Can You Hear Me Now?

There was a fascinating article in the January 11, 2005 New York Times: you know when you call customer service and a recorded voice says, “This call may be monitored for quality assurance purposes”? It turns out that’s no lie. Even when you’re waiting on hold and talking to your cat or wife or husband or maybe yelling at your kids, somebody may be listening.

The most revelatory part of the article, however, is how hard that job is, to be on quality control and listen to a hundred or so calls a week, evaluating the customer service rep but also listening silently to customers and their rants, sob stories, and in some cases, pick-up lines. There’s a huge turnover rate in these call monitors, and Ken Belson, the journalist who wrote the article, provides a striking insight that explains why: we live in a culture where listening is “a rare commodity” and “the opposite of talking is waiting to talk.”

Belson is dead-on. Listening is a dying art. In America, what counts most is how many words you can get in edgewise before you’re interrupted. And the interuptee, to coin a word, isn’t responding to what you’ve just said, but rather is simply saying something that’s been in his or her mind before you even began to speak.

We live in a world of preemptive interuptions. We live in a world, it seems, of preemptive everything.

Update on Burglary

First the facts…the word floating around town was that there were over thirty break-ins over the holidays. The police have announced that there have actually only been twenty-four reported break-ins. So already I feel safer. (So already I feel safer?)

Other facts: mostly jewelry was stolen. Yes, some Oreos. And in one case, seven bars of Irish Spring soap. No electronics, no firearms, no alcohol, none of the Christmas presents wrapped under all the trees.

The police announced all this at a recent community meeting, held on the neighborhood green, which I left feeling like I had just stumbled in and out of a Twilight Zone episode. Which episode? Any of them, I guess.

The police chief told the crowd of nearly fifty that the thief is most likely “one of us” and could even be there at the meeting. I had momentary visions of the Salem witch trials–neighbors turning on each other, fingers pointing, the gallows being readied right there in the middle of the green, hastily assembled from nearby benches. Luckily, my neighbors all had cooler heads than that.

My own theory is that the criminal is a college kid, who was home for the holidays and needed some cash. Gambling debts? It was either steal his neighbors’ jewelry or have his kneecaps broken? Or maybe he wanted to woo his girlfriend with an awesome Christmas present? The police estimate that the total value of all the goods stolen is about $31,000. That could buy a nice iPod and a few accessories. (Of course, why not just steal some of the doubtless countless iPod-shaped presents that were under everybody’s Christmas trees?)

At any rate, in our own household we were lucky. Or just a plain waste of the thief’s time. We can’t find anything missing. We don’t have many valuables, but it’s not like we don’t have any. Surely the crook could have found something worthwhile to steal after going to all the trouble to break in? Truth be told, I feel a little dissed. Like somehow I wasn’t good enough to rob.

The American dream lives on…

Pirates & Emperors

I’ve been meaning to blog this for a while, and the end of the year seems like a good time to clear out a backlog of mentionable links. This brilliant Schoolhouse Rock spoof called Pirates & Emperors got a lot of attention in the blogsphere when it came out in October, but it’s so on the mark that I think it’s worth resurfacing the link now.

The cartoon highlights the fact that the U.S. goverment routinely aids and abets “vicious, low-down thugs” who try to “to overthrow the government by attacking undefended civilian targets like schools, farms, hospitals, & outreach centers.” In Nicaragua we called these thugs “Freedom Fighters.” In Afghanistan in the eighties this was the Taliban.

One country’s idea of freedom is another country’s idea of terrorism…

I want my debt back!

Bush is set to sign into law a bill that raises the United States’ debt ceiling by $800 billion, bringing the credit limit of the U.S. government to a grand total of $8.184 trillion.

Now, according to the U.S. census bureau, the U.S. population is (today) roughly 294,791,347 and counting (there’s somebody new being born approximately every 8 seconds and somebody else dying approximately every 13 seconds). So that means for every American, the government has racked up $27,762 in debt.

On one hand $27,762 doesn’t sound like a lot of money, at least not compared to the trillions of debt that it’s a fraction of. On the other hand, $27,762 is a hell of a lot more money than the $300 instant refund check I got back from the government back earlier in Bush’s presidency.

