Monday, August 30, 2010

Glenn Beck Rally: Been There, Heard That

With an estimated attendance of 87,000 people - far below the organizer's estimated 300,000 but still a respectable number - the sad truth is that only 0.03% of all Americans had the honor and ability to witness the Glenn Beck Jesus-Luther-Lincoln Rally in person. Recognizing the seminal importance of this event to the future development of America, Freedom, and Glenn Beck's paycheck, I made a point of attending the 8-28 Rally along with my Liberal friend Rob and my Lumix digital camera and techno-lifemate Olympus LS-10 Digital Audio recorder.

What follows are a few choice visual and audio samples - unaltered - to provide the other 310,023,000 Americans who weren't there to see and hear it themselves.

I want to be clear - For those who support the Beck-Jesus '12 ticket, the following contains obvious elements of your professed convictions of which you may not be aware.

For those who find the entire Tea Party movement uncomfortably racist and politically reactionary without any rational, meaningful, or positive contributions, these selections will better inform you about what Glenn Beck really stands for. And how it's actually worse than you thought.

Let's start with a Listening Session:



Audio Sample 1 - Glenn Beck & Closing Prayer
Near the end of his speech, Glenn Beck introduces a disabled Vietnam veteran-turned-pastor to give the closing prayer. The soldier in question was wounded when his own phosphate grenade detonated in his hand, instead of someone else's bunker, and the resulting damage... well, I'll let Glenn tell you about it in all its gory details. The clip is cut down from the original, and includes Beck's intro, part of the pastor's prayer, and Glenn's teary-eyed farewell.

Audio Sample 2 - Amazing Grace
In the finest age-old American tradition, this post-independence hymn was played by a troupe of bagpipers in (presumably?) authentic American kilts. As a symbol of English royal hegemony - written in 1779 by a former Royal Navy sailor and later Anglican clergyman - and performed with Scottish national war instruments, one can assume the Founding Fathers would have considered it thoroughly "unamerican." Its regular use as an protest anthem during the Civil Rights and Anti-Vietnam movements only further confuses what connection Glenn Beck was hoping to form at this meeting of former Vietnam supporters and pro-segregationists.

Audio Sample 3 - National Anthem
Perhaps the most obvious choice for a gathering of individuals whose sole unifying stance is loudly shouted hyper-patriotism, the rendition in questions was so slow as to not just be sappy, but almost Tar-like. The heavy use of synthesizer did nothing to improve its authenticity, but the choked emotion as the crowd sang dutifully along suggests none of these theatrics seemed out of place to them. Not many people bothered to stand up from their lawn chair or put their baseball caps over their heart, but you can hardly blame them. They were old, and it was a warm, sunny day. Patriotism shouldn't have to cost you any personal discomfort.

Audio Sample 4 - Christian Soft Rock
The inclusion of a contemporary Christian "When I think About the Lord" may seem odd for a 'veterans and patriots' rally, but not if you've been paying attention to Glenn Beck's regular use of religious allusion to bind his fandom more closely to his message. This wasn't buried in the line up, nor was it the terrible "go home" music played at the end of a concert to clear the place out. This is the song that came on immediately after Glenn Beck left the stage. This was the climax of the entire 8-28 "Restore Our Honor" event. Thank You, Jesus.

Audio Sample 5 - Country
What goes better with New Age evangelism and blind semi-racial nationalist loyalty? Country music, of course, but not the sad, romantic kind. This is Country music in the age of Toby Keith, the "God-Bless-My-Country-So-I-Can-Kick-Your-Ass" subcategory of an otherwise touching and personal musical genre. The song in question celebrates how God and 17 year olds with machine guns prevented us from being overrun by Nazis or Japanese. A critical observer might ask, "Couldn't God have stopped the Nazis without all those 17 year olds killing so many innocent people?" Sure, but then what would we brag about?

The visuals were no less disturbing, but you'll have to wait for the next blog post for a fuller explanation. I can only work on this so long before my writing devolves into tirades, and no one really wants that.

