I now have two good, thought-provoking posts hostage.
Tex related a story about some of the new summer program students who have began flooding Xalapa with their bermuda shorts and bad accents. A large group of Americans were in La Oveja Negra drinking mojitos, and one of them commented, "I feel like this is, like, authentic Mexico!"
Really? White people and everything?
One of my favorite ways to experience authentic Mexico is to go to the pulquería on the other side of the center. Pulque is an alcoholic beverage made from the maguey plant, a relative of the agave from which we get tequila. Mexico's indigenous peoples used pulque for rituals, and it remained popular under Spanish rule because a drunk population is easier to control. Pulque was widely consumed until fairly recently, when the beer companies started misinformation campaigns claiming it was detrimental to the health. Now, there are just a few pulquerías still scattered about.
Yesterday I rounded up what became a rather large group of foreign students to go for pulque. I had no money, but with Jon and SB buying I managed to sweet talk my way into three mugs of the citrusy beverage. On previous visits I'd only ever had one, so I didn't really realize what I was in for. But pulque is most definitely stronger than beer.
The fun began after most all the white people had left, leaving just Nick and me behind. We had only been alone for a minute or so when some Mexicans invited us to go talk with them. They were all in their mid-twenties and wanted to pick our brains about "what Americans think of Mexicans." Let me tell you guys: I sure get sick fo speaking for you.
It ended up being a lot of fun. We spent hours with them hanging out at one guy's apartment and talking, and I gave my phone card to one of them who calls his girlfriend frequently from pay phones.
This is authentic Mexico: you meet people, you befriend them, you talk and have a good time. I've found that, in general, people here are far friendlier than in the States - though sometimes they need to get some race resentment out of their system first (I find I'm often listening to someone I just met rant about how Americans treat Mexicans).
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Striking again
I wrote a fantastic post yesterday but am holding it hostage because nobody's commenting again.
Monday, May 26, 2008
A creative history of Frockleton
Many who know me will know that I have essentially written a full fantasy fiction book series in my head, and simply lack the motivation to type up these best-selling novels. These books have a sort of solemn outlook, inspired in no small part by The Lord of the Rings. Perhaps someone reading this will understand that the sort of setting for a book series like that may not lend itself well to, say, a Dungeons & Dragons campaign setting, or even a more differently styled, fun-filled adventure story (contrast LOTR with The Hobbit and you'll see a remarkable difference).
Because of this, I have over the years brainstormed many a fantasy fiction setting (and one or two half-baked sci-fi settings). I tell you all of this to introduce something that's been drifting around in my head for years: The Adventures of Nidgin Idberry of Frockleton.
The adventures started back when I ran the old version of nickkauffman.net and was looking for content to spice up my site. I planned a chapter-by-chapter, fast-paced story packed with adventure and hilarity and wrote out the first chapter from scratch, never making any character plans or actually developing the world. The project never came to fruition.
That was not, however, the death of Frockleton. I'm not sure if I have any fan crossover, but I used to post a stick figure comic called Nickslife Comics on a Xanga account*. Considering what little effort went in to drawing up the MSPaint-produced comics, I had a surprisingly dedicated fanbase. With Nidgin's adventures still in my head, I drew up this comic, converting the first part of Chapter One into a visual adventure.
I put an awful lot of work into that comic, and the limitations of using such a format are clear. Nothing ever came of it.
Finally, we arrive at today: I have in the past week drawn a full map of Jedya and written descriptions of the various inhabitants. I've thought through the overall plot of the greater story, with a few cliché twists in there. And I'm considering publishing it chapter-by-chapter on a separate blog.
What I have to ask myself is, is there a market for this kind of story? What this really should be is a comic. Unfortunately, my drawing skills are limited to cubes, funny-looking trees, and something that is getting closer and closer to looking like a front view of the U.S.S. Enterprise (the Starfleet ship, not the U.S. aircraft carrier). The remaining sliver of hope is the observation that two of my favorite web comics, Penny Arcade and Three Panel Soul, both involve a writer-artist partnership.
So, does anybody know a good artist?
*The reason I'm not posting a link is that Xanga did not at the time allow image hosting, so all the comics were hotlinked to a folder on nickkauffman.net. I canceled my web domain, which wiped out the images. The original copies were lost from my hard drive at some point along the way.
