lately with school. I don’t think this will be a trend that’ll fade any time soon. Our first real assignment is due in a couple of days, the same day as the novice mooting competition in fact. The assignment is to write an office memo. It’s fun. J But I’m seriously behind in writing summaries for my courses. It looks like I’m just going to have my unfiltered notes to study for the midterms from.
David and I celebrated our 6 month anniversary this past weekend. J He got me a claddagh ring. J Which I am delighted with. J I used to think they were corny and hokey, after Buffy made them popular. But I don’t anymore. J Mine is better than Buffy’s anyways, since it’s gold and it’s from
Jack Layton (federal leader of the New Democratic Party) gave a talk at Osgoode last week. He had a comfortable, personable speaking style, which I appreciated, except that he tended to get off topic. So he only got to talk about environmental issues, and had to leave out
Provincial election and referendum on the electoral system tomorrow. I’m looking forward to seeing how that turns out.
And I’m looking forward to reading I Am America and So Can You. Should be good. J I’d really like Colbert to have Ann Coulter on the Report. That psychotic fascist bitch needs to be seriously mocked, if not publicly repudiated. Really she should be tried and convicted for hate speech.
- Location:computer lab
- Mood:
blah
The Canadian and US dollars are at par now. It all seemed to happen rather quickly. Kinda creepy.
School is good but a lot of work, which was to be expected, but I want to work regularly too so I can have money, and then the time I can spend with David is cut way down, which makes my heart hurt. :*-(
I need to get my hair done. It's getting way too long.
- Mood:
accomplished
These are the ten steps she outlines as the "blueprint" for closing a society and creating a fascist state:
1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy
2. Create a gulag
3. Develop a thug caste
4. Set up an internal surveillance system
5. Harass citizens' groups
6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release
7. Target key individuals
8. Control the press
9. Dissent equals treason
10. Suspend the rule of law
You can see that all this is happening (read the article for details). All that's left is the tenth step.
The stuff I found particularly creepy:
At first, the people who are sent there are seen by citizens as outsiders: troublemakers, spies, "enemies of the people" or "criminals". Initially, citizens tend to support the secret prison system; it makes them feel safer and they do not identify with the prisoners. But soon enough, civil society leaders - opposition members, labour activists, clergy and journalists - are arrested and sent there as well.
Okay, so that's not anything new. But it did drive home the point, for me, that what we're seeing now in the USA are serious danger signs, and that it's not necessary to wait for things to get worse before concluding that things are going very wrong.
The years following 9/11 have proved a bonanza for America's security contractors, with the Bush administration outsourcing areas of work that traditionally fell to the US military. In the process, contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars have been issued for security work by mercenaries at home and abroad.
... after Hurricane Katrina, the Department of Homeland Security hired and deployed hundreds of armed private security guards in New Orleans. The investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill interviewed one unnamed guard who reported having fired on unarmed civilians in the city. ... the administration's endless war on terror means ongoing scope for what are in effect privately contracted armies to take on crisis and emergency management at home in US cities.
... If you are reading history, you can imagine that there can be a need for "public order" on the next election day. Say there are protests, or a threat, on the day of an election; history would not rule out the presence of a private security firm at a polling station "to restore public order".
The scary thing is that I really can see this happening. Americans are already so apathetic about the way their elections are conducted; there was a shocking lack of outrage about the discrepancies that occured in the last two elections.
a secret Pentagon database includes more than four dozen peaceful anti-war meetings, rallies or marches by American citizens in its category of 1,500 "suspicious incidents". The equally secret Counterintelligence Field Activity (Cifa) agency of the Department of Defense has been gathering information about domestic organisations engaged in peaceful political activities: Cifa is supposed to track "potential terrorist threats" as it watches ordinary US citizen activists. A little-noticed new law has redefined activism such as animal rights protests as "terrorism".
...
In 2004, America's Transportation Security Administration confirmed that it had a list of passengers who were targeted for security searches or worse if they tried to fly. People who have found themselves on the list? Two middle-aged women peace activists in San Francisco; liberal Senator Edward Kennedy; a member of Venezuela's government - after Venezuela's president had criticised Bush; and thousands of ordinary US citizens.
Professor Walter F Murphy is emeritus of Princeton University; he is one of the foremost constitutional scholars in the nation and author of the classic Constitutional Democracy. Murphy is also a decorated former marine, and he is not even especially politically liberal. But on March 1 this year, he was denied a boarding pass at Newark, "because I was on the Terrorist Watch list".
"Have you been in any peace marches? We ban a lot of people from flying because of that," asked the airline employee.
"I explained," said Murphy, "that I had not so marched but had, in September 2006, given a lecture at Princeton, televised and put on the web, highly critical of George Bush for his many violations of the constitution."
"That'll do it," the man said.
You can see how far this extends beyond dealing with reasonable threats to the security of the United States. A genuine threat is being used to silence political opposition.
Bush supporters in state legislatures in several states put pressure on regents at state universities to penalise or fire academics who have been critical of the administration. As for civil servants, the Bush administration has derailed the career of one military lawyer who spoke up for fair trials for detainees, while an administration official publicly intimidated the law firms that represent detainees pro bono by threatening to call for their major corporate clients to boycott them.
