Weather guessing

When I went to college, I really should've studied meteorology rather than math. Being a weather guesser has to be the best job in the world. In what other job, except for baseball player, can you fail 3 out of every 4 times and still be considered competent? I'm more surprised when the weather guess, er, "report" is actually anything vaguely close to correct.

Today's predicted low temperature is 5 degrees.

The current temperature is -12 degrees.

I'll make sure to keep my shovel handy for tomorrow. It's supposed to be clear and dry.

Big political news day in this area

Local Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand was anointed by Gov. David Paterson to fill the US Senate seat left vacant by Sec. of State Hillary Clinton. Gillibrand will have to run again in a special election in 2010. Even before she was officially named, Long Island Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy promised a primary challenge, slamming Gillibrand's pro-gun owners' rights stance.

And in an event that would be the lead story on any other day, a long-serving former Republican state senate majority leader Joe Bruno was indicted on eight counts of public corruption. The indictment against Bruno by a federal jury was not unexpected as an FBI probe into his business dealings had been ongoing for quite some time. Bruno was born in Glens Falls and is apparently a distant relative of mine, though it didn't do any good for my unemployed-at-the-time father back when Bruno was embroiled in a nepotism scandal early in his term as majority leader. My father may have had the right last name, but the wrong letter after it: a (D) rather than an (R).

A collective punishment against common sense

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." -Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Periodically, you hear of boycotts against Israel, Israelis and Israeli products for their long occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Even in unassuming New Zealand, you saw a bizarre protest against an Israeli tennis player and a restaurant owner declaring he wouldn't serve Israeli guests. Bear in mind, these protests weren't against Israeli leaders or anyone in any kind of decision making capacity or even against Israeli bureaucrats. They 'shrewdly' targeted tennis players and tourists because they were too impotent to think of action that was meaningful like, I don't know, organizing fundraisers to help Gazan families.

They protest a collective punishment by... imposing a collective punishment.

People who do this insist they are not anti-Semitic and that they just detest what the Israeli STATE is doing. I have some sympathy for that. What the Israeli state is doing in the occupied territories, keep them as de facto prisons for 40 years, is unconscionable. Their recent annihilation of Gaza (1300 Palestinians dead, 5300 wounded, 1.5 million made homeless) is the worst atrocity of all.

But how often do you hear for such sanctions against other human rights abusing countries? I've never been sure why human rights abuses by the Israeli state merit a boycott against everything related to that country but human rights abuses by Syria, Sri Lanka, Eritrea and countless other places barely merit a mention, let alone a cause célèbre. How come no one boycotts the local Chinese restaurants in solidarity with, say, Tibet?

The Israeli government should be punished. Their leaders should be sent to The Hague or, at the very least, be subject to a travel ban like Robert Mugabe and his thugs. Protest in front of Israeli embassies and consulates all you want. But what purpose does it serve to protest tourists, except reinforce the already impenetrable Israeli siege mentality?

Most absurdly, I've periodically heard members of western academia call for cultural boycotts against Israel. If you call for a cultural boycott against any country or people, then you should be automatically kicked out of academia. The whole point of universities is to foster cross-cultural understand, increase exposure to different ideas and expand knowledge. It's completely antithetical to that purpose to call for a cessation of cultural links, a decrease in exposure to different ideas and shrink knowledge.

In times of war and other time, cross-cultural exchanges, such as via universities, are even more important not less. If these so-called academics are going to make their ivory tower into a prison, then they have no business being paid to influence young people.

Today, I read a great example of the sheer stupidity of such cultural boycotts. I'm sure many of you have heard of the film Waltz With Bashir, which was nominated for the Academy Award for best foreign film. The film maker Ari Forman was part of an Israeli army unit that was involved with the infamous Sabra and Sathila Massacre, in which Israeli-backed Lebanese Christian militia slaughtered nearly 3000 Palestinians refugees during the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon.

The film maker had great guilt about being part of such an atrocity and the film explored that. Much like All Quiet on the Western Front, the film was an anti-war piece made all the more powerful by the fact that it was told by a soldier.

So here you have a powerful anti-war film, an anti-war against Lebanon film, an anti-massacre film, a film that casts the Israeli army in a dubious light.

And it is banned in Lebanon, because the country has a law prohibiting the importation and viewing of all Israeli films, regardless of content.

Sounds more like a collective punishment against common sense.

What I believe

In the spirit of the last entry and of the NPR This I Believe series, here are some beliefs of my own. Some have been posted here before and some are new.

I believe that being humane is more important than being smart.

I believe ethics are a way of life. Either you believe in them or you don’t.

I believe the celebrity culture is not worth anyone’s attention.

I believe in respecting others. Not necessarily agreeing with every life choice they make but respecting who they are.

I believe that politeness is a greatly undervalued in the modern world.

I believe that you are irrelevant except to the extent that you affect other people and other living creatures.

I believe bars are a terrible place to meet people.

