Saturday, May 29, 2004

 
Today: In Philadelphia.

Okay, so I'm now officially part of the country's jobless. Sadly, the only free internet access in town is at Woody's bar. Most people are looking for hook-ups on the web while drinking and standing around boys that they could hook up with easily...weird. Where are we going as a society.

A little tirade, now.

I had an audition for the Apprenticeship at Walnut Street Playhouse today. It was good, though I'm a bit miffed at the call-back procedure. The whole call-back consisted of only about 1 total minute (each) of an improv game. I'm not sure what they could glean from that, but whatever. Anyway, I'm going to go now. I hope everyone's having a great weekend.

With any luck, i'll come back to the city and have a job.


 
Today: In Philadelphia.

Okay, so I'm now officially part of the country's jobless. Sadly, the only free internet access in town is at Woody's bar. Most people are looking for hook-ups on the web while drinking and standing around boys that they could hook up with easily...weird. Where are we going as a society.

A little tirade, now.

I had an audition for the Apprenticeship at Walnut Street Playhouse today. It was good, though I'm a bit miffed at the call-back procedure. The whole call-back consisted of only about 1 total minute (each) of an improv game. I'm not sure what they could glean from that, but whatever. Anyway, I'm going to go now. I hope everyone's having a great weekend.

With any luck, i'll come back to the city and have a job.


Tuesday, May 25, 2004

 
A second note on the DRAFT.

This is an email I just wrote which I'm particularly proud of in response to a friend's email that perhaps a Draft (or required national service) is the best and most prudent option for the US. He mentioned the fact that I might bludgeon him for saying so...

I'm not going to bludgeon you, but I'm certainly going to ask you why you think that our nation's youth should pay for what you've all ready called Bush's 'mess.' Certainly, people should 'fight for their country', but we (and I mean ME because I'm the age that this legislation effects) don't deserve to have to pay with our lives for the mess our president has made after we've protested (and I did), written letters (which I did) and after WE have sided with a consensus of the global community (the UN) that this was not the proper course of action to begin with. This war was wrong. We did not need to be there and we should get the hell out. Now. I've written scads about this in my blog, which I urge you to read (http://mattmager.blogspot.com look for the 5/5 entry that starts 'I don't like to talk about this'). I'm admittedly not an expert, but I don't think that mandatory military service is going to fix the basic problems--again read that blog entry to see why, it's about as this letter.

As a side note to the comment about North Korea: they're using the same tactics that everyone else uses to get sanctions lifted. We do it too. The Israeli government, right after they were established, had a nuclear facility paid for by the French that they made atomic weapons with. They threatened Nixon that they would use these on the Palestinians (unbeknownst to them) if we didn't help them with more troops. We did, and the 'temple weapons' as they were called were never used. There's a long history of people using nuclear devices as negotiating tools, rather than actual weapons. Though there are reports that the leader of North Korea is insane, I'm pretty sure there'd be a lot bigger to-do if there was any real threat. They play fairer than our media likes to pretend. Is there a danger there--yes. Is it something that's a foreseeable threat--maybe. Would we be hearing so little about it if there were a clear and present danger?...I think you can see where I'm going with this. They're not ACTUALLY going to do any bomb dropping and their nuclear program isn't actually functioning--if they were, we'd be there, taking over THEIR country--after all, that's the way we do things now, right?

I mean really: pre-emptive air strikes and now required military service--It's ridiculous to think that we're supposedly the most 'free' nation and yet the longer this president who is the 'leader' of the free world stays in office, the more he strips the freedoms of his people after he's created, again, what you admit, is HIS big mess.

Certainly, given the present escalation of the conditions in Iraq, we would need to have more troops, but we shouldn't be there in the first place. We all know by now that there are no WMD. We all know that this war wasn't about Saddam Hussein--that's why Halliburton and all the other major corporate contributors to the Bush campaign are still hanging around Iraq like an incurable jock-itch. The prisoner abuse scandal has now been pinned to everyone up the ranks to Rumsfeld AND Bush--meaning that the people who hate us have ammunition given to them by our president, who is NOW going to send out the nations CHILDREN in their fire? I think it's more than just a coincidence that a lot of the countries have been taking their troops away from Iraq and limiting their communication with President Bush.