Weber
::(lame)Texpatriot

Sunday, August 29, 2010

Glenn Beck and the Divine Providence of 8/28

Glenn Beck chose the date August 28, 2010 for his "Restoring Honor" rally on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC. Mostly, this was because it was the only weekend he wasn't already booked for a stand up routine (he remains a professional touring comedian when not a firebrand ultra-conservative talk and TV host). He was later informed that the date in question - and indeed, the location as well - were shared by one of the more important moments in American's history - Martin Luther King, Jr.'s famous "I Have a Dream" speech from August 28, 1963.

Since Mr. Beck couldn't reschedule - he is, after all, a very in-demand demagogue, earning over $23 million annually from his speaking tours, radio & TV shows, and book sales - he decided, and announced publicly and repeatedly, that "divine providence" had proscribed this historic date for him to deliver a speech of comparable importance to his civil rights predecessor. Somehow, between the date and the location, Abraham Lincoln (as a "conservative" republican "forefather") and Martin Luther King, Jr. (as an "anti-establishment" protester) became Beck's unlikely - and unwitting - accomplices in what was, in effect, an "orgy of self-promotion" (this quote from Christian Science Monitor, no less) bouyed by cheap one-liners about "restoring American honor," "turning back to God and Jesus," and "supporting the troops."

My full report (including some audio clips) of what I observed after 2.5 hours of wandering the crowd and listening to several speakers, country music bands, and lots - LOTS - of God references, will be posted in the upcoming days.

For now, I'd like to briefly address the "divine providence" argument of August 28. But rather than most other media orgs, I'm not focusing on the MLK link. This appears to be, by all accounts, 100% accidental on the part of the organizers. While that certainly makes them seem tragically uneducated in American history - a doubly-sad fact considering Mr. Beck's recent "Beck University" video blogs to help "reteach" American history with a focus on the "contributions of Conservative values" like McCarthyism and Jesus - in truth, focusing on the Beck-MLK link only adds credibility to what, in reality, is meaningless.

In other words, by scheduling the event on August 28, Beck - unwittinglying - made it more of a statement than he intended to. Rather than credit him for such a clever turn, I'd like to look at how he originally justified his selection of the date. OF course, saying that you had an open weekend and wanted to get a paid gig doesn't do much to motivate your fans, so he needed something else. Not knowing about the MLK connection, he went Biblical, and found a passage in Romans 8:28 that he felt called him - personally - to hold a rally at the Lincoln memorial on 8-28-10 (no idea where the "10" came from - seems likely to me that he could just as easily have been 5 years late or 50 years early on this "God message").


I will use the New American Bible, which I cannot be sure this is the same bible that Mr. Beck was quoting. Though raised a Roman Catholic, for whom the NAB is a common translation, Glenn Beck is a converted and active Mormon, and his bedside copy may read differently.

The cited verse reads, "We know that all things work for good for those who love God, who are called according to His purpose."

Pretty generic, frankly. If Mr. Beck places himself in the category of "those who love God," as he certainly spends lots of time proclaiming, then I can see how he could use this passage to suggest that holding a rally on August 28 (any year) - if done by him - should "work for good" assuming that what he is doing is "according to His purpose." In other words, if we assume that God wants white people to pay less taxes, then he should logically make Glenn Beck's 8-28 rally work out well.

The number of problems with this facetious argument are manifold, but rather than poke fun at them, I'll take a different track. Here are some alternative 8:28 passages that Mr. Beck could have chosen, and what they might have meant for the "divine providence" of his event:


Leviticus 8:28 - "When he had received them back, Moses burned them with the holocaust on the altar as the ordination offering, a sweet-smelling oblation to the Lord."

Beck didn't sponsor any book burnings at the 8-28 event, but clearly if he gets his way most 20th century American text books will be going the way of the Pyre. How dare they not villify the anti-christ Woodrow Wilson!


Joshua 8:28 - "then Joshua destroyed the place by fire, reducing it to an everlasting mound of ruins, as it remains today."