And if you add in my wife’s and my four-month-old son’s share of the debt, the total is $83,286 for my entire household. Now we’re talking.

I want my debt back.

Preferably in cold hard cash. But if that doesn’t work, then in an infinitely deferred no-fault loan, for which I never have to pay the principal or the interest. I mean, if the government is getting all that dough scott-free, why can’t I? At the very least, could the President write a letter of reference to my credit card company, asking them to extend my credit line indefinitely?

Let me tell you, my family sure could use this money much more than George Bush and Congress could. We don’t have any costly misguided invasions of foreign countries to worry about, but we do have a mortgage. I’ve been eyeing an iPod too. And then there’s my son’s college fund.

Of course, there’s always a chance the deficit will end up being reduced in future generations. But really, come on, the government has no incentive to decrease it. Nobody nowhere never has ever lost an election because they’ve been profligate, squandering their constituents’ money and good will.

Oh, you fiscal conservatives and deficit hawks, where have you gone? Can you believe I’m actually getting nostalgic for Ross Perot’s flowcharts and hour-long infomercials?

Self-immolation on the White House Lawn

On Tuesday a man set himself aflame on the White House lawn.

As the Times reports today, apparently the man was a key informer against a Muslim cleric in Brooklyn who had allegedly raised funds for al Qaeda.

The man’s act seems, without us knowing the full details, incomprehensible. It should be pointed out self-immolation has a long history (Vietnam, Prague) and I find it unnerving that it’s happened here, just a few feet from the supposed center of the “Free World.” Self-immolation doesn’t say so much about the men and women who perform as it does about the social context in which they find it their only alternative, their only way to express their voice.

This is History

Karl Marx, who is just as much an authority on these things as any of the talking heads on the cable news channels, famously said that history always repeats itself, the first time as tragedy and the second time as farce. He was talking about Napoleon, but the principle seems to apply just about everywhere you look. Yesterday history once again repeated itself with a new world leader pretend leader: George W. Bush.

But to truly understand what happened yesterday, you have to flip-flop Marx’s argument: the presidential election has repeated itself, but the first time in 2000 it was farce. This time around, it’s tragedy.

Eminem’s Mosh

For the past few days the blogworld has been buzzing about Eminem’s new video, Mosh. Directed by the Guerilla News Network’s Ian Inaba, this song’s driving beat, conveying a greater sense of urgency than even Eminem’s powerful “Lose Yourself,” urges voters disillusioned with Bush to remove him from power.

mosh1.jpg
mosh2.jpg
mosh3.jpg

There’s been a call-in drive to elevate this video to number one in MTV’s TRL. Last night, at least, the video was in the top 20. MTV was compelled to broadcast the video, but only part of it. They cut out two of the most powerful scenes of the video: a shot of a collage showing dozens of newspaper articles, their headlines announcing the grave misjudgments of the Bush administration. Before the collage stands Eminem, angrily pounding the walls.

The video proceeds to show several individuals dramatically affected by Bush’s policies: an urban black man, a target of racial profiling; a working mother about to be evicted from her apartment; a U.S. soldier ordered to Iraq. These individuals and many more begin to march/mosh behind the passionately rhyming Eminem. Their destination is revealed in the final scenes, which MTV did not show last night: the army of angry moshers storm the steps of a courthouse, not to riot, as it first looks, but to orderly exercise their right–and power–to vote.

I’m disappointed but not surprised that MTV (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Viacom) did not show the controversial video in its entirety. “Mosh” is one of the strongest indictments I’ve seen of President Bush since Fahrenheit 9-11. Eminem has already been targeted by the FCC and FBI, and this video probably places him squarely on Bush’s enemy list. (More likely Karl Rove’s list, since Bush doesn’t read the news.)

Embattled Presidents

Seeing Clinton on the campaign trail stumping for Kerry–a seemingly triumphant MacArthuresque return–brought back some memories of Clinton’s later years in office. One phrase that keeps coming back to me which the media used to the point of clichehood to describe Clinton in those years was embattled.