I've just re-read the way the bill is written and under almost every item the words 'The President's Discretion' (or something to the same effect) are emblazoned clearly as a factor in determining just about everything with regards to the required national service. What does that mean? It means that the President will be able to decide who (read: which tax brackets) this will mandatory service will apply to. Do you think the Bush girls will be off in active duty in Iraq? I don't think so. They, like the rest of the rich, will be sitting in desk jobs (like baby Bush did...When he SHOWED UP--which was next to never) in cushy places in the states while the poor serve out arduous tours of duty wherever oil futures could be helped by a conflict.

I wonder what his daughters think about this. They've just finished college, and though both of them went to wealthy universities, I can't help but think that they'll both have friends who aren't as fortunate (read: Powerful) as them. I wonder what they think of the fact that their friends are about to be catapulted irrevocably into a repeat of one of the most disenfranchising and deadly events in American history. Sadly, given the fact that Kerry is all ready favored over Bush by a margin of 10-20 % points by people under 25, I don't see why their father would care if he kills us--we're not his supporters. If we were contributing to his campaign, maybe we'd have a chance--but there aren't many 24 year olds who own Oil or Utility companies to give him monetary blow-jobs to stave off this kind of legislation.

Presidential discretion...My ass.

And, as a last note, please look at this website to see why sending more troops would actually do no good.

 
***NEWS FLASH***

My friend Justin just sent me this link. In case you don't feel like looking, there are two bills pending legislation in the House right now that seek to reinstate the draft.

This bill is now on the table, as well as this one. PLEASE. We MUST do what we can to stop this from happening.

Please visit www.moveon.org and help us stop the rich people in our country from sending our kids to wars fought over oil futures

 
Today: Singleversary™

I'm taking a stand. Here. Now. This second. I'm sick of everyone being able to celebrate how goddamn long they've been in a relationship. Woopdi-shit. I want my own! Someone needs to give me presents for being single. You have your one-month anniversaries, your 5 year anniversaries, your golden and silver and whateverthehell else kind of metal symbolic anniversaries and everyone showers you with gifts, I'm just fucking sick of it. This outburst is in light of a wedding invitation I received in the mail yesterday. I was thinking to myself: no one gives me presents for being single. No one throws rice or blows bubbles at me because I DON'T have a long-term boyfriend. Who says that I'm supposed to even want that! I mean, I DO, but , every year that I don't have a boyfriend on valentine's day I'm made by the media to think that I'm some kind of deformed leper-franken-quasimoto-zombie and it's ridiculous.

I propose (yes, propose) that we single people start having Singleversaries. The Singleversary is the day when you can be proud that you've lived this much of your life without being codependent, abused, thwarted, held-back or emotionally sabotaged by a relationship. Now, I know not every relationship is codependent or holds its parts back, and I know plenty of VERY happy married and long-term dating couples, but I'm advocating that there are as many HAPPY UN-married UN-paired UN-dating people in the world and that we should have our own kind of celebration? Why make us feel like we're second-class because we're not in a relationship?

My first Singleversary will be on July 20th. I believe that's the day that I broke up with my last real boyfriend. That was 4 years ago. I'm going to be showering myself with gifts and all sorts of other things, and I urge you to do the same. I'm going to be registering gifts for my Singleversary at Borders, Bed, Bath & Beyond, Macy's and Barney's. This should ensure that those of you with varying tastes and tax-brackets can give me the most lavish gift you can afford on what will be my 4th consecutive year of singledom. How many of you can boast THOSE kinds of numbers? This is something to celebrate. I've gotten to know me more in these 4 years than I EVER could have if I'd been in a relationship and I defy anyone to prove that that's not the case.

There's nothing WRONG with us for being single. Some people like being single. I actually enjoy being single a lot of the time. And yes, this whole notion of a Singleversary is absurd, but so is a birthday party so is a bridal shower so is the prom and Oscar™ parties and every other social gathering when you take a close look at it. I think that we need to really take a look at how we as a society treat single people. Un-wed mothers are looked down on so much and without any reason at all--they're even blamed for slumps in the economy (though they represent less than one percent of what's used in the welfare system). Single candidates for public office are told that that's a draw-back. The only time single people are ever marketed to is to help them become less single: i.e. to make them more attractive so they can find a mate quicker. And, the biggest fuck-you: married people get tax-breaks, and for why?!