Because of this, I have over the years brainstormed many a fantasy fiction setting (and one or two half-baked sci-fi settings). I tell you all of this to introduce something that's been drifting around in my head for years: The Adventures of Nidgin Idberry of Frockleton.
The adventures started back when I ran the old version of nickkauffman.net and was looking for content to spice up my site. I planned a chapter-by-chapter, fast-paced story packed with adventure and hilarity and wrote out the first chapter from scratch, never making any character plans or actually developing the world. The project never came to fruition.
That was not, however, the death of Frockleton. I'm not sure if I have any fan crossover, but I used to post a stick figure comic called Nickslife Comics on a Xanga account*. Considering what little effort went in to drawing up the MSPaint-produced comics, I had a surprisingly dedicated fanbase. With Nidgin's adventures still in my head, I drew up this comic, converting the first part of Chapter One into a visual adventure.
I put an awful lot of work into that comic, and the limitations of using such a format are clear. Nothing ever came of it.
Finally, we arrive at today: I have in the past week drawn a full map of Jedya and written descriptions of the various inhabitants. I've thought through the overall plot of the greater story, with a few cliché twists in there. And I'm considering publishing it chapter-by-chapter on a separate blog.
What I have to ask myself is, is there a market for this kind of story? What this really should be is a comic. Unfortunately, my drawing skills are limited to cubes, funny-looking trees, and something that is getting closer and closer to looking like a front view of the U.S.S. Enterprise (the Starfleet ship, not the U.S. aircraft carrier). The remaining sliver of hope is the observation that two of my favorite web comics, Penny Arcade and Three Panel Soul, both involve a writer-artist partnership.
So, does anybody know a good artist?
*The reason I'm not posting a link is that Xanga did not at the time allow image hosting, so all the comics were hotlinked to a folder on nickkauffman.net. I canceled my web domain, which wiped out the images. The original copies were lost from my hard drive at some point along the way.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Why you should fear me
In blog-related news, I'm having a few issues with my element display that I hope will go away on their own, since everything appears to be in order on my dashboard. I added a feed from my Twitter account for those little thoughts that aren't detailed enough to deserve their own post, and a couple of corporate blog links. Also, after knowing about it for several months, I finally fixed the dead link to Anna Banana's site (she threw me off with the "www" addition to her URL).
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
They keep trying to save me
Most of my more dedicated readers will know by now that my host family are Jehova's Witnesses, and that they are at least slightly crazy. I believe that these are two separate factors that work together to make my housing situation more interesting, rather than being directly related.
This has not always been clear, and I can name one particular example in which the obfuscation became awkward. It was over winter break, and I was at home having the Kauffman family Christmas dinner with my aunts and uncles (and parents and brother). Conversation turned to my host family back in Mexico, and I immediately said "They're crazy!" Before I could elaborate with tales of lacking sanity, my dad interjected, "Yeah, they're Jehova's Witnesses, right?" True. But as far as I know, that's not why they're crazy. And again, before I could get any words out, my uncle Tim turned to me and told me he was studying to be a Jehova's Witness. It was an incredibly uncomfortable situation, and now I'm the intolerant one.
Anyway, I think there are things to be learned from the Jehova's Witnesses (or Testigos de Jehova). Today a nicely-dressed man caught up with me as I was walking between schools and said, "Una disculpa, ¿Usted habla inglés?" I said that I did, which is always risky if you're trying to get somewhere on time, and he pulled a copy of The Watchtower from his bag and handed it to me, explaining that this issue was about la creación ("What Does Creation Reveal about God?"). I told him I live with Jehova's Witnesses and didn't need to take one of his copies, but he said to go ahead and take it since it was already in my hand. I can't argue with that logic.
Most churches have some sort of theological pamphlet available. Off the top of my head, the Church of the Brethren has Messenger magazine, the quarterly Brethren Life & Thought, and congregational and district newsletters. But the Jehova's Witnesses pass them out to people like me on the street in a friendly, non-preachy way. Realistically, most of them probably go in the trash, but some of them are bound to be read. And this isn't blind fundamentalist preaching (no apologies) - they actually encourage you to study and develop your own thought (with the help of Church publications). From conversations with my host family, I think these people are better Biblical scholars than most average churchgoers (I'm proud to say that so far I've been able to hold my own in referencing scripture).