Simply doing a quick LexisNexis search in major newspapers for the phrase “embattled Clinton” or “embattled President” during Clinton’s second term in office shows over 250 results. “Embattled Clinton finds public support eroding,” announces the Boston Herald on September 20, 1998. “Embattled Clinton forges ahead; will public follow?” asks USA TODAY earlier that year, on January 28.

What was so embattling Clinton? Remember? Not his economic policies, not his environmental record, not his foreign diplomatic endeavors. Sex. Monica Lewinsky and Kenneth Starr’s pornographic report.

Now, I’ve done a similar LexisNexis search for occurrences of “embattled Bush” in lead paragraphs of major newspapers during the past five years. The results? Bush is called “embattled” only five times, and four of these are in the foreign press.

Why is it that, at this point in Bush’s presidency, so close to elections for a second term in office, with virtually every foreign and domestic policy of his administration an utter failure, Bush is not called “embattled” by the American media?

Is it because Bush’s biggest failures–Iraq and his war on terror–satisfy some sort of primeval desire in the American mind for violence? There can be no doubt about it: America is the most violent nation on the planet. And what we sometimes lack in real bloodshed we make up for in cinematic gore.

When it comes to sex, though, as the Clinton example demonstrates, America is the equivalent of a repressed Victorian.

Every evening, Americans can witness a dozen grisly murders on their television screens–and that’s before the 11 o’clock news–but show us one glimpse at a bare nipple during the Super Bowl, and it’s time to call in the morality police.

All in the Family

Thanks to the Political Wire for the alert:

A cadre of Bush’s second cousins have come out in forceful support of Kerry. On their site, Bush Relatives for Kerry, they announce that “blood is thinner than oil.” And they’re right.

Of course, as Political Wire also points out, Bush and Kerry are themselves cousins, twice-removed. It seems that something like 10 or 12 generations ago the children of Edmund Reade (1563-1623) and Elizabeth Cooke (1578-1637) married spouses who are direct forebears of President Bush and Senator Kerry.

Popular Culture: The ENEMY

In the New Yorker’s recent account of George Soros’s multimillion dollar endeavor to oust President Bush, journalist Jane Mayer points out that

“the astonishing amount of cash that Soros has poured into the Presidential race is nonetheless dwarfed by Republican efforts to influence public policy through private donations.”

Mayer then highlights a report put together by Rob Stein, which details how a handful of absurdly wealthy conservatives have contributed millions upon millions of dollars during the past three decades to conservative and right-wing institutions and foundations, in effect “financing a war of ideas to tilt mainstream thinking in America rightward” (New Yorker, October 18, 2004, p. 188).

I hadn’t heard of Stein’s report, but apparently it’s been making news. First, this summer in the New York Times Magazine, and then in September in Harper’s. In the New York Times Magazine article, Matt Bai summarizes Stein’s report as demonstrating how conservatives have established a “message machine” that spends $300 million every year pushing its right-wing agenda.

Jane Mayer lists a few of the institutions that comprise the conservative “message machine,” and one of these instantly caught my eye: the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, funded in part by Richard Mellon Scaife, one of the 200 or so “anchor donors” for the conservative movement.

Why, the study of popular culture–that sounds like something right up my alley. Not much different from Pop Matters or PopCultures, right?

Not really.

The innocuously-named Center for the Study of Popular Culture is not the place to go if you want to read a feminist analysis of the latest episode of The Apprentice or to read thought-provoking explorations of hip-hop culture.

No, it’s the place to go when you want “constant updates on the ongoing crises of our day, from multiculturalism to the war on terror.” Yes, multiculturalism is a grave threat. And if Kerry is elected, I’m sure Dick Cheney would say, multiculturalism WILL STRIKE AGAIN!!!

Those wacky white billionaire conservatives. What will they think up next?

The Presidential Debate

The next few comments are all my attempt at “live blogging” during the presidential debate tonight. Except when I wasn’t yelling at my television screen I was trying to write. You can tell I was yelling quite a bit.

9:17 PM: Watching the debate…I don’t feel so hot. Our man is a broken record. Tora Bora again? There’s got to be more you can criticize Bush for during the war…

9:19 PM: So Bush is working with Canada to see if they’ve got a flu vaccine they can share? What about their killer drugs?

