Tread lightly on the things of earth

Read this: A Nation of Victims (Renana Brooks, The Nation). Don’t be one:

President Bush, like many dominant personality types, uses dependency-creating language. He employs language of contempt and intimidation to shame others into submission and desperate admiration. …

Poll after poll demonstrates that Bush’s political agenda is out of step with most Americans’ core beliefs. Yet the public, their electoral resistance broken down by empty language and persuaded by personalization, is susceptible to Bush’s most frequently used linguistic technique: negative framework. A negative framework is a pessimistic image of the world. … Catastrophic words and phrases are repeatedly drilled into the listener’s head until the opposition feels such a high level of anxiety that it appears pointless to do anything other than cower. …

People do not support Bush for the power of his ideas, but out of the despair and desperation in their hearts. Whenever people are in the grip of a desperate dependency, they won’t respond to rational criticisms of the people they are dependent on. They will respond to plausible and forceful statements and alternatives that put the American electorate back in touch with their core optimism.

Absolutely fascinating.

From Reuters, Top senator backs amendment banning gay marriage:

[Tennessee Sen. Bill Frist,] the Republican leader of the U.S. Senate said on Sunday he supported a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage. …

The marriage amendment, reintroduced in the House of Representatives last month, says marriage in the United States “shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman.”

Sen. Frist, this is none of the government’s business. This amendment is about as appropriate — and would be about as effective — as was Prohibition. This one is worse, however: It amounts to state-sanctioned discrimination. Please stand down.

This willingness to tamper with the bedrock of our collective identity as a nation, the Constitution — especially for matters that are no concern of government — really ticks me off.

See also Frist Backs Putting Gay Marriage Ban in Constitution in today’s WaPo.

[via Daily Kos]

Five weeks ago I wrote that I had, for the first time in my life, contributed money to a political campaign. Now I’m up to $150 toward Howard Dean’s campaign. I recognize that’s a piddling amount by Republican fundraising standards.

But I’ve been wondering if I, up to now a political couch potato, am being rousted by our current political situation to increase my financial contribution from $0 → $150, what might that mean summed over significant numbers of similarly roused citizens?

This morning I get this email from Howard Dean (italics mine):

Our fundraising total for the second quarter has surged from 3.2 million dollars to 6 million dollars in just eight days.

How did this happen? Over 21,000 people believed that their individual contributions, when added to the individual contributions of thousands of others, could make a difference in our campaign. And their contributions have made a massive difference. …

We have already raced past all expectations. We now have the opportunity to truly shock the press and the pundits with our show of grassroots strength. We have 36 hours to raise an additional half million dollars.

Using the Internet to empower true democracy — to truly harness the power of the people — has long been a dream of mine. Yes!

If you’re a U.S. citizen, consider making a citizen’s campaign contribution because, as Dean’s campaign is demonstrating, even what you might consider a tiny amount can cumulatively lead to large, effective chunks of money.

(If you lean toward a Democratic candidate, then your financial participation is particularly important, as the Republican Party is prepared to throw money at the 2004 presidential election in quantities sufficient to buy small countries. Except without benefitting the small countries.)

It’s quick and easy to contribute to Dr. Dean’s campaign here.

2003-06-30 update: Adam Nagourney writes in today’s New York Times:

Howard Dean announced yesterday that he had raised close to $9 million this year, establishing himself as a top-tier candidate in the Democratic presidential field. The figure stunned his rivals and transformed Dr. Dean from a maverick into a more traditional contender.

Yes!

2003-07-01 update: I agree with Kos’ important observation that

Having people like you and me fund a candidacy like Dean’s frees it from whoring itself to corporate interests. The results are intoxicating.

Wow, rereading Frank Herbert’s Dune after having just finished its more recent prequel trilogy by his son Brian Herbert and Kevin Anderson — House Atreides, House Harkonnen, and House Corrino — is proving to be a different, richer experience.

I first encountered Dune years ago, and I remember marveling at the intricacy of Herbert’s invented world/ecology and universe/culture. Whenever I get dehydrated — which is regularly since I keep forgetting to drink enough water — I imagine myself living on Arrakis, an ecologically-aware offworlder no Fremen can accuse of being “water-fat.”

(I even read Herbert’s whole 6-book series clear through Chapterhouse Dune — I wonder how often normal people get that far? :-) )

This time in place of the marveling there’s the comfort of a more familiar backstory for its characters. I feel know them better now. I always thought Duke Leto was given short shrift in Dune; now he’s a much more fleshed-out character for me.

Not every character fares as well, though. I keep remembering Peggy Halley’s review comment concerning Emperor Shaddam Corrino — his character got kinda flattened in the prequel trilogy — that while in Dune he is “a character who is arrogant and wrong-headed, but not stupid,” in the prequels he “could be out-thought by a reasonably fresh potato.” :-)

I see at Amazon that a final prequel, The Butlerian Jihad, is due out on September 2. Cool. And it’s already available as an unabridged Audible title.

(BTW, Audible.com provides hours of listening entertainment for not much money; I’m really enjoying their products. If you check them out, tell ‘em mwjames sent you — they’re running a Refer-a-Friend contest!)

Read Sister Joan Chittister’s column from exactly one month ago today, Is there anything left that matters? If you’re a Christian, read it twice:

This is what I don’t understand: All of a sudden nothing seems to matter.

First, they said they wanted Bin Laden “dead or alive.” But they didn’t get him. So now they tell us that it doesn’t matter. Our mission is greater than one man.

Then they said they wanted Saddam Hussein, “dead or alive.” He’s apparently alive but we haven’t got him yet, either. However, President Bush told reporters recently, “It doesn’t matter. Our mission is greater than one man.”

Finally, they told us that we were invading Iraq to destroy their weapons of mass destruction. Now they say those weapons probably don’t exist. Maybe never existed. Apparently that doesn’t matter either.

Except that it does matter.

I know we’re not supposed to say that. I know it’s called “unpatriotic.” But it’s also called honesty. And dishonesty matters.

Today in Reuters story In Milestone, Top Court Overturns Sodomy Laws:

The U.S. Supreme Court [SCOTUS] struck down on Thursday sodomy laws that make it a crime for people of the same sex to engage in “deviate sexual intercourse,” a ruling that gives gay rights advocates a major victory.

This decision is important. Regardless what one thinks of homosexuality, it’s clear that if we allow legislation that discriminates against homosexual persons then we are lying about our commitment to equal protection under the law in the United States — just as we were through the 1950s when (as one prominent example) we forced African Americans to the back of the bus and by way of Jim Crow forbade them to vote, and through the 1920s when we treated women remarkably similarly.

If we intend to truly live out the ideals of liberty and freedom we lay claim to, then today’s ruling is essential. Otherwise we are a house divided against itself.

[via Daily Kos]

2003-06-27 update: Today I see Gov. Dean’s statement on the decision, adding yet another reason to support him IMO.

A Dean site commenter points out that the Texas law struck down applied to everyone, but was enforced only against homosexual persons.