Oh, and readers: how many of you have allowed a father and son to share your house for a few days simply because they were seeing the same eye surgeon as you and lived further away? (I guess this only applies to people who have had eye surgery.)
This has not always been clear, and I can name one particular example in which the obfuscation became awkward. It was over winter break, and I was at home having the Kauffman family Christmas dinner with my aunts and uncles (and parents and brother). Conversation turned to my host family back in Mexico, and I immediately said "They're crazy!" Before I could elaborate with tales of lacking sanity, my dad interjected, "Yeah, they're Jehova's Witnesses, right?" True. But as far as I know, that's not why they're crazy. And again, before I could get any words out, my uncle Tim turned to me and told me he was studying to be a Jehova's Witness. It was an incredibly uncomfortable situation, and now I'm the intolerant one.
Anyway, I think there are things to be learned from the Jehova's Witnesses (or Testigos de Jehova). Today a nicely-dressed man caught up with me as I was walking between schools and said, "Una disculpa, ¿Usted habla inglés?" I said that I did, which is always risky if you're trying to get somewhere on time, and he pulled a copy of The Watchtower from his bag and handed it to me, explaining that this issue was about la creación ("What Does Creation Reveal about God?"). I told him I live with Jehova's Witnesses and didn't need to take one of his copies, but he said to go ahead and take it since it was already in my hand. I can't argue with that logic.
Most churches have some sort of theological pamphlet available. Off the top of my head, the Church of the Brethren has Messenger magazine, the quarterly Brethren Life & Thought, and congregational and district newsletters. But the Jehova's Witnesses pass them out to people like me on the street in a friendly, non-preachy way. Realistically, most of them probably go in the trash, but some of them are bound to be read. And this isn't blind fundamentalist preaching (no apologies) - they actually encourage you to study and develop your own thought (with the help of Church publications). From conversations with my host family, I think these people are better Biblical scholars than most average churchgoers (I'm proud to say that so far I've been able to hold my own in referencing scripture).
Oh, and readers: how many of you have allowed a father and son to share your house for a few days simply because they were seeing the same eye surgeon as you and lived further away? (I guess this only applies to people who have had eye surgery.)
Sunday, May 18, 2008
¿Hay machismo en la lengua castellana?
Those of you who understand Spanish (or, as this particular piece more correctly calls it, Castilian) will appreciate this article one of my professors gave me earlier this year.
Dios: creador del universo y cuya divinidad se transmitió a su Hijo (varón) por línea paterna.
Diosa: ser mitológico de culturas supersticiosas, obsoletas y olvidadas.
Patrimonio: conjunto de bienes.
Matrimonio: conjunto de males.
Héroe: ídolo.
Heroína: droga.
Atrevido: osado, valiente.
Atrevida: insolente, mal educada o puta.
Soltero: codiciado, inteligente, hábil
Soltera: quedada, lenta, ya se le fue el tren.
Suegro: padre político
Suegra: bruja, metiche, etc.
Machista: hombre macho.
Feminista: lesbiana
Don Juan: hombre en todo su sentido
Doña Juana: mujer desconocida, cualquiera
Zorro: espadachín justiciero.
Zorra: puta
Perro: mejor amigo del hombre.
Perra: puta.
Aventurero: osado, valiente, arriesgado, hombre de mundo.
Aventurera: puta.
Ambicioso: visionario, enérgico, con metas.
Ambiciosa: puta.
Cualquier: cosa o persona indeterminada.
Cualquiera: puta.
Fulano: persona indeterminada.
Fulana: puta.
Callejero: de la calle, urbano, guía de la ciudad.
Callejera: puta.
Hombrezuelo: hombrecillo, varón, mínimo, pequeñito.
Mujerzuela: puta.
Hombre público: personaje prominente.
Mujer pública: puta.
Golfo: masa de agua marina parcialmente rodeada de tierra.
Golfa: puta.
Lobo: mamífero predador rapaz y feroz; hombre agresivo.
Loba: puta.
Ligero: hombre débil y/o sencillo
Ligera: puta.
Adúltero: infiel
Adúltera: puta.
Putin: jefe de estado ruso.
Putina: puta, putilla.
Hombre que vende sus servicios: consultor.
Mujer que vende sus servicios: puta.
Hombre de la vida: hombre de gran experiencia.
Mujer de la vida: puta.
Rápido: inteligente, despierto.
Rápida: puta.