9:24 PM: The president just “whewed” in a falsetto. Man, that rocks. Did the bulge in his back tell him to do that?

9:30 PM: Let’s amend the constitution. Yeah! Give the citizenshry the power! Bush doesn’t want the courts to define marriage. So he’s going to do it for them.

9:36 PM: The horse and buggy days were BAD. I’m glad I know where Bush stands on that issue.

9:56 PM: “Border Governor”–I think Bush is talking about Texas, but I’m not really sure. Bush pantomines an illegal immigrant carrying a “card.” I would’ve thought he and Ashcroft would have preferred ID chip implants. Kerry says our borders are LEAKING. Could we sink? Should I buy flood insurance? Who do I sue? Uh-oh: Kerry’s the biometric fan.

10:11 PM: Kerry hunts. But wait, I thought he was French.

10:18 PM: Bush: You can worship the ALMIGHTY, but if you don’t want to, fine. It just means you’re not as good as me. And you’re going to rot. In the ALMIGHTY’s hell. Bush: God wants everybody to be free. Little did you know that God is actually a co-writer of the seventies feel-good show, Free to be You and Me.

10:26 PM: Bush met his wife at a barbeque in Texas. It’s like The Last Pictureshow in Texas all over again, but not.

Dred Scott

Is it just me, or did Bush’s remark in Friday’s debate about Dred Scott come out of bizarro world?

In response to a question about whom he would choose to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court, Bush referred to the Dred Scott decision, in which, Bush explained,

“Judges years ago said the Constitution allowed slavery because of personal property rights. That’s personal opinion, that’s not what the Constitution says. The Constitution says we’re all…it doesn’t say that. It doesn’t speak to the equality of America.”

Does this make any sense? The only thing I can reasonably assume is that Bush means he would not appoint a Supreme Court justice who approves of slavery. Swell. How enlightened of Bush. I’m glad to know that he draws the line at reinstating slavery.

Florida, the Gift that Keeps on Giving

On Overstated, Cameron Marlow has created an interactive perl script that will scan the presidential and vice-presidential debate transcripts for particular phrases. For example, the Debate Analyzer lets you search for “hard work,” and you discover Bush repeated the phrase eleven times. The analyzer highlights the phrase and shows its context, enabling you to see that, in this case, Bush is mostly using it describe his job. Don’t you just feel so sorry for the man? Maybe he deserves some vacation time?

One thing I discovered with this tool is that in the first debate Kerry mentioned “Florida” twice, while Bush doesn’t mention the state by name at all, ever. It’s as if Bush is afraid to jinx the upcoming election by drawing people’s attention to the state. Pretty remarkable, considering the debate was held in Coral Gables, FL. Is Bush hoping Florida will once again be his trojan horse? Or is it a gift horse? Or simply a stolen horse?

Ants

Feeling frustrated with your fellow Americans after looking at the latest presidential poll results? Vent with the Ant City game!

bomber.jpgIf the predictions are correct and Bush wins, can we all expect to be issued a “Visual Language Survival Guide”? — a glossy, colorful pamphlet given to U.S. troops and independent contractors in Iraq, intended to help Americans communicate with prisoners of war, enemy combatants, and the random Iraqi civilian.

The top image to left is presumably for those situations in which you’re not sure (a) if the sniper is in a building, and if so, which floor; or (b) if the sniper is behind a grassy knoll. (You know, I’m beginning to wonder if there’s a link between Saddam and JFK’s assassination…Has Bush mentioned anything about that yet?)

The bottom image very helpfully allows you to politely inquire about where, exactly, the mad suicide bomber hid his explosives: (a) on his yellow sweater; (b) duct-taped to a stationwagon; or ==(c)== carefully hidden on the side of his truck.

I’ve only got two comments about this image: damn, those are big ass sticks of dynamite. And, wow, can he really drive looking out the window like that? I mean, that’s a major safety hazard. If that’s the way Iraqis really drive, then they do deserve to be invaded, occupied, and subjected to American graphic artistry supremacy.