Words

I dithered a bit about whether or not to post this to my personal or my political blog. You can see where it ended up! Even though it touches on the political, it really is personal to me and, I think, to many others. And it was inspired in part by another blog I read this morning.

You see, despite protests from certain political arenas, words really do matter. Although many of us were raised on the sing-song mantra of children everywhere, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never harm me," those of us who have been wounded by words know the truth.

We may never have exhibited casts or bruises for the world to see, but our spirits - our psyches - have suffered damage. In some cases, it can be repaired; in other cases, the victims don't - can't - find their way out of the pain and so take their own life or the lives of others. But a CAT scan of our emotional selves would still find the lingering scars in the same way that an experienced eye can tell that a bone has at one time suffered a break, or lungs still bear the scars of pneumonia.

Words live on in our brains just as memories do, and words - as with memories - can be triggered by unexpected events or circumstances, often reopening those old wounds, even if just momentarily.

I have a younger sister whom I love with all my heart. She's enough younger (four years) and we grew up with interests different enough that there was no real reason for us to ever be compared to each other. We had different friends and never went to the same school at the same time. But within our extended family we were frequently referred to as "the pretty one," and "the smart one." The truth is, we were both attractive girls and young women, and both had - and have - above-average intelligence.

But I grew up thinking my only currency in life was my looks. This led, over the years, to some bad choices and to behaviors that can only be described as destructive. Imagine my surprise when I entered college as an adult and discovered how smart I really am! I'm prouder than a woman my age should be of my 4.0 GPA in college, and still get a thrill when someone acknowledges my intelligence in even the most oblique way.

My beloved sister, on the other hand, grew up feeling that she was playing second fiddle to the sister everyone described as "pretty." She made good grades, she pushed herself to excel in ways that still astound me, and - while I would hesitate to speak on her behalf - I suspect that she, too, found ways to validate herself that weren't particularly healthy. Frankly, I've always though she is beautiful - well, ever since I stopped thinking she was "cute" - and, although our looks have faded, as they are wont to do with the passage of years, neither of us could be described even today as unattractive. Okay, maybe when we first wake up in the morning...

The other wounding word was "fat." I am a large woman; there's no getting around it. I'm larger today than I've ever been, and the word "fat" can still cause me anxiety, but as a young girl and a teenager, I felt fat. What I didn't know then is that the people who referred to me that way were expressing their own insecurities and that it really had nothing to do with me. Until I was pregnant with my first child, I can't find even one photograph of myself where I would be considered fat. Tall, yes. Big-boned (my mom's favorite appellation), yes. But not fat.

(My mother's constant use of the phrase "big-boned" was finally validated when I was in my 40s and had my first bone density test. It turns out that I do have "big bones": my bone density is 125% of normal! With the history of osteoporosis in my family, "big boned" is my favorite thing to be!)

Moving away from the personal, how many news reports have we heard in the past few years about people killing themselves or others because of words? How many young people have lashed out violently after years of being bullied?

Four-eyes. Stupid. Ugly. Cripple. Fat. Queer. Crater face.

I'm not trying to use this forum to point a finger and say that the young man who committed the crimes in Tucson, AZ on Saturday was directed to do that by anyone. But I am saying that when we use inflammatory language there will be consequences. Sometimes the consequences are damaging only to the individual; it's internalized and a life is changed in some way. But sometimes the consequences are damaging to others. We can't know who hears our words and perceives them as a call to action. We need to appreciate that inflammatory words create a climate that elicits more inflammatory words, and that climate then can - and sometimes will - reach a state where words are no longer enough. Where some other kind of action feels necessary. Proverbs 15:1 tells us, "A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger." (NIV)

We share our planet, our nation, our states, our cities, our communities with people who may not always be able to distinguish between rhetoric and a call to action. There are mentally and emotionally fragile people among us; people who cannot be counted on to know that we "didn't really mean it that way."

I am resolved to use kinder words. I may not always be successful, and I will not turn away from a good and enlightening discussion or argument. But I can be kinder. I have never suffered name-calling (you can ask my kids!), but now I will work to guard against words that can engender hatred and anger. I hope I can encourage others to do the same.

I'm pissed-Part II

(Warning: This post may make you angry. If you agree with me, I hope it makes you angry enough to take some action. If you disagree, that's okay; this country is great because we can disagree publicly with each other and with our elected officials.)