Dios: creador del universo y cuya divinidad se transmitió a su Hijo (varón) por línea paterna.
Diosa: ser mitológico de culturas supersticiosas, obsoletas y olvidadas.
Patrimonio: conjunto de bienes.
Matrimonio: conjunto de males.
Héroe: ídolo.
Heroína: droga.
Atrevido: osado, valiente.
Atrevida: insolente, mal educada o puta.
Soltero: codiciado, inteligente, hábil
Soltera: quedada, lenta, ya se le fue el tren.
Suegro: padre político
Suegra: bruja, metiche, etc.
Machista: hombre macho.
Feminista: lesbiana
Don Juan: hombre en todo su sentido
Doña Juana: mujer desconocida, cualquiera
Zorro: espadachín justiciero.
Zorra: puta
Perro: mejor amigo del hombre.
Perra: puta.
Aventurero: osado, valiente, arriesgado, hombre de mundo.
Aventurera: puta.
Ambicioso: visionario, enérgico, con metas.
Ambiciosa: puta.
Cualquier: cosa o persona indeterminada.
Cualquiera: puta.
Fulano: persona indeterminada.
Fulana: puta.
Callejero: de la calle, urbano, guía de la ciudad.
Callejera: puta.
Hombrezuelo: hombrecillo, varón, mínimo, pequeñito.
Mujerzuela: puta.
Hombre público: personaje prominente.
Mujer pública: puta.
Golfo: masa de agua marina parcialmente rodeada de tierra.
Golfa: puta.
Lobo: mamífero predador rapaz y feroz; hombre agresivo.
Loba: puta.
Ligero: hombre débil y/o sencillo
Ligera: puta.
Adúltero: infiel
Adúltera: puta.
Putin: jefe de estado ruso.
Putina: puta, putilla.
Hombre que vende sus servicios: consultor.
Mujer que vende sus servicios: puta.
Hombre de la vida: hombre de gran experiencia.
Mujer de la vida: puta.
Rápido: inteligente, despierto.
Rápida: puta.
Friday, May 16, 2008
One Semester of Spanish Spanish Love Song
I finally figured out how to embed YouTube videos in my blog and decided to celebrate with this piece of hilarity.
Nothing relevant
I re-read my last post today - something that I should do more often, as I often find grammatical errors - and noticed that I used the phrase "supersonic speed" in reference to my reading. I thought this was funny because "supersonic" means "faster than the speed of sound." This is a slightly awkward phraseology* not only because sound has nothing to do with this, but because the speed of sound is a fixed velocity at which sound waves travel through space (specifically, a standard oxygen/nitrogen mix at 20 degrees Celsius). I don't think this is comparible to speed of reading comprehension, as the nerve impulses in my brain are traveling at the same 20-30 m/s as in any other brain. (Reading speeds, while measurable, will no doubt vary depending on word complexity and context.)
I think I'll stop there, because I'm starting to ask the question "what does move faster when I read?" Off the top of my head, I think I remember hearing that speed reading isn't about reading lines faster - it's about absorbing more words at the same time. However, this tangent could lead into some pointless research and distract me from my writing.
I am happy to report that there is one person that truly understands me. God bless you, Billy Joel. (I was surprised to learn that he's slightly younger than my dad).
*Immediately after using the word "phraseology," I looked it up to see if it was a real word. I am proud to report that it is.
I think I'll stop there, because I'm starting to ask the question "what does move faster when I read?" Off the top of my head, I think I remember hearing that speed reading isn't about reading lines faster - it's about absorbing more words at the same time. However, this tangent could lead into some pointless research and distract me from my writing.
I am happy to report that there is one person that truly understands me. God bless you, Billy Joel. (I was surprised to learn that he's slightly younger than my dad).
*Immediately after using the word "phraseology," I looked it up to see if it was a real word. I am proud to report that it is.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Which language is funnier?
K-Cizzle seems to be giving me crap for writing too much about politics and not enough about me. I cannot resist, however, expressing my excitement about my main man's endorsement of my backup man. Click the link for a class-A speech by John Edwards. In other political news, the California supreme court today ruled that a state ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional. It has always been my stance that the nearly nationwide exclusion of gay couples from marriage is one of the most shameful bits of injustice still alive in our legislature, and I get pretty worked up about it. For a smile, imagine me cheering out loud when I saw the news on CNN and then explaining to my Jehova's Witness host family why I was so happy.