They often live together and share expenses, why should they get ANOTHER break just because they've entered into a government sanctioned legal contract? Why shouldn't I get a tax break for being self-sufficient and for taking care of my goddamn self? I can see giving people tax breaks for having kids--they're expensive and generate no income, unless you make them child models. My point, and one that I've stolen from Evan is that a single person shouldn't be given a tax penalty just because he's NOT in a relationship.

This just furthers my point that we need to start celebrating our singleness--and I don't mean by getting shit-faced and hooking up. I mean by saying 'you're goddamn right I'm single and I'm proud of who I am.' I'm going to have a Singleversary party soon and you're invited. I'll give you a free beer if you bring me a guy I can date.

You'll note, also that Singleversary™ has been trade-marked. This is because when Hallmark™ comes and steals my idea so they can market cards to single people, I want to be able to make them pay for it.

Monday, May 24, 2004

 
Today: Wearing Linen and singing my heart out.

Okay, so first thing's first: I love linen. When the weather is a nasty 80 degrees like it was yesterday--and I do mean nasty--it's just about the only thing I can stand next to my skin. I have never survived a NY Summer, but having only had a taste of what's to come, I can now say that I'm wholely happy to have been away for the last 4 years consistantly. Also, I look forward to being gone part of the time, with any luck. Which brings me to point two.

I have had such a good time singing lately. I've been doing this show at St. Malachy's church and just loving it. And also auditioning has been a real treat lately, too, when I've felt good about myself. I'm just so looking forward to doing more auditions and getting jobs. Yay. I just hope that this high lasts a little longer than the last one like it. I keep having these week periods of being happy and then being depressed, and, frankly, I'm sick of it.

In other news: Bush is all cut up from falling on his bike the other day at the Branch-Bushidian compound in Wac--I mean Crawford TX this weekend. Highlights from his speech this evening will include 'c'mon, you wouldn't not re-elect a man when he's all bruised and beat up, would you?!' and 'we as Americans must stand up and fight for people who are rich and balance impaired--let's start by re-electing me.'

Lastly, you'll notice that I like to put links of random shit up on my blog. I urge you to do the same.

I would also URGE you to COMMENT on my SITE.



Friday, May 21, 2004

 
Bush talks to students: My two minutes of hell.

Okay, so I only caught about 2 minutes of Bush's speech to LSU this morning, but in those two minutes, I heard enough to stop my ears and drop my tea on the ground--making a big mess in the pantry, which I left for the next person to clean up.

During those two minutes, Mr. Prezzie made only about two points: (now, I've paraphrased, because I can't remember the exact wording)

1: It's important to choose your friends wisely: the people you're associated with have a tendency of rubbing off on you

2: The only way to defeat evil is by rooting yourself in your beliefs and holding steadfast in a plan of action.

Fascinating, really, that he would use THOSE as two important points. Lets go over the facts for a minute here…

Point 1.

People we're associated with. Aren't Mr. Bush's friends the former Enron executives who have all been indicted? Great decisions there, Dubya. And your pal, Donald Rumsfeld, for some reason you're holding on to him as if your life depends on it, though he's at the center of the biggest PR nightmare you've faced since you've come into office. Why associate yourself with him?

Theflip-sidee to this, why are OTHER people associating themselves with him? I've got a joke for you that I saw on a comic strip yesterday:

What does Colin Powell's wife say to him every morning?

"don't forget to take your spine out!"

Why is he still with the Bush Administration? Guh, it's depressing to watch a man we all had so much hope for being completely eaten by evil.

Point 2.

It's not surprising that he suggests that it's good to stick to one's guns. That's what he's done throughout his term. What's interesting to me is that he would suggest that to students. It reminds me of the southpark episode 'the succubus' where Chef's girlfriend keeps singing this song and the kids realize that that's what it's going to take to destroy her, to use her ugly-ass folk song against her. In that same way, Bush is giving the young the tools to destroy him, but does he realize it? The young are the ones that hate him the most, it would appear.