I believe narrow-mindedness, snobbery and pomposity are three different versions of the same thing.

I believe Jerry Springer, professional wrestling and most political yap shows are three different versions of the same thing.

I believe that religion is neither inherently good nor evil. Both Osama bin Laden and Martin Luther King Jr. were driven by their religious beliefs.

I believe that if your deity tells you to commit violence against innocent people, you need to shop around for a new deity.

I believe that if the leader of your country tells you to commit violence against innocent people, you need to shop around for a new leader.

I believe that PBS history documentaries are ten times better than History Channel documentaries.

I believe that while small towns have their flaws, they have many redeeming values even for open-minded, culturally inclined people.

I believe that America is not the only country in the world and that Americans are not the only people in the world. I believe that too few Americans appreciate this. And sometimes people in the rest of the world forget that too.

I believe that money is a means to an end, not an end in itself.

I believe that if you define yourself by your job, then you'd better have a meaningful job.

I believe that a life without a dream is not a life.

I believe there’s too little idealism in the world.

I believe that how you think is far more important than what you think.

I believe that your course in life is usually determined by whether you are a fundamentally positive or fundamentally negative person.

I believe that you can learn so much about people and the world by simply closing your mouth and paying attention, really paying attention. If when people aren't talking to you.

I believe that helping others is its own reward.

I believe that children are more interesting than adults. I also believe they are easier to deal with than adults because, for better or worse, they are more straight-forward.

I believe that people who never have doubts are very dangerous.

I believe that people with no sense of humor are very dangerous.

I believe that just because you like to be alone at times doesn’t mean you’re lonely or a loner.

I believe that being alone with your thoughts is important every once in a while.

I believe that sunsets are God’s way of saying, “Take ten minutes to slow down and relax.”

I believe burning leaves is the most evocative smell.

I believe that autumn is the best season.

I believe everyone should try to learn at least one foreign language.

I believe everyone should live in another country at some point, if only for a few months.

I believe everyone should work at least one job in the service industry. It might make them less of a jerk when dealing with underpaid food service, supermarket, department store or amusement park workers.

I believe you should actively seek opinions, perspectives and points of view that are different from your own. I believe that everyone should occasionally read newspapers or consume other news sources from countries other than their own.

I believe America the Beautiful should be this country's national anthem. I believe we ought to do more to heed its lines, "God mend thine ev'ry flaw; Confirm thy soul in self control, thy liberty in law!"

I believe that patriotism must manifest itself in concrete actions, not merely in cheap politicized slogans.

I believe that it's better to be slightly disappointed at someone for not fulfilling high expectations than satisfied that they fulfilled low ones.

I believe citizens expect too little of politicians and even less of ourselves.

I believe that a sense of place is important. Every place should not look and feel like every place else.

I believe every once in a great while, you should do something totally out of character. You might learn something about yourself.

Are you smarter than a first grader?

Click here to find out.

Hope?

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." -Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

I have a confession to make: I'm guardedly optimistic about the prospects for the Obama presidency.

It's no secret that I've had issues with him in the past. But he's impressed me since his election.

He has a tight balancing act, trying to represent all Americans while not abandoning what appear to be his moderate liberal instincts. But at least he's trying, which is more than can be said for his predecessor.

Bush has been a disastrous president and in almost every stylistic manner, Obama is the polar opposite. I think this is why people are so hopeful. Many people are also excited about the prospect of an actual intellectual in the White House. What's important is not Obama's intelligence, although that helps, but his curiosity. There is an important symbolism that leader of the nation be open-minded, constantly seek to challenge himself. There's an important symbolism that the self-proclaimed leader of the free world be open to that world. And in a country that claims to be meritocratic, it's important to have a president that worked hard to achieve the position, a president that inspires voluntary respect rather than demanding personal loyalty. And in a country that so values innovation, it's important to have a president that seems welcomes new ideas. Let's hope that intellectualism, the pursuit of knowledge, replaces willful ignorance as the trait most valued in America.

The thing I've most feared is that the euphoria over Obama's election will neuter his supporters. If Obama is to truly represent the change he claims, then it requires everyone to hold his feet to the fire, especially the people who supported him. Will his swearing in be the beginning or the end?

I won't paper over the issues I've had with him. He's made militaristic noises toward Pakistan and Iran. It remains to be seen if that was just to appear tough to appease the corporate media or if he meant it. He's promised the same blind loyalty toward Israeli atrocities as the current administration. The bucketloads of corporate cash he's received is a serious potential impediment to the sort of change he's sold. This is where it's important that his supporters not be overjoyed into silence. Lack of accountability is what made the current presidency a nightmare and it could do the same to Obama's if the people let it.

The major differences between he and Bush are on style. But while substance is important, leadership style isn't irrelevant either. No president can anticipate in advance every issue he's going to face in his presidency. Bush was strongly against 'nation building' before he took office. That quickly went out the window after 9/11. Instead of the 'humble America' he promised, Bush gave us a humbled America.