Okay. I'm sorry, Kacie. Both of those things made me really, really happy. That's something about me, isn't it?
Sebastian and Sara Beth (no link because she hasn't updated since Thanksgiving) have both commented to me in the past over the fact that our personalities are often different depending on what language we're speaking. For example, I am widely considered to be hilarious in English, while most Mexicans who know me think I'm pretty quiet (there are more extreme examples, but none of you know the guy and then I wouldn't be writing about me). But it's definitely true. My host family thinks I'm a quiet guy who's completely devoted to his studies. This is clearly not true, but it can be hard to crack jokes in your second language.
Prime example: I got my hair cut three months ago - a rather drastic change from my ponytail-length locks. My host mom, shocked, said, "¡Te cortaste el pelo!" ("You cut your hair!") I gave her my normal reply to this comment, introducing my old joke to a new language: "No, alguién más me lo hizo" ("No, somebody else did it for me"). She did not laugh.
I pushed the event to the back of my mind, so it was not until a long time later that I suddenly realized why the joke wasn't funny. "Te cortaste el pelo" does not only mean "you cut your hair." Those exact same words would also be the translation for "you got your hair cut" or "your hair was cut." The words do not automatically imply that I did the action - they could simply be a passive way of saying the action was done to me.
Humor, though, is the least of my worries when it comes to crossover between English and Spanish. I have concluded that reading is a real problem for me, and I think I know why: in English, I am more or less a speed reader. I'm not one of those freaks you see on TV waving his hand across a page and absorbing every word, but I find that when I hand someone else a paragraph to read, I can read it to myself four or five times (or more) while they work on it once. I cannot do this in Spanish - at least not yet. But my eyes expect my brain to snatch the words off the page at supersonic speed, so they scan rapidly across the lines and leave me having no idea what I just read. In other words, how I'm trained to read doesn't work with a second language. I literally have to go one word at a time, absorbing about three before my habits kick in and I start zipping across the page again. Then I go back and read the next three words. By the time I've done this a few times, I'm thinking so much about how I'm reading that I've forgotten what I already read.
It sounds funny, but this has been a real issue for me.
Finally, I suppose I should put some kind of personal update in here for people who want to know what I'm up to. As always, I'm watching TV, interspersed with occasional bars and internet cafés. I've been at least mildly depressed for a month or two, and I'm really just looking forward to coming home and spending an entire four days with my family before I head down to Indianapolis to work (this will more than likely result in more depression, since I'm spending half my summer living alone in a city where I don't really know anyone).
There might also be one or two things bringing me down that I haven't mentioned.
And on that note, I'm out.
EDIT: Thank you John (and I suppose Elaine, though I don't know you) for this. Laughing out loud in internet cafés does invite stares.
Okay. I'm sorry, Kacie. Both of those things made me really, really happy. That's something about me, isn't it?
Sebastian and Sara Beth (no link because she hasn't updated since Thanksgiving) have both commented to me in the past over the fact that our personalities are often different depending on what language we're speaking. For example, I am widely considered to be hilarious in English, while most Mexicans who know me think I'm pretty quiet (there are more extreme examples, but none of you know the guy and then I wouldn't be writing about me). But it's definitely true. My host family thinks I'm a quiet guy who's completely devoted to his studies. This is clearly not true, but it can be hard to crack jokes in your second language.
Prime example: I got my hair cut three months ago - a rather drastic change from my ponytail-length locks. My host mom, shocked, said, "¡Te cortaste el pelo!" ("You cut your hair!") I gave her my normal reply to this comment, introducing my old joke to a new language: "No, alguién más me lo hizo" ("No, somebody else did it for me"). She did not laugh.
I pushed the event to the back of my mind, so it was not until a long time later that I suddenly realized why the joke wasn't funny. "Te cortaste el pelo" does not only mean "you cut your hair." Those exact same words would also be the translation for "you got your hair cut" or "your hair was cut." The words do not automatically imply that I did the action - they could simply be a passive way of saying the action was done to me.
