Congratulations. You have not burned a Koran today.

Must we be congratulating Terry Jones, pastor of some godforsaken church in Florida, for NOT burning Korans this weekend? I'm not burning them either, which is the position of millions of people all over the world. Are we being congratulated? Roger Cohen quotes Heinrich Heine saying in the 19th century, "If they burn books, they will also burn people." How prescient he was. That could have been Terry Jones's next step, too. Would anyone put it past him?

The news media is only too happy to make a disgusting circus of all of this. How Jews (the Anti-Defamation League, for example) could possibly join in this anti-muslim fray is just totally beyond me. The ADL says it's okay to build the mosque center, just not where the group that's doing it wants to build it. Do they realize they are contributing to a miasma that may well have little muslim children in NYC right now feeling exactly the way little jewish children felt in Germany in the 30s? Never Again--was that supposed to be just about Jews?

For once, I must say Thank you, NY Times, for today's paper. It included a speculation on why Terry Jones gets so much ink (a bit of a mea culpa, in fact) and at long last an actual story about the Muslim widow and children of an actual Muslim who had been killed in the World Trade Center. Ultimo!

The trouble with "Liberals"

They will not stop demonizing their fellow citizens, will they? I mean some progressives, who cannot understand how Americans can be SO stupid as to support the Republican party in the upcoming election. Well, they voted the Dems in, didn't they? And what did it get them? Worse unemployment, a commission apparently created to end social security, a very bad health reform bill that will require us to pay the scandalously high salaries of insurance co. CEOs, and the loss of more and more houses to foreclosure. No advance on unions, no improvement in privacy, no prosecution of torturers, and... Military Commissions! There are I suppose some good things that the Democrats did; they are not nearly as bad as the Repugs even at their worst, but who knows about them? The Dems seem almost to hope that nobody important (read rich) knows if they've done something for the "lesser people" (vide Alan Simpson, meaning anyone who isn't a Fat Cat). Secretly, I have to feel, they just want to be accepted by the Establishment (a word I haven't heard in a long time) so they'll get a lot of money for their campaigns (plus it's so much more elegant to pal around with the elite).

So who are the masses supposed to vote for? There are only two parties and that doesn't give them much choice right now. How do they express their displeasure with the Dems? By voting for them again? I don't think so. And most people are not quite up to starting new parties or new movements, oddly. So all they can do is vote for the Other Guy--the repugs, god help us all.

a poem about my husband when he was dying

Remember, no, Forget


Remember the moments when we were together
In a white room. Remember no forget the rest that came afterward.
The rest--your rest is what we’re talking about, but
I meant everything, the rest of it, that came later,
Everything after you died in the room. Everything up to now.
No, I know.
You really died in some other room where they were scanning your body. I don’t know why. I know that then,
You were alive, drugged, happy in a way, smiling, and then we (Laura and I) went out to dinner and
You were dead. Even though the machines kept you breathing for awhile.

But remember the moments before, way before, the day before,
The week before, the years before. Sleeping side by side, your hands on my breasts. Embracing until we were exhausted. Almost too tired to get up. You got up so early.
The moments in the living room
Before dinner. Drinking vodka, talking, kissing, laughing about what happened
That day or last year or whenever. Planning what to do on our next trip.

Remember the awful moments and also the one happy moment in the white room
When you said, “Where have you been all day?” When you finally smiled.
They finally decided to give you something to stop the pain. Finally.
Waiting, waiting, I waited all day long for that moment that I thought would come
As soon as we got to the hospital. But didn’t. It was just pain and
Pain and pain and pain until that one moment in the white room. They all said things like
“Dad, how are you?” I said, “I was right here.” I embraced you.

That was the last time.

To the New York Times (which will never publish it) today

Your August 5th story, "Law Will Extend Medicare Fund, Report Says," repeats the same old chestnut about Social Security that we've heard or seen millions of times: ... "After that, the program will have to draw down the Social Security trust fund, which is not an actual reserve of money but an accounting device tracking the accumulated surplus. " I have never understood what this means, but I would like to. Aren't all such institutions merely accounting devices by this measure? I mean, is a bank an actual reserve of money or merely an accounting device? Surely banks do not have all the billions or millions of dollars they list as assets in little piles in a back room. Surely even Goldman Sachs and the companies that issue all the stocks they sell are also "just accounting devices." Is there something I don't understand here? If so, I would appreciate an explanation OR I would appreciate your discontinuance of this phrase, which seems only to be of use to those who would denigrate Social Security.
Thank you.
Carol Wheeler

-

Who do they write for?

"Nervous about Social Security? Better Prepare Now" is the headline of a piece in today's Times (7/31/10)--yet another thoughtless, let 'em eat cake article on subjects like this in that paper. The advice the writer gives amounts to: Eat less caviar now, drive something less than a Mercedes, winter may be coming. Does it occur to anyone at the Times that there are families, yes, whole families, that are barely making it, that can barely put food on the table? If they are employed at all, they're lucky, and if they are, they're, perforce, contributing to social security, which is all they'll get and all they can hope to get when they retire. Do the editors read their own newspaper? People are hurting, and people of modest means make up most of the population, even in New York City. Remember, the US is among the three countries with the widest income gap--one percent of the population owns about 95 percent of the wealth. I know the Times has reported on this. How can they be so crass and callous? Beats me.

If... then

If... then... Two of the worst phrase introducers that journalism has to offer. Cases in point from the Times: If the president sticks to his timetable for leaving Afghanistan, we could lose this war (!) (Senator Graham, what ever made you think we could win this war?); If the new drug tryout works, we'll find the secret to Alzheimer's (commenter on new small company drug). The first one--losing the war--so utterly certain; the second--the drug working--so unlikely and yet so obvious. Why bother to report them? Surely the Times can do better than this?

Oh Joe!

"Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, the independent from Connecticut, suggested legislation that would strip Americans of their citizenship — and the constitutional rights that come with that — if they become involved in terrorism. Speaking on Fox, Mr. Lieberman noted that existing law stripped citizenship from Americans fighting for enemy militaries." (from the Times)

But Joe, you're forgetting we live in the US under the US Constitution, which I believe includes a little matter of innocent until proven guilty. Had you heard of that, dear Senator Lieberman? Or do you admire the Israeli government, which ignores decisions of its Supreme Court, when it suits it? Maybe you don't want to live in, let alone legislate, in the US. Your attitude seems totally at odds with our system of government, the one our soldiers supposedly are dying for right now. "Become involved in terrorism," how would you prove that? Or is it just on the basis of what the police decide, no proof needed. What a stunning remark, Joey baby. Even Glenn Beck, according to the Times, knows better.