Except for the secret desire to one day rule the country from his own throne, I get the impression that Glenn Beck wouldn't mind seeing DC go down in righteous flames a la Gamorrah or 1900s Chicago. His rhetoric makes clear, though, that if anything apocalyptic did happen to DC, it would only be because God wanted it to happen. Puts a new spin on the Pentagon 9/11 attack.

Matthew 8:28 - "When he came to the other side, to the territory of the Gadarenes, two demoniacs who were coming from the tombs met him. They were so savage that no one could travel by that road."

'Demoniac' is an odd translation, more commonly phrased as "demon-possessed men." That is, they were not 'demons' per say, but regular men who had become overtaken by evil spirits. If modern-day 'evil spirits' are the lurking vestiges of racism, intolerance and attitudes of religious superiority, then this passage may be spot on. There were so many of these 'demoniacs' on the Mall on 8-28 that they had to - ironically - close down Independence (avenue).


Luke 8:28 - "When he saw Jesus, he cried out and fell down before him; in a loud voice he shouted, "What have you to do with me, Jesus, son of the Most High God? I beg you, do not torment me!"

One of the most disturbing things about listening to Glenn Beck speak is his obvious self-importance. The histrionics, the sudden tears and long 'introspective' pauses, all bely just how "consecrated" he believes his every word and action to be. He routinely plays the "underdog" card, and on many occasions talks - at length - about his own personal sacrifice and suffering - usually over watching the nation he loves rot and decay, certainly not through his own physical discomfort or poverty. I doubt that Glenn Beck sees himself as a modern day Jesus, but I know that he plays upon his audiences pro-Jesus affinity to better position himself by association. So I say unto him, "What have you to do with me, Glenn Beck, you of the Most High Self-Opinion? I beg you, do not torment me (further)!"

Mormon 8:28 (Book of Mormon) - "Pray for them, my son, that repentance may come unto them. But behold, I fear lest the Spirit hath ceased striving with them; and in this part of the land they are also seeking to put down all power and authority which cometh from God; and they are denying the Holy Ghost."

Indeed, the Tea Partiers are looking to put down all power and authority, not from God but from the very same founding documents of this country's Constitution that they claim to uphold. Handouts about rewriting the 14th amendment (the one that ended Slavery and guaranteed universal citizenship) were one of many examples from the 8-28 rally. That's not just Conservative, repealing anti-slavery legislation is remarkably reactionary. As one DC blogger commented, in reference to the Rally organizers advising attendees not to venture onto the Green metro line for reasons of personal safety, they would have come all the way to Washington and not been able to see their beloved document in person, as it is stored in the National Archives on the Green line.

Alma 8:28 (Book of Mormon) - "And it came to pass that the people did wax more gross in their iniquities"

Amen to that. Between calls for an end to social services and "we support Arizona" anti-immigration T-shirts, the rally was a focal point of truly gross sentiments of American iniquity.

More to come from the field,

Weber
::(lame)Texpatriot

Monday, August 23, 2010

United We Stand

While the content (and timbre) of this blog may recently have skewed toward politically indignant and/or disparagingly unemployed, it's perhaps worth noting that not everything in my life is as dark, dramatic or depressing. Having abundant free time in a new town does offer a variety of new opportunities and experiences, and while it may not be fiscally responsible to indulge in such chicanery often, one must be allowed to live a little even amidst a career transition.

Coming to DC in the summer affords ample outlets for such revelry, and while the more obscure (and gratuitous) tend to be most up-my-alley, The District also offers other experiences which are equally worth their down payment. For example:

As I have alluded to in an earlier post, professional sports were not a prominent part of my childhood. Oklahoma is a hard part of the country to characterize - neither "Western," (CA, NV) "Southern," (GA, AL) "Mid-Western" (OH, IL) nor "Southwestern" (AZ, NM) - it is an equally nebulous zone of professional sport affiliation. For Football, we tended to go Cowboys, mostly because Dallas was 'a mere' 5 hours away, and because the only other professional franchise city within a comparable distance - Kansas City - was universally bad at every sport. Our other pro sport affiliations were most commonly based on who had the coolest uniforms, particular marquee players (seriously, who hates air Jordan?), or the teams with which we had the most success on various NES video games (how else could I be a Blackhawks fan?).