On that same note, I read a very disturbing article in Rolling Stone yesterday (yeah, I know--shutup.). Seriously, though, it was scary. It seems that small college towns (like my home town) are denying college students the right to get registered to vote in the cities that they live, some even using scare tactics and blatantly illegal bullying to scare off young voters. The problem is, of course, two fold as it disenfranchises the students from the political system AND it tells them that it has to be difficult. Woah, sucky.

I've been reading a lot of random websites lately, including the Heritage foundation's website, which is evil--pure,unadulterated evil. I wish some one would make these people of pure,unadulterated evil go away, because it's full of so much pure,unadulterated evil. IMHO, of course.

In other news, I saw Super Size Me, last night. Great movie. I'm never going to eat another Big Mac as long as I live. Oh, wait: I'm already a vegitarian.

Lastly: My days at my present job are numbered. The number is 5. I wonder what I'm going to do.


Wednesday, May 19, 2004

 
Where Did Spring Go???

So, I guess they were right about Global Warming. I was walking home last night and realized that there never was the season 'Spring' this year. Save for a few scant days of 60 degree weather, we went immediately from the 50s and 40s to the upper 70s and 80s. Almost over night. Normally I'm gone by this time and have moved immediately to a warmer place, so I'm not around for the change of seasons, but this year, here I am, and darn it if it doesn't scare me.

Now, this wasn't supposed to be a political piece, but it's turned into one. In searching for a link to 'global warming' above, I found this site, which upsets me a lot. They claim to be a non-partisan consumer advocacy group (the Cooler Heads Coalition--which is under the umbrella of the National Consumer Commission), but with who's on their list of supporters (e.g. The Heritage Group and 'Alliance for America' and other groups of old, white, rich people with nothing to do but try to be all up in everyone's business IMHO), clearly that's not the case. This group categorically denies that global warming is really an issue, and that further regulations guarding the use of CFC's and the accumulation of CO2 are going to cause increases in prices for consumer goods. This is interesting to me, in light of what I just said. It's really hot outside--and no one is talking about it being a heat wave…it's just our climate CHANGING…Seems to me like someone is masquerading as a public information source and is actually the PR arm of a network of big-business retirees trying to keep their portfolios in line. (wow, I'm becoming such a conspiracy theorist)

On the flip side, though, moveon.org recently sent an email to it's members saying that people should go see The Day After Tomorrow and pass out flyers reminding audiences that the types of apocalyptic spectacle shown in that movie could indeed happen if we're not steadfast in our concern and policy on global warming. I don't want to sound cynical, but I don't think that's going to do a damn thing. Sure, some of these people may take the flyers and say 'oh, look, it could really happen, I'll recycle my Coke can', but that's where it'll stop. As Americans, we generally say we support issues regarding environmental concerns, but often fail to follow through when it comes down to paying higher prices for environmentally friendly goods or boycotting companies who won't get with the program.

And even when advocacy groups do affect positive changes in our policy, that policy is only for the US. The problem with global warming clearly becomes not the word 'warming,' but the 'global' part of it. How can we really combat this problem, as it is a GLOBAL issue? The people at the NCC say we shouldn't regulate too much the use of CFC's and CO2 emissions, that it's bad for business and consumers. The Greenpeace organization would probably have the US ban them altogether. But that doesn't solve the real basic issue either: we're not the only industrialized nation in the world.

*gasp*

Now that you've recovered from this shock, let's keep going, shall we?

A global coalition is clearly the only real way to fix this problem (and many, many others). If we, the US, just impose our regulations on companies with factories in the US, then we're only making sure that no damage is being done by us here. I think, though, we can all agree that it's not outside the realm of possibility for a company to decide that due to regulations in the United States that they'll just outsource their factory work to somewhere that's got cheaper labor and fewer environmental regulations.

Of course, they wouldn't admit to that, blah, blah, blah, but they'd move to SE Asia (or have all ready done it), and then look-at-it-go, 30 years later there's a big honkin' hole in the ozone over California because lo and behold: air moves (gasp again), and the shit that the American Corporations have pumped into the air in their factories in Southeast Asia is now hanging over LA and giving cancer to the children of those people who pushed for these moves. Justice is served, and now we can all laugh at those rich West-Coast bitches for finally getting their just desserts.