So, Chicago lost their bid to bring the 2016 Olympics to the US. According to the voices on the far right, this is a GOOD thing. Why was it a good thing? Well, because in their mean-spirited world they perceive this loss to be an indictiment of the President's powers of persuasion, and they are gleefully chuckling and applauding this decision, despite the anticipated boost it would have given the US economy. Oh, and also despite the fact that, just last year, George W. Bush (you may recall he was the darling of the Right) strongly supported Chicago's bid, saying that the Olympics were "really...coming to America."

Rush Limbaugh, the head of the Republican Party, was gleeful over the loss. Michelle Malkin, the press secretary for the right, was her usual mean girl self. And Fox News actively campaigned against Chicago's bid.

Now all of this may be surprising, in light of the fact that the GOP loves to claim that they are the only true patriots. One would think that promoting one's country would be a normal outgrowth of such patriotism. Instead, the far right's so-called patriotism is far more interested in finding petty adolescent joy in anything that - in their eyes - diminishes the man who was elected by the majority of Americans to lead this country. But, perhaps, not so surprising when you remember that Limbaugh is the man who stated that he hopes this President fails.

So there you have it: Situational Patriotism. As defined (by me): Love of and/or devotion to one's country, as long as everything goes my way.

I'm pissed-Part I

(Warning: This post may make you angry. If you agree with me, I hope it makes you angry enough to take some action. If you disagree, that's okay; this country is great because we can disagree publicly with each other and with our elected officials.)


Max Baucus-D, Montana
Tom Carper-D,Delaware
Kent Conrad-D, North Dakota
Blanche Lincoln-D, Arkansas
Bill Nelson-D, Florida


A note to the Senators listed above: Even though I don't live in any of your states, I am publicly pledging to contribute money during your next campaign to your opponent. It may not be much because I rely on Social Security for my income, but I will do it. Each of you is a disgrace to the party you purport to represent, and obviously care little for the will of the American people. Polls have consistently shown that the majority of citizens are in favor of a public option; these Senators, however, prefer to bow to the demands of the insurance companies.


Look around your cities and towns, my friends. Who has built and owns the largest, most spectacular buildings? Banks and insurance companies, in most cases. Guess who pays for them? You do. How can we continue on the path we're on without becoming partners in our own destruction? Why do we allow our elected officials to stay in the pockets of the very people who are sucking us dry?


I don't blame Republicans for this mess; they are staying true to their leader, Rush Limbaugh, and his stated desire to see this administration fail. But the Democrats were elected by the people to get things done. This travesty is, in every way, an inside job.


From a report issued today by The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation:


Researchers from the Urban Institute used their Health Insurance Policy Simulation Model to estimate how coverage and cost trends would change between now and 2019 if the health system is not reformed. The report shows that under the worst-case scenario, within 10 years:

• The number of people without insurance would increase by more than 30 percent in 29 states.
• In every state, the number of uninsured would increase by at least 10 percent.
• Businesses would see their premiums increase—more than doubling in 27 states.

Even in the best case scenario, employers in 46 states would see premiums increase by more than 60 percent. 

• Every state would see a smaller share of its population getting health care through their job.
• Half of the states would see the number of people with ESI fall by more than 10 percent.
• Every state would see spending for Medicaid/Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) rise by more than 75 percent.
• The amount of uncompensated care in the health system would more than double in 45 states.

"If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always gotten."

Anthony Robbins

Partisanship is not the same as patriotism

It was really a time of learning new trades, new ways of doing things, and making do. Other than heavy hearts, I fully believe that if the truth was ever told, this country was more together, caring more, with less, than ever before or since. (Cecilia P. Jones-Angell, October 19, 1990)

The statement above is taken from my mother's memoirs,which she wrote out in the years before she died, and refers to the early days of WWII. I am struck by the comment of people caring more, with less, and that the country was together.

In many ways, perhaps, it was a simpler time, despite the fact that the whole world was at war, and given that the country was emerging from the Great Depression. I think that we could learn from our history about the value of pulling together toward a common goal instead of fighting to undermine whatever hope we might find for our nation and the world.

I can accept that there are people who did not vote for our current President and who are disappointed that their candidate, their party, did not win. I know that I would be unhappy had the election gone the other way. But I hope that I would be looking for solutions and working to mend fences instead of continuing to be angry and working to tear the fragile fabric of our economy.