While these connections made the respective sport more interesting to watch, loyalty was not guaranteed - even over the course of a season. As long as one was willing to brave the initial heckling any self-respecting brother would pile on in the event of an about-face, one's "favorite team" could change as often as one's favorite sugar-coated breakfast cereal.
All of this goes a long way to say just this: home-town fandom - the kind you cannot escape on the bad years except by playing ostrich, but which tastes all the sweeter if/when it eventually pays out - was really not something I had experienced, or even witnessed, growing up.

In moving to San Antonio for college, I unwittingly entered a city with not only a professional sports team, but exactly one sports team on which the populace can focus their enthusiasm. It being a boon era in Spurs history didn't hurt. Every spring, Go Spurs Go was painted on major buildings, across car bumpers, and splashed on solid-color T-shirts throughout town. This was fandom. This was home-town proud.

After graduation, when I really became a San Antonio resident for the first time, I began to slowly partake in the festival, but there was one problem - I don't like basketball. It's OK to play, but as a spectator sport, I just check out. Sacrilege in SpursAntonio.

The move to NY cleansed the stigma to an extent - the fact that I didn't care about the Knicks was in no way abnormal for a New Yorker. Yankees, Mets, Giants, Jets - it was all too much to choose from, too much effort to follow.

But DC offers the middle-ground - a buffet of clear options in the sport of one's choosing (sorry, Hockey). Redskins, Nationals, Wizards, Capitals... and DC United.

One of my brothers lives in London, and over several years has developed a true obsession with Chelsea FC in the best traditions of English Premier League football. While the remarkable success Chelsea has enjoyed in recent years is certainly enviable, what I noticed most in visiting them is that clarity of purpose that comes with choosing a team to support and committing to the roller-coaster such fandom elicits. Good games and bad, horrible calls and well-earned cards, coaching changes and player trades - these are all followed in rabid detail, but ultimately do not matter. For they are supporting Chelsea Blue. More than a collection of talented athletes and matching equipment, it is a tradition - in the technical sense of unofficial transfer of practices and customs among those with a shared heritage. In this case, that means certain fight songs, jersey designs and scarves among those willing to associate around a football club.

This to me was alluring, and I began investigating my options in my most recently-adopted "hometown." The Wizards were out for the same reason as the much more venerable Spurs, and while the Nationals have all the down-and-out underdog charm I crave, baseball's frenetic schedule (and general Yanks-BoSox domination) does little to entice. The Redskins - with recently acquired Donovan McNabb and practical franchise-founder Clinton Portis - offer a real possibility, but the point of having a home team is that you have the chance to actually see them play in person. With 'cheap seats' starting at $45, and those not always available, I'll be cheering against the rest of the NFC East from my sofa.

That leaves Major League Soccer's DC United. League champions in the inaugural '96 season, with follow-up trophies in 1997, 1999, and 2004, they even have some international success. In short, the Red-and-Black have as long and as proud a heritage as possible State-side. But recent seasons have been less glamorous, and 2010 is rapidly approaching abhorrent. As of Aug 19, they were 3-14-3 (W-L-T), at the bottom of not only their division, but indeed the worst record in all of MLS. The LA Galaxy lead the league with 43 pts; DC United has 12. Their goal differential is an astounding -20 in a sport that is notoriously low-scoring. Last week they fired their head coach, and rather than bothering to find a replacement, promoted a recently-retired former player, Ben Olsen, into the job as an interim to end the season. If Disney were going to make a plucky underdog movie about MLS, United would be their humorously inept protagonist.