Don't we wish. The world, though not without a sense of poetic justice, doesn't always work that way. There is ALREADY a hole in the ozone above Australia, and that's the result of factories in thPhilippineses. Australia itself has few companies that engage in that kind of business, what did they do to deserve that? (I mean other than Paul Hogan)

What're we gonna do? I don't know, but man it's sure hot outside. I guess I just wish I didn't feel so guilty every time I think about what's wrong with the world…Let me know what YOU think! Give me a comment.

Friday, May 14, 2004

 
Today: On sickness

I've been feeling oogy for the past few days. My dad is coming to visit and I'm going to be auditioning for a paid gig on Sunday. NO GOOD! Because of this ooginess, I've felt so...out of sorts. I've felt like I'm, for lack of a better term, High. Completely, utterly, ridiculously HIGH. For three days. At first I thought it was the medicine I was taking (on a related matter, I don't drink coffee or have much caffeine ever, so when I take Pseudoephedrine--a stimulant and the most common OTC decongestant--I get really zippy), but now I'm completely off those, and I'm still feeling weird. It reminds me of the Magic Mountain. I've felt all week like I've been put into a state of euphoria from the sickness I've had.

What's next? Hallucinogenic nosebleeds?

More on that later, I guess.

Wednesday, May 12, 2004

 
What's with my butt?

Okay, so last night I get off the train and someone follows, kind of close as I walk toward home. I get kind of suspicious and move slightly to the right so I can see what this guy's up to. We near a corner and he turns to me an then says, with complete earnest, 'you have a nice ass.' I stop dead in my tracks, I must have looked like I don't speak English. He says again 'yeah,' and nods his head as if he'd just reassessed and reached the same conclusion, then continues walking around the corner. Now, I live in Harlem--and not an ethnically diverse section of Harlem, either. I'm one of probably 30 white people within an 8 block radius. People don't generally look at me unless it's with some kind of curiosity as to why the hell this white boy is in their largely black neighborhood. But, for some reason, this guy thought it was okay to remark about my ass in the open air and it has forced me to realize some things and question others.

First off: though I'm not surprised that my room mate and I are not the only homosexuals in that neighborhood, I'm certainly surprised that anyone would be so bold in that area. Why would he do that? Is he so desperate for attention that he's got to hit on me? I've seen how men eye up girls in my neighborhood and give them cat calls, was it the same kind of deal?

Second: I'm surprised that with the amount of other people in the area that MY butt would be so enticing to him. Not to sound racist, but again, my neighborhood has a lot more black people than white, and, not to be racist still, aren't black people known to have nicer butts than their white counterparts? That's at least what I've been told. Why look at my butt when there's all this...for lack of a better word 'ghetto booty' around? Perhaps this is what it feels to be racially fetishized.

Third: Do I really have a nice butt? I consulted several sources. First I asked my best friend, Evan. He said that he couldn't really say, given that he's my best friend and all. He did tell me, though, that a friend of mine, José had said to him that I had a nice butt, which is unlike white people. (Interesting!) I looked in the mirror, wearing the same pants that I was when the man called attention to it and didn't really see anything to write home about. So I asked my friend and co-worker Ryan who said that I didn't have a butt really at all. I disagree, having known a couple buttless people in my life and knowing that I at least have more than they do. (More interesting still!) And then I remembered that recently an industry person asked me if I was a dancer because he noticed that the pants I was wearing were showing off my 'dancer butt'. Now, perhaps this was a come-on from a kind of smarmy industry guy who wanted to see how far he could get with the dumb blond. But why my butt? I've got nice eyes, too!

Still, though, can all of this attention really all just be coincidence? Do I really have a notable butt?

If I had a picture, I'd let you see and you could tell me what you think, but oh well...I'm not that kinda guy.

We'll get down to the bottom of this some how, though...Mark my words!

Tuesday, May 11, 2004

 
Today: With regards to Sun & Weekend 'fun'

This past weekend was supposed to be stormy and yucky. I had, until Friday, looked at the weather for the weekend with dread and impending misery that I was going to be cheated out of the sun and nice weather again for a weekend. It turns out that the weather had other plans for the weekend and it turned into the most beautiful and relaxing I've had in a long, long while. It's funny, somehow that became the theme of the weekend. There were a lot of preconceptions that were broken down by the end of the weekend, and I must say, generally, they were pleasant surprises. Evan visited.