Humor, though, is the least of my worries when it comes to crossover between English and Spanish. I have concluded that reading is a real problem for me, and I think I know why: in English, I am more or less a speed reader. I'm not one of those freaks you see on TV waving his hand across a page and absorbing every word, but I find that when I hand someone else a paragraph to read, I can read it to myself four or five times (or more) while they work on it once. I cannot do this in Spanish - at least not yet. But my eyes expect my brain to snatch the words off the page at supersonic speed, so they scan rapidly across the lines and leave me having no idea what I just read. In other words, how I'm trained to read doesn't work with a second language. I literally have to go one word at a time, absorbing about three before my habits kick in and I start zipping across the page again. Then I go back and read the next three words. By the time I've done this a few times, I'm thinking so much about how I'm reading that I've forgotten what I already read.
It sounds funny, but this has been a real issue for me.
Finally, I suppose I should put some kind of personal update in here for people who want to know what I'm up to. As always, I'm watching TV, interspersed with occasional bars and internet cafés. I've been at least mildly depressed for a month or two, and I'm really just looking forward to coming home and spending an entire four days with my family before I head down to Indianapolis to work (this will more than likely result in more depression, since I'm spending half my summer living alone in a city where I don't really know anyone).
There might also be one or two things bringing me down that I haven't mentioned.
And on that note, I'm out.
EDIT: Thank you John (and I suppose Elaine, though I don't know you) for this. Laughing out loud in internet cafés does invite stares.
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
Clinton wins Republicans
I'm writing two back-to-back posts today, so make sure you catch the other one.
As those of you who care about politics enough to read what I think probably know, Clinton won Indiana 51-49: far from the strong victory she really needed. But something caught my attention early on, and that was a brief conversation about "The Limbaugh Effect." This is the splash created by Rush Limbaugh's call for Republicans to vote for Clinton in order to sow chaos in the Democratic party (no guarantees that link works). CNN reported that in Indiana, voters identifying themselves as Republican went to Clinton 54-46.
This was just too good to let go, so I spent a small chunk of my afternoon - a chunk that should have been spent polishing my résumé - checking statistics and crunching numbers to disregard Republican votes for both Clinton and Obama. The final tally? Clinton 50.37%, Obama 49.63%. That rounds to 50-50. I am delighted to report that Clinton's margin would have been even more embarrassingly slim if it hadn't been for the Republicans.
Also, a word to the wise: do not leave yourself logged in to Blogger if I will be using the computer. This might happen. (Check it out now before he notices!)
As those of you who care about politics enough to read what I think probably know, Clinton won Indiana 51-49: far from the strong victory she really needed. But something caught my attention early on, and that was a brief conversation about "The Limbaugh Effect." This is the splash created by Rush Limbaugh's call for Republicans to vote for Clinton in order to sow chaos in the Democratic party (no guarantees that link works). CNN reported that in Indiana, voters identifying themselves as Republican went to Clinton 54-46.
This was just too good to let go, so I spent a small chunk of my afternoon - a chunk that should have been spent polishing my résumé - checking statistics and crunching numbers to disregard Republican votes for both Clinton and Obama. The final tally? Clinton 50.37%, Obama 49.63%. That rounds to 50-50. I am delighted to report that Clinton's margin would have been even more embarrassingly slim if it hadn't been for the Republicans.
Also, a word to the wise: do not leave yourself logged in to Blogger if I will be using the computer. This might happen. (Check it out now before he notices!)
Indiana counts; Blacks do not
Congratulations to Hillary Clinton for barely winning the state that is home to the Ku Klux Klan.
Was that an unfair shot? Sorry, I'm in a really good mood.
I'll leave the political spin to other people this time. There's plenty of it out there, and I have to say it looks pretty good for Obama. I would like to address something that isn't getting any coverage at all, though it should: the blatant racism of the Democratic party.
It was no big surprise when CNN called North Carolina for Barack Obama the moment the polls closed (thus legally permitting them to talk about their exit polls). What really got to me came moments later, as they started to examine the vote breakdown by race. Hillary Clinton won 61% of the White vote, leaving Obama with 37%. By contrast, Obama won 91% of the Black vote, with Clinton picking up just 7%. The pundits tipped the hat to Obama for not performing too abysmally with White voters, and then immediately moved to discussing the obvious problem here. Can you guess what the problem was? Obama isn't winning enough Whites.
Let's look at this again. Obama wins 37% of White voters. Clinton wins 7% of Black voters. Who has the bigger problem with appealing to a demographic here? Clinton always talks about how she's winning in groups that the Democrats need (never mind that come November, those blue-collar working class white guys will be voting for McCain). Guess what? The Democrats can't win in November without the Black vote.