I of course am thrilled at the chance to get in my 'hard knocks' years right off the bat, and have taken to learning the lineup with aplomb. Not only do they sport a clever looking kit - black or white with red accents and a strong VW logo mid-chest, game-day seats cost only $23. Playing in the colossal (by soccer standard) 45,000 seat RFK Stadium, former home of the Redskins and the much-maligned Senators, there is hardly a bad seat since it rarely reaches 20% capacity.

Since moving to DC in June, I've been watching and waiting for the ideal chance to watch a game live. Several of my new DC friends are general soccer fans, if not necessarily United supporters, but differing schedules had precluded an outing. Fortuitously, this all changed on August 22, when my friend Michael and I eased into our chairs 8 rows behind the corner flag in the 1/3 full Section 115. The main supporter groups - La Barra Brava and the Screaming Eagles - were situated across the field from us, but we were not without our share of large drums and avid fans. One fellow who kept trying to entice the crowd into song wore black and red face paint and jersey 66 - "Darth Hooligan" - written on the back.

The match of the day was against DC's closest rival - the Philadelphia Union (full match recap here). Not only is "Pee-You" the physically closest team to DC in MLS, they also happen to be the newest (first game in March 2010) and now the second-worst team (behind you-know-who) with a record of 4-10-5. In the two team's only prior meeting, Philly's debut home-opener on April 10, Union defeated United 3-2. Still, if DC had any hope of ending its 5-game MLS losing streak, the Philly youngsters represented their best chance.

Philly's attack focused almost entirely on the French magician (and former Seattle Sounder) in purple shoes, Sebastien Le Toux (who Does sound like a Disney villain). In response, DC boasted a more rounded squad, with a talented young goal keeper - Bill Hamid - who came up through United's U-18 academy, as well as "senior" players like Danny Allsopp, Santino Quaranta, and the highly-decorated Jaime Moreno.

In addition to the Navy-and-Gold and Red-and-Black on the field, nature provided a 'third force' to the unfolding events on the pitch. At the 30' mark, a sudden downpour rolled over RFK stadium, and while the crowd quickly retracted into the (entirely open) covered seats in the second sections, on the field play continued.


United opened the game by marching straight down field and taking an early, if not especially impressive, shot on goal. It was surprisingly authoritative from a team with a brand new coach, and not at all as desperate as the nothing-to-lose record might suggest. Most of the half featured DC making strong attacks from the midfield, with only a few crosses, and no less than 4 shots on goal. The 0-0 deadlock was nearly broken in the 7th minute when Le Toux drilled a shot from close range, but Hamid's fingers held strong. In minute 22, a nice cross from Andy Najar, combined with an awkward defensive move by Philly, put the ball at Allsopp's feet not 10' from the goal. The finish was fine, and DC went up 1-0.

The action continued without the water seeming to make much difference, but the remainder of the half was a dead-lock possession game. The second half was much drier, but the pattern essentially the same. In the 62nd minute, another Philly snafu in midfield gave DC a 3-4 break, and they took full advantage. Najar's beautiful cross at the top of the box was even more beautifully stepped over by another DC striker before coming awkwardly to Allsopp's outside left. The control, precision, and speed of the resulting contact was incredible, and the giant United victory flag made a second lap around the field.

DC controlled possession in the remaining minutes, but never gave up its relentless attack. Another amazing airborne effort was called offsides, and the game ended in an ebullient win for DC, their 4th league win all season.

In all, the game doesn't mean much in the grand order of things. With only 9 games left in the season, only Disney could dream up a United comeback. The giant they slew was no Goliath, but the goals made were done with skill and authority. Defense was strong - or at least stronger than the error-prone Union - and importantly it marked a turnaround, however brief, from the previous coach Onalfo's backslide. As the game-day program admitted, "playoff hopes seem distant for both teams..." I believe the correct term is "mathematically impossible."

Still, you've got to root for the home team, for if they don't win it's a shame.

Cause it's One- Two- Three Goals, you're out in this 'ole ball game.