The decision making process, the leadership style, of a president and administration determines how these unexpected crises are faced. And Obama's apparent style of openness and collaboration is more likely to result in success than Bush's style of secrecy and surrounding himself with yes men. It remains to be seen how he'll govern; we'll know more about him once he actually has to face challenges and do something that might be controversial. But I'm somewhat reassured by his apparent instincts.

He's been so oversold as the Messiah that there will be inevitable disappointments. Especially since the hope invested in him was as much about disgust with the current administration's sickening immorality as about Obama himself. His supporters have to come back to Earth. Still, I'm willing to give Obama a chance. Not a blank check, but a chance.

But after eight years of the Dark Ages, let's hope that Obama's inauguration begins America's Renaissance. With all the problems the country's facing, I'm hopeful that we finally have a president and an administration that might actually be up to the job. THAT would be change we can believe in.

Dr. King's real dream: dignity for all

Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. won the Nobel Peace Prize for his advocacy against segregation and other forms of state-sponsored racism. On this national holiday honoring him, it's worth remembering that King viewed as more than mere legal racial equality. He viewed the struggle more broadly as one in favor of human dignity. This is why he did not retire from public life following legalistic victories such as Brown vs the Board of Education or the Civil and Voting Rights Acts. Although legal segregation was crumbling in the last years of his life, Dr. King did not diminish his activism in any way. He merely refocused it toward another aspect of human dignity.

At the time of his assassination in 1968, King was in Memphis as part of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference's (SLCC) Poor People's Campaign, where the city's garbage workers were protesting against unlivable wages. The SLCC had conceived the campaign as a way to mobilize poor people of all skin colors on behalf of a federal economic plan to rebuild American cities.

King realized that the end of state-imposed segregation would not improve the lives of black people if they remained miserably poor. In much the same way the lives of blacks in the south remained virtually unchanged long after the 'transition' from slavery to sharecropping.

King viewed the campaign part as the second phase of the civil rights' struggle. He viewed endemic poverty as a civil rights' issue.

This commitment to human dignity animated another lesser known aspect of King's work: his opposition to the Vietnam War and to militarism more broadly.

During his Beyond Vietnam speech given exactly one year before his murder, he explained why opposition to the aggression against Vietnam had entered into his activism:

As I have walked among the desperate, rejected and angry young men [in the ghettos of the north], I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they asked -- and rightly so -- what about Vietnam? They asked if our own nation wasn't using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today -- my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent.

Americans were being shipped off to Vietnam to kill, to destroy and to die. Nothing good was happening because of this. And King knew that the war machine specifically sought those with few other economic options to serve as its cannon fodder, a situation that's little different today.

Like many social justice advocates before and since, he deplored how much of our national resources (both financial and human) was wasted on fabricating foreign enemies to obliterate. "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom," he warned.

King probably realized that the fact that many young people had few other economic options was no accident, but the result of conscious policy choices made to ensure an insatiable monster created, funded and propped up by your tax dollars always had food.

(It's not the only insatiable monster but the other main one merits an entry of its own)

To restrict Dr. King's legacy to the fight for legal equality for black people is to sell him short. And it's misleads people into believing that his dream has been realized. His true struggle was the quest for human dignity for all people.

He could be no clearer about this when he concluded his Beyond Vietnam speech:

We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy, for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers.

If you truly want to honor him, then follow this injunction.

Checking in on the watchdog

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." -Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Apparently I'm not the only person who thinks that the chit-chatty, flip style of The Post-Star's editorials reflects poorly on the paper.

Though ignoring the unprofessional style, they do get the content right once in a while, such as here and here.

The paper refuses to allow online responses to letters to the editor. Their logic is: Our letter writers are held to a standard that requires them to sign their letters. The commenting feature online does not require the respondent to be identified. We don't feel that is fair. If anyone would like to respond to a letter, they must be held to the same standard as the letter writer and be identified. They can do this by writing their own letter to the editor through the Web site or responding directly to the editor.

Frankly, I understand and sympathize with this position. However, I find it a bit hypocritical that they would then continue to allow 'Don Coyote' to make 'his' cheap shot of the day. 'Don Coyote,' I have no doubt, is nothing more than a cover for Post-Star staff members to make snide comments about public figures without compromising their 'objectivity.'

Given how often the paper's managing editor brags (usually here) about how the daily gives prominence of place to local stories, I found it odd that they would place a wire service article about Martin Luther King Day celebrations on the front page of the print version while a story about the local King Day celebration was relegated to the local section.

Accordingly, the paper's coverage of the local event was disappointing. Very brief remarks from local politicians earned four paragraphs in the article. Yet the magnificent and powerful remarks by the keynote speaker Rev. Dr. Glorya Askew only earned a token half sentence. I guess this is what happens you provide substance instead of soundbites.