Today I watched a documentary by Alexandria Pelosi, the daughter of the Speaker of the House. She compiled film clips and interviews with my countrymen who supported the McCain ticket because she felt it was important to know that there are people in this nation who vehemently disagree with what the Democratic Party stands for, and who yet are faithful Americans and patriots. She wanted people to know that we share a love for our nation with people who believe differently and who feel excluded from decision-making, and who even feel betrayed and marginalized.

The documentary began with a disclaimer that not everyone who is Republican is as radical as some who are portrayed, but that the people who spoke were sincere and genuine in their feelings. I can accept that; I can even embrace the differences of my fellow Americans without accepting their ideology. What I cannot embrace or accept is the determination to see our country fail just because of spiteful feelings or resentment over last November's election.

In recent days I've seen and heard too many conservative politicians posturing over the stimulus bill that the President signed this week. I've heard some Republican governors decry the bill and make statements regarding whether or not they will accept money from the bill, even as their states sink further and further into unemployment, foreclosure crises, and budgets bordering on bankruptcy.

Fortunately, the bill allows for state legislatures to accept the money over the governors' objections so as to avoid states being penalized for political reasons. I heard Governor Schwartzenegger on this documentary as he criticized then-candidate Obama for his fiscal policies; and yet today the governor of California is eagerly awaiting the assistance this stimulus package will bring to his state. I know that the Republican governor of Florida has taken a stand with the President to implement the bill and bring relief to his constituents.

I don't think anyone should be silenced for their genuine objections, but I do think that people need to accept reality. I think Republican members of Congress need to look at where we are headed and, instead of attempting to place every stumbling block possible in the path of this new administration, they should be working for the good of the country rather than looking at their chances of getting re-elected.

I am so tired of the intractable partisanship that permeates the fiber of our nation. It was not always so; even I can recall a time when Senators, Congressmen, Governors, and even the common citizen put aside partisan politics for the good of the whole. Why would any right-minded person want our nation to fail? Why would one hope that our President will be proved wrong in his policies? Why wouldn't all Americans want to see our nation succeed, regardless of who is in office?

I truly cannot fathom the mindset that denies reality. If you don't agree with the stimulus package then, by all means, speak your mind; and if you're truly against it, then please return whatever monetary benefit you accrue. If you're really dead set against it, then you would be hypocritical to accept a reduction in your taxes or assistance with your mortgage or a job that is created or even additional weeks of unemployment compensation or COBRA assistance. If you put your money where your mouth is, then you will have credibility.

Otherwise, you are, in the words of St. Paul, a noisy gong or a clashing cymbal, seeking only to disrupt rather than attempting to heal in our time of national need.

The way we were/The way we are/The way we can be

Kissimmee (pronounced Kuh-SIM-me; if you pronounce it wrong, the ghosts of ancient Indians will rise up and smack you!), Florida is a smallish town in Central Florida, located near DisneyWorld. When I was a small child, the population was a few thousand and the area was mostly cattle ranches and poor folks. African-Americans of the time were often victims of violence, frequently for the "crime" of being "uppity" or talking back to white people.

I grew up in this Florida, mostly in Tampa, but for a few years in Lake Wales, a nearby town. This was in the 1950s, when the South was littered with signs saying "White Only" or "Colored Only," over water fountains, bathrooms, and other public places. This was a time when it sometimes seemed that simply having dark skin was a crime, and anyone with light skin could be your judge, jury, and sometimes, executioner. In towns like Kissimmee, if you were black, being on the street after dark in the white area of town could cost you your life, and your executioner would most often be found blameless.

Last night on television, I watched in awe as a reported crowd of 35,000 people stood in Kissimmee, Florida, in the midnight chill of 42 degrees (cold for the Sunshine State) and waited to see and hear Barack Obama speak. There were old, middle-aged and young; black, brown and white; men, women and children, all gathered to hear a mixed-race man speak to them about the future of their country. He was cheered and respected, and I was enthralled. Forty years ago, Barack Obama's parents could not have shared a hotel room in Florida without being arrested. Today, their son stands an excellent chance of being the next President of these United States.