Weber
::(lame)Texpatriot

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Sound, Fury and Baseless Protestation

Living in New York City, I've been hearing rumblings about the proposal by prominent New York businessmen (who happened to be Muslim) to build a $100 million facility in lower Manhattan for quite some time. But back in the spring, these reports were always greeted with an air of "who cares" if not out right celebration - while the 9/11 aircraft may have only flattened the WTC, the ensuing business flight from the neighborhood has been slow to bounce back. Adding a major fitness/ cultural/ arts center seemed to most of us like an excellent compliment to the 9-years-late WTC memorial and reconstruction efforts.

As this local issue gained more distant headlines, business competition mingled with blatant intolerance to raise a sudden ruckus over something as ridiculous as historical preservation and zoning laws. The more a simple matter of city red tape turned into a national-spotlight debate, the more and more I've heard about the"ethics" and "unamericanism" of the so-called "9/11 Mosque." For a time, I let this all pass. Bigots will be bigots, and while the ignorant should be educated, it's not always a task I feel up to when facing such tidal waves of ill-informed opinion. In short, I was quite happy to sit back and let the crazies spew their hate-speak, trusting that more rational heads (and the founding laws of our country) would prevail.

But in recent weeks, a local zoning non-issue has turned into a toxic national political debate, and I realized something profound - unlike many of the issues that divide our country in which both sides have valid reasons for their own impassioned differences (ex: abortion, gun control, death penalty, etc.), the argument against the legal construction of an Islamic-based community center on property legally purchased by an accredited non-profit organization is entirely baseless. On the grounds of New York state law, the principles of the US Constitution, and the simple morality of equal treatment without prejudice, no argument could be sustained in favor of such an unlawful prohibition. What there is - and apparently in droves - is fear, hate, intolerance and ignorance washing over our public opinion like a tsunami.

I have had the displeasure of being exposed to an extremely high level of mass media coverage in the past week due to some tedious temp receptionist assignments, and I must admit to being shocked not only by the woefully poor diversity of the coverage provided, but by the blatant misinformation, convenient omissions, and willful misdirection employed by pundits and politicos from across the political spectrum.

On Monday, in response to CNN anchor Rick Sanchez's prompt that - legally - the Muslim community of New York has every right to build this center in the location they've chosen, a writer from Red State Blog quipped, "My point is not if they have the Right, it's if the should [be allowed to build it]."

That's right. A super-conservative, small government, gun-toting champion of private property and Laissez-Faire business policy formally states that while it is 100% legal to build this Islamic center - there is no grounds upon which the government could block it - that the government should step in and block a private development project - with the only imaginable motivation being intentional abrogration of the 1st amendment freedom of religious practice.

The next 3 minutes involved the CNN talking head repeating things with the phrase, "This is about Freedom!" and the Red States blogger disagreeing by repeating things about, "The good of America."

So common sense is clearly out, and has been replaced by common talking points that are meaningless and serve only to prop up the otherwise root-less house-of-cards "logic" used to deny a group of US citizens their "inalienable" right to the free practice of their private property and religious rights.

But first, two clarifications:
  1. The structure in question is not a mosque. It is an Islamic cultural center, called Park 51 - more akin to a YMCA or a JCC - that will have a prayer room incorporated into its design, as do most US universities, military bases, and airports.
  2. It's not at the World Trade Center, it is near it. Park 51 will be built at 51 Park Place, yes, approximately 2 blocks away from the NW corner of the WTC footprint. While 2 blocks might be close in most of America, I assure you, in NYC it's practically a world away. It's not even within line-of-sight. The blocks between them are full of such non-patriotic edifices as the Equinox Sports Club and the University of Phoenix.

With that out of the way, the offending talking points I which to address are as follows:
  1. The World Trade center is "sacred" ground.
  2. The current buildings at 51 Park Place are historic and deserve preservation.
  3. Even if they have the right to build this center, they should not be allowed to do so.

I want to address these in turn, because when the real merits of these talking points is brought to light, it becomes crystal clear that 99% of the "arguments" against the construction of this community center are baseless. The remaining 1% - that many Americans blame all Muslims for the attack on 9/11 because they are not educated enough to distinguish between a small sect of radical extremist terrorists and the largest single religious group on the planet - is not really a problem that the Islamic center needs to fix; that one is on the rest of us.