On Friday, after being told that I wont have a job in 3 weeks and after a dumb rehearsal, I went to see a GREAT movie: Mean Girls. I read a weak review of it in the Times and decided to go see it anyway. They were right: it didn't hold together so well. There were problems with it and characterizations that were dumb, and even a little preachiness that we all could have done without, but what the hell--it was a fuckin' funny movie and had some extremely great performances from some seriously talented young ladies. Despite the fact that it totally stole one of it's lines from Teen Girl Squad, it was still awesome. Lindsay Lohan, by the way, is great. I really like her--she's got the confidence and maturity that very, very few 17 year old actors have. I know I didn't have it at that age. I'll be looking for her to become the next uberfamous it girl--I just hope that it doesn't turn her into a bitch, because we've already seen in this film what it'll look like, and believe me, it may be funny, but it's not pretty.

Moooooving on, Saturday was all about hanging out. We hung out in the morning, then I had a rehearsal, then a class. Evan hung out while I was doing this, stewing on the argument that we were going to have at some point regarding the evening plans including dancing. We went to a restaurant called Schnack for dinner, which was cute. We had PBR when we came in and then had our argument while sipping chocolate shakes and while I drew with crayons. It's hard for me to argue how I feel about things with Evan because often I feel as though I'm a despicable person for having my own feelings about things. It's not something that anyone has to do, either. The basic thing, though, I realized, is that Evan and I just don't see eye to eye on the way that social situations work in clubs. And I'm no more right or wrong than him, just different.

After finishing our food, we hung about out in Carroll Gardens, Brooklyn, for a while, and Evan even said that he'd live there. W'hoo! Then we went to my house and drank really quickly while myself, Jenny and Branko battled over where we should end up. Eventually we decided on Boys Room (which I tried to find a link for, but couldn't). When we got there, I was afraid that Evan would have an attack of...body, but to my surprise, once we got downstairs and started acting like idiots, Evan seemed to have a good time. I think he understands a little more what clubs actually are to me, now, so, perhaps sometimes he'll do that now and not be afraid of them so much. Who knows--we all have our feelings about stuff when they happen. I just now know that Evan has an inner skank, too--well, I knew that he did already, it's just nice to see the skank get out once in a while.

On the way home, somehow (in my drunker than drunk state) I put us on the wrong train and made myself really angry. So angry that I started stomping around and cussing shit out. Got so angry I forgets where I stays at. Not good.

Sunday was a day of food. Had a brunch meeting. Ate food. Then went to see a show that Evan's friend's boyfriend wrote. The play was annoying, but not nearly as annoying as this guest of another friend of his. I didn't realize that people could be so young and so pompous at the same time. I really wanted to murder him. With my bare hands. In front of everyone. Right there....grrrr. But enough about him. Who thinks anyone from Columbus, Ohio is all that important anyway? I certainly don't!

Then we went and had more food, this time at Yaffa Cafe. It was good. Then we walked around more. Then we had food again, this time at Cafe Gigi, which doesn't really exist except for the fact that I eat there pretty often (you just can't find it listed...not in Zagats, not off of 411, not ANYWHERE!!--except online (HERE) Yum. Then we walked around just a tiny bit more, before going to my home.

Then I beat Evan up. With a duck.

It was a good weekend

Wednesday, May 05, 2004

 
I'd like to start this off by saying I don't enjoy talking about this, but if I don't write some of this out, I'm going to go nuts.

A guy from my town, a soldier, was killed in a non-combat related accident the other day in Afghanistan. I'm not going to mention his name because what I'm about to say could upset people. Now the local media is all over my little home town and talking about this death and how it affects everyone. I don't remember him, though from his age, he must have graduated only a year ahead of me. I'm sure, like many future soldiers, that he was 'sorta quiet', came from a lower-middle class home and was a 'good guy' who 'stayed out of trouble'. They say he's left behind a wife and two children, I feel terrible about this, as I'm sure everyone does. That's not the point.

In six weeks, no one but his family and those close to him will remember.