Now you can brush off the problem as saying Obama gets so many Black voters because he's Black. Okay, maybe he does. Why, then, is a White person like Clinton failing to win her own race as overwhelmingly? Are White people less racist or something?
Alternatively, you can say what's really being implied by all this conversation - or lack thereof - and that is that we all know the Blacks will vote for the Democrat in November anyway. So much for Democrats not taking their vote for granted. And they shouldn't: the ONLY way Clinton can get the nomination is if the Superdelegates swing strongly to her, taking the nomination away from Obama, who will have more pledged delegates and, probably, a higher popular vote total. If that happens, I can guarantee you Black voters aren't going to be tripping over themselves to support her in the Fall.
Was that an unfair shot? Sorry, I'm in a really good mood.
I'll leave the political spin to other people this time. There's plenty of it out there, and I have to say it looks pretty good for Obama. I would like to address something that isn't getting any coverage at all, though it should: the blatant racism of the Democratic party.
It was no big surprise when CNN called North Carolina for Barack Obama the moment the polls closed (thus legally permitting them to talk about their exit polls). What really got to me came moments later, as they started to examine the vote breakdown by race. Hillary Clinton won 61% of the White vote, leaving Obama with 37%. By contrast, Obama won 91% of the Black vote, with Clinton picking up just 7%. The pundits tipped the hat to Obama for not performing too abysmally with White voters, and then immediately moved to discussing the obvious problem here. Can you guess what the problem was? Obama isn't winning enough Whites.
Let's look at this again. Obama wins 37% of White voters. Clinton wins 7% of Black voters. Who has the bigger problem with appealing to a demographic here? Clinton always talks about how she's winning in groups that the Democrats need (never mind that come November, those blue-collar working class white guys will be voting for McCain). Guess what? The Democrats can't win in November without the Black vote.
Now you can brush off the problem as saying Obama gets so many Black voters because he's Black. Okay, maybe he does. Why, then, is a White person like Clinton failing to win her own race as overwhelmingly? Are White people less racist or something?
Alternatively, you can say what's really being implied by all this conversation - or lack thereof - and that is that we all know the Blacks will vote for the Democrat in November anyway. So much for Democrats not taking their vote for granted. And they shouldn't: the ONLY way Clinton can get the nomination is if the Superdelegates swing strongly to her, taking the nomination away from Obama, who will have more pledged delegates and, probably, a higher popular vote total. If that happens, I can guarantee you Black voters aren't going to be tripping over themselves to support her in the Fall.
Thursday, May 01, 2008
My theory about Obama
I think Obama means it when he talks about being angry with Rev. Wright, or when he calls him divisive. But I think he agrees with a lot of what he says. This guy is a super-liberal trying to pass himself off as moderate enough to get into the White House. No political middler is going to hang around listening to liberation theology for twenty years.
I hope he pulls it off.
And you know what? I agree with a lot of what Rev. Wright says. What's his most controversial stuff? Let's take a look.
"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye. We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards."
He's not wrong, boys and girls. We are hypocrites, perhaps not for being outraged at the attacks on our country, but for not being outraged by the atrocities we commit against others. By the way, did you know the United States prosecuted a Japanese officer for water-boarding U.S. prisoners of war?
As long as I'm saying controversial things, here's a comment for my old high school: Having an armed police officer in the building is not only creepily indicative of a police state, it also statistically increases the chances of a student being shot.
You may be all cozy with it now, but take it from someone living in Mexico: the next step is having to walk past cops carrying M-4 assault rifles every day, and that does not make you feel safe.
I hope he pulls it off.
And you know what? I agree with a lot of what Rev. Wright says. What's his most controversial stuff? Let's take a look.
"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye. We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards."
He's not wrong, boys and girls. We are hypocrites, perhaps not for being outraged at the attacks on our country, but for not being outraged by the atrocities we commit against others. By the way, did you know the United States prosecuted a Japanese officer for water-boarding U.S. prisoners of war?
As long as I'm saying controversial things, here's a comment for my old high school: Having an armed police officer in the building is not only creepily indicative of a police state, it also statistically increases the chances of a student being shot.
You may be all cozy with it now, but take it from someone living in Mexico: the next step is having to walk past cops carrying M-4 assault rifles every day, and that does not make you feel safe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)