Now, most people don't think of Florida as "the South." Today it is mostly thought of in terms of Miami, DisneyWorld, white-sand beaches, a repository for Cuban and Haitian refugees, and retirees from the North. But when I was growing up there, at least in Central and Northern Florida, the state was as southern in attitude, societal values, accents, and segregation policies as any other southern state. To have witnessed via television the gathering in Kissimmee last night was as miraculous to me as anything I've ever seen. My spirits soared on the wings of Sen. Obama's words and the cheers of the crowd.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

This morning, as I was returning from my morning walk, the little girl across the street called out to me, "Obama rocks, doesn't he?" "Yes," I replied, "he does!" "Maybe," she said, "he'll be our first brown President!" "That would be great, Tiana!" I replied to her, my 9-year-old Mexican-American neighbor.

Upon reporting this conversation to Jim, I realized what an exciting idea that must be for this child and her family, and for so many others whose skins aren't white. Despite the conservative Christianity this family practices, they are able to visualize a world where hope and acceptance are more important than labels.

I guess I'm just not that smart

THIS IS A POLITICAL ENTRY. YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!

I guess I'm not very smart. I've been trying to figure out why people are so hell-bent on believing John McCain's interpretation of Barack Obama's platform instead of believing the man whose platform it is.

I know people who make less than $200,000 a year - people who would clearly benefit from Obama's tax plan - who don't understand that they will pay less tax. I don't understand that.

I know people who think that we should continue to give tax breaks to big business because they believe big business will create jobs. Well, all the jobs that big business has created have been overseas, while we watch jobs that pay a living wage disappear in this nation. I don't understand that.

I know people who listen to McCain/Palin showcase "Joe the Plumber" - a man who lied to Obama not only about his ability to buy the company he works for, but also the amount that company is worth. Yet these folks believe that Joe is the face of America. Does that mean that most Americans lie about their financial position? Does that mean that wanting to buy a company equates with being able to buy it? Does that mean wanting a company to make a certain amount of money means that it actually makes it? Does saying you're a plumber actually make you one? Even if you don't have a license? I don't understand that.

I know people who think the Iraqi war was justified, even though it's been proved that the man who started it (George Bush, in case you've forgotten) lied to the entire nation. Yet they still support the ongoing killing of innocent men, women and children and sending our sons and daughters into harm's way. I don't understand that.

I know people who claim that this nation was founded as a Christian nation, yet they ignore the fact that most of our founding fathers were Deists and that this nation was not founded as a Christian nation, but as a nation with no national religion. I don't understand that.

I know people who claim they are followers of Jesus Christ, yet judge and condemn those who believe differently than they do. I don't understand that.

I know people who think John McCain is qualified to be President because he was in the military and was a POW during Vietnam. Why does that make him qualified? I don't understand that.

Perhaps if I were smarter I could understand these things. Perhaps then I would understand why it's okay that John McCain has his own connections to ACORN and why his involvement with the Keating Five is ignored(yes, I know he was cleared of charges, but he was criticized for "poor judgement" - and he was 58 years old at the time; old enough to know better, one would think!).

Perhaps if I were smarter I could figure out why it doesn't matter that Sarah Palin's husband, Todd, was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, an organization that promotes secession and "Alaska First." And why it's okay that Gov. Palin has shown her support for this organization.

I guess I'm just not that smart.

You can teach an old dog new tricks!

Here in Oregon, we vote by mail. (It's not my preferred method, but that's fodder for another post!) So my ballot for the election has been sitting on the breakfast table since Saturday, and some time within the next two weeks I will mark my choices for President, US Senator, and a number of other candidates and issues and send in my ballot.

This will be my 11th Presidential election. I'm a bit nonplussed by that number since I certainly don't think of myself as being *that* old! But I can remember every election and tell you who I voted for in each one. (I've never been a "party line" voter, and I did spend a portion of my life registered as a Republican.) This year, this election, is different for me in a number of ways, however. For the first time, ever, I have:

• put a campaign sign in my yard
• put a political bumper sticker on my car
• donated money to a political campaign
• watched the debates
• closely followed the polls and reports
• canvassed my neighborhood in support of a candidate
• made phone calls in support of a candidate

I frankly think Barack Obama is the brightest hope this country has seen in 48 years, and he has inspired me to become involved in a way that I never thought I would. Indeed, in a way I never wanted to. (That, too, is another post!)

Today at the volunteer phone bank at the Obama campaign office, I spoke on the phone with an 84-year-old woman. She was quite pleased to get my call, and said, "Oh, yes, honey, I have already filled out my ballot and I just put it in the mailbox!"