Last week a former NFL 'star' died. Suddenly, he's the most 'heroic' casualty of the action. He'll probably get all kinds of praise for the rest of the year and will, most likely, go down as one of the 'important' casualties of the war, in history books. Now, I'm not saying that his efforts weren't heroic in and of themselves. He was indeed a hero. I've read articles on his courageous decision to leave fame and fortune go and join his brother in the armed services. But why is it that he's more heroic than this soon-to-be nameless guy from my town? Is it just because he gave up wealth--the riches that other people never get the chance to be offered? Is heroism now defined by class, too? (I say 'now,' though I know it's not new).

We call all of the people who died in combat (and even those who died in accidents, like the young man from my town) 'heroes,' but somehow, when it's a rich, white, famous person who dies, they're MORE heroic. Now, It's one thing when the Media does something like this. That's the way they operate. The problem is that we, as Americans, play along with it. What gives? Are we so duped as a country that we think that if we're not rich, white and famous that we're nothing? Why is it that the people that die for the safety of the richest are always the poorest? I have too many questions today, but that's only the beginning of my problems with this whole thing. There is something more that bothers me.

At last count, something like 760 coalition soldiers have died in Iraq (with nearly half of the fatalities occurring after Sadam Hussein's capture), I'm not sure how many have died in Afghanistan, but the numbers are suggest that close to a thousand, in total, have died in one of the two takeovers (Afghanistan and Iraq) since the first invasion. I'm not going to harp on Bush--I'm done harping about him. The action was taken, the action happened, and there's nothing that we can do to retroactively stop it. What I will harp on, though, is the exit strategy of all of this. Whatever it is, I can not believe it's effectively laid out. This whole June 30th thing? I don't think that all of what's escalating in Iraq is going to allow us to leave that simply. We're doing so much fighting and defending our alleged peace-keeping efforts at this point, that we can't even properly begin the re-building efforts of infrastructure--let alone government.

But If we just up and left now, that would be even worse than staying. We've got Iraq like a bruised, beaten child in a corner. We may be trying to help, and our efforts MAY be well intentioned, but Iraq's people are scared, hurt, angry and don't know what they can do to fix the imbalance, that, to many of them, we've imposed. To just go in, blow shit up and then leave is probably the most dangerous thing we could do. Peoples' lives were destroyed by our bombardment and invasion. Civilians, something like 10,000, have been killed--all of whom have families, very ANGRY families. Certainly Sadam was a bad ruler, and certainly he was a tyrant, but are we so arrogant that we can go in, irrevocably maim millions of peoples' lives (most of the bombing occurred in major cities and 75% of Iraq's population is urban), and then just leave, thinking 'we did our part?'

There is a bigger problem with thinking that we can just leave now. We've gone in and put out what our president and his administration had deemed a fire, but there is still a bed of coals that we have been quietly stoking the entire time. Our exit strategy looks more like a bullet's than anything at this point: we went in with 'surgical strikes' and now we're leaving a gaping hole as we exit a country whose people we've killed, whose leaders (albeit tyrants) we've ousted, whose homes we've destroyed and whose hope we've only marginally brought back--and for what? Oil profits? Even if all of this has been to ensure the US' oil interests and to make daddy Bush richer, you'd think that we would be a little cleaner than what's happening now. There isn't a clear plan to install any form of real government into Iraq. There has been no global agreement on what should be done in terms of the mess we've made. Further, it doesn't appear that our leadership knows where to go from here. I don't think they even know what's going to tip the scales.

What happens when the number of deaths in Iraq succeeds the numbers killed at the World Trade Center? Are we going to finally say 'enough' then? And when we finally DO leave, how is this administration going to deal with the power vacuum it's created with the forced overturning of the leader of an already seething country? Lastly, and most important to me, how are we going to get our kids out of there without further damaging that delicate power structure?

The people that are dying over there, unlike the 35 year old action stars that will be portraying them in movies years from now, are young. They're scrawny kids who, often, are just trying to find some structure or a way to pay for college. At the bottom of our society is a group of people so starved for upward mobility that they have to take whatever outs this system gives them. The most obvious and tantalizing is to some is enlistment. The heroic thing they did was not to try to 'save our country' from unnamed evils, or to spread our perverted notion of democracy--or even dying in battle. Their heroism was trying to better their lives. All political views aside, I want them home--so they can do that.

The problem is, though, that if we just bring them back, might we have created a bigger monster in Iraq and Afghanistan--and further the whole middle east--than what was there?

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

archives