Elsewhere, a CIA contract worker who said in a closed blog that "waterboarding is torture" was stripped of the security clearance she needed in order to do her job.
Most recently, the administration purged eight US attorneys for what looks like insufficient political loyalty.
...
The Committee to Protect Journalists says arrests of US journalists are at an all-time high.
...
The Committee to Protect Journalists has documented multiple accounts of the US military in Iraq firing upon or threatening to fire upon unembedded (meaning independent) reporters and camera operators from organisations ranging from al-Jazeera to the BBC.
...
You won't have a shutdown of news in modern America - it is not possible. But you can have, as Frank Rich and Sidney Blumenthal have pointed out, a steady stream of lies polluting the news well. What you already have is a White House directing a stream of false information that is so relentless that it is increasingly hard to sort out truth from untruth. In a fascist system, it's not the lies that count but the muddying. When citizens can't tell real news from fake, they give up their demands for accountability bit by bit.
...
most Americans do not realise that since September of last year - when Congress ... passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 - the president has the power to call any US citizen an "enemy combatant". He has the power to define what "enemy combatant" means. The president can also delegate to anyone he chooses in the executive branch the right to define "enemy combatant" any way he or she wants and then seize Americans accordingly.
...
legal rights activists at the Center for Constitutional Rights say that the Bush administration is trying increasingly aggressively to find ways to get around giving even US citizens fair trials. "Enemy combatant" is a status offence - it is not even something you have to have done. "We have absolutely moved over into a preventive detention model - you look like you could do something bad, you might do something bad, so we're going to hold you," says a spokeswoman of the CCR.
...
The John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007 gave the president new powers over the national guard. This means that in a national emergency - which the president now has enhanced powers to declare - he can send Michigan's militia to enforce a state of emergency that he has declared in Oregon, over the objections of the state's governor and its citizens. ... Critics see this as a clear violation of the Posse Comitatus Act - which was meant to restrain the federal government from using the military for domestic law enforcement. The Democratic senator Patrick Leahy says the bill encourages a president to declare federal martial law.
When you see the pieces of all these different incidents put together, a picture does become clear. I've argued before that America is listing towards fascism, mainly in terms of ideology, with some disturbing factual shifts in that direction as well. When you read this, you realize just how far the Bush administration has gone. Of course freedoms have been limited in times of war in the past, and the US has engaged in civil rights abuses during such times, and things got better when the war was over. But as Wolf points out, the "War on Terror" is a war against an amorphous enemy, on a global battlefield, without any end in sight.
a hollowness has been expanding under the foundation of all these still- free-looking institutions - and this foundation can give way under certain kinds of pressure. To prevent such an outcome, we have to think about the "what ifs".
What if, in a year and a half, there is another attack - say, God forbid, a dirty bomb? The executive can declare a state of emergency. History shows that any leader, of any party, will be tempted to maintain emergency powers after the crisis has passed. With the gutting of traditional checks and balances, we are no less endangered by a President Hillary than by a President Giuliani - because any executive will be tempted to enforce his or her will through edict rather than the arduous, uncertain process of democratic negotiation and compromise.
And there's the rub. It's not just a matter of partisan ideology, it's a structural change in the way America is run.
I am so going to read Wolf's book. The End of America: A Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot
- Mood:
shocked
- Mood:
drunk
Hi!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now that I'm back in school, I'll probably be spending more time on LJ. ;-) And facebook too. Everyone uses facebook, I need to get in on the action.
Osgoode Law school is great. Everyone's smart, the classes are interesting, and the material is just challenging enough, without being difficult. I think I'm gonna try to get on some mooting teams. I didn't even know that mooting was an activity a few weeks ago. (For those of you who don't know, mooting is pretending to be a lawyer in a pretend court). And I won a $50 gift certificate for Yorkdale mall for kicking ass in the frosh-week scavenger hunt. :-D The only thing I don't like is that the books are ridiculously heavy. And expensive.
York is a crappy campus though. There aren't any cool places to hang out like there were at the University of Toronto. They do have a little mall-type place, and vendors in their food court selling jewlery, video games and marijuana paraphenalia. It's creepy. It takes me an hour and a half to get up there. Oh, and sexual assault is a regular occurance on campus. I need to get some mace.
I lent the first two seasons of Buffy to my friend Cynthia, and she's totally hooked. She sped through season 2 in a week. Now David and I have to hurry up and finish season 3 so I can give her that too.
I'm past the five-month mark with my boyfriend David. Yay! And we're still all happy and lovey-dovey, really disgustingly cute. It's great. :-D I've spent some time with his family too and we're really getting along. His dad even gave me a free dental check-up. ... actually that was kind of weird.
I'm watching Farscape now, because David lent it to me. I just saw the first two episodes. It's okay I guess. The villain is kind of lame. And the characterization could be stronger. As could the script in general. And the direction. I'm assuming it gets better. I'd probably enjoy it more if I wasn't judging against the Firefly standard of sci-fi.
Brian K. Vaughn is, like, my hero. I LOVE the first issue of "No Future for You." The dialogue is right on, and he does such a great job with Faith. Having Faith and Giles work together is just... *squee!* That's the only way to describe it. My two favourite characters. Together. I am so pulling for Faith/Giles now. Faith/Giles FTW!!!
- Location:Library
- Mood:
alive!