"You know," she continued, dropping her voice to a whisper, "I just changed to the Democratic party this year. If my father wasn't already dead, this would have killed him. He was a staunch Republican all his life, but it was not the party that exists today. He would have been disgusted with those people bringing all this religion into politics. That's just not the way it's supposed to be."

I agreed, and thanked her for her support. She closed by thanking *ME* for calling her and others to help get out the vote.

We should never be so set in our ways that we're completely closed to the idea of change. Really, what difference would it have made if this woman had not changed her party affiliation? None. She still could have voted for Obama in the election next month. She wanted - needed, perhaps - to make a statement. And even if she and I - and those who read this post - are the only ones who know, it doesn't matter. She made her voice heard - and I'm sure her father would understand!

You go, Joe!

Some things speak for themselves!

Just don't do it!

Okay, I confess: I try to be nice and not anger members of my extended family, but sometimes I just get really pissed off when I get an email that starts (or ends) with the following words:

This is not sent for discussion, if you agree forward it, if you don't, fine, delete it. I don't want to know one way or the other. By me forwarding it, you know how I feel.

But I'm really starting to get annoyed at the number of these emails I'm getting from people who should know better. Maybe I don't want to know your opinion if you don't want to know mine. It really doesn't seem fair to expect me to not offend you if you don't care that you might offend me.

So, what to do? I've been simply deleting and ignoring them, but somehow it leaves me feeling angry and frustrated. I suppose family peace is a noble undertaking, but why is it the offender doesn't feel that same dedication to family? Or maybe he is just unthinking; I'd hate to think he's uncaring.

Can it be that he really doesn't understand this might be offensive? He knows that he and I don't agree on political issues, and he has stopped sending overtly political emails. But somehow he doesn't understand that we might not see eye-to-eye on other issues, as well.

I have to ponder this for a while and decide how to approach it. Family feuds just aren't my cup of tea.

Politics, not as usual

I did something today that I never thought I'd do - I went campaigning door-to-door! I suppose you'd have to understand that I grew up in an atmosphere of politics - an atmosphere so choking that I've avoided it for the past 45 years. Oh, don't get me wrong, I vote religiously. And I have some pretty definite ideas about who I vote for and the choices I make. It's just that, when your mom lives and breathes it for all of your growing-up years, you kind of get the inside view - and it's often not very pretty.

So when Barack Obama said he was for change, I started to listen. Especially since a lot of politicians say that. And they say that it won't be "politics as usual." And they say that they're different, they're not beholden to the entrenched bureaucracy. And I always want to believe; God, how I want to believe! But I'm almost always disappointed, because it usually turns out that they aren't any different than the ones who went before them.

But something about Obama resonated with me. I saw young people starting to get excited, and I started to get excited, too. But I kind of held back, waiting. Then I read his book, The Audacity of Hope, and I got a little more excited. So I went to my local Barack for President headquarters and told them that I thought, maybe, I might like to help, but I'd get in touch when I got back from my cruise. And I kept thinking about it and talking about it, but not doing anything. (I'm pretty good at procrastinating.)

But on Monday of this week, I went to Obama's web site and registered to do door-to-door canvassing for him. I got a list of 40 names in my neighborhood. Today, I visited every one of those houses. There were about 10 people who weren't home, and of the others, only two refused to talk to me. Out of the 28 or so I spoke with, all but four are voting for Obama, but everyone was cordial - even those who are voting for John McCain! I feel good about having done this, and I'll catch the others tomorrow or early next week. But I proved to myself that we can disagree without being disagreeable. We don't have to be mean-spirited or spiteful just because our politics are different!

Do I think even Barack Obama can create immediate change in the country? No, but I think we have to make a start, and he's the only candidate that seems willing to speak to the issues and not make this a war of hatred and name-calling. And I think we have to start somewhere. Maybe by the time my grandsons are old enough to vote, we will have returned to some level of kindness in politics.

I hope more people will take the time to really investigate who they're voting for and make informed decisions, not party-line decisions. No one can do everything they say they will; our system pretty much ensures that. But you can choose to vote for the person whose ideals more closely parallel your own - IF you take the time to learn. Otherwise the overblown (and often deceitful) rhetoric, the hate emails that are circulating on the internet, and the loudest voices will determine our future.

If you care enough to vote - and I hope you do - then you should care enough to investigate the facts for yourself. November 4th isn't so far away.