Talking Point #1 - The WTC site is "sacred ground."

No "sacred" site in the history of the world has seen as much sacrilege, secular pride, or irreverence in the immediate aftermath of its sanctification as the WTC "crater" that will (someday soon?) be the 9/11 memorial. For 9 years the site went to waste, filled with shifting amounts of leftover debris, rainwater runoff, and various eternally-parked construction vehicles. Plans were stalled, changed, redrafted, and squabbled over in a manner that would make even the most corrupt medieval Pope blush.

And speaking of the Pope, did he consecrate the WTC site on his visit, as a location of religious importance to all Catholics? Or the Protestants? What would it take for a site - any site - to be declared "sacred" in such a manner as it would be respected by all US citizens regardless of their denomination? What single other site in the US is "sacred?" Not Gettysburg. Not Independence Hall. Not the Japanese internment camps.

The WTC is a site of sacrifice - of innocent death metered out by a merciless enemy. It is a place of memorial, as we remember those who needlessly died, and yes, it is a place of patriotism in the odd way that so many fields of battle and death become immortalized in our perception of what it means to be an American. The Alamo is a good parallel. Those who died had either renounced their US citizenship, or never had any, but their death defending a valueless outpost for no strategic advantage has gone down in our history as an adage about how "Americans" defend their "values " to the death.

And that's what the WTC is - it's a place of national memory-identity based in memorializing the dead. That is important, and deserves considerable respect - more than it's been shown - but that doesn't make it a place of religious importance, pilgrimage, or power. That doesn't, in short, make it "sacred." It's a simple matter of misuse of vocabulary, no less brilliant than the "refudiate" episode.

And if it's not sacred to one religious group, how could the presence of another religious infringe? If it is, instead, a place of patriotic memory, then only the presence of anti-Americanism could be offensive - and that is not the case.


Talking Point #2 - the Historical Preservation maneuver

This was obviously a desperate attempt by either business competitors or self-styled 'patriots' to block the Islamic center project through bureaucratic red tape. Mayor Bloomberg chased this phantom around City Hall for a few weeks before taking the initiative and inspecting the dilapidated ruins himself. What he found was an old building - not unlike any of the other structures in lower Manhattan that are routinely leveled to make room for the next Old Navy, Starbucks, or corporate megalith. On August 3rd, after carefully reviewing the case, and with cameras rolling, the NYC Landmarks Preservation Commission voted 9 - 0 against granting the building any protections as an historic landmark. It was, in their opinion, not historically remarkable in any way, and certainly not up to the standards necessary to block urban renewal efforts in an important commercial center.


Talking Point #3 - The "Moral" Question

This is the knife upon which the mugwumps in this issue are cutting their throats (I'm glaring at Nevada). Unable to provide one single reason why the Park 51 project cannot legally proceed, they seek to argue that it should not proceed, employing a range of feigned compassion, moralist rhetoric, or bombastic patriotism (thank you, Sarah Palin, for lowering the bar). Each of these arguments are founded in two assumptions - both not only untrue, but in fact the opposite of accurate.

Assumption 1 - Any Islamic presence near Ground Zero either "dishonors the fallen" or is a "victory for the terrorists." This would only be true if: 1) All 1.5 billions Muslims in the world support the acts of two dozen brainwashed al-Qaeda suicide bombers; 2) it was the stated objective of al-Qaeda to integrate with American lifestyles and adopt the local culture of co-ed prayer, modern bathing suits, and religious toleration; 3) the people who died on 9/11 were uniformly Muslim-haters, for whom such a presence would be a personal affront.

In case it isn't obvious, not a single one of these three assumptions are even remotely close to being true. In fact, the opposite is true in all three cases.


Assumption 2 - (Lower) Manhattan is currently devoid of any Muslim presence, and must be kept that way in perpetuity so as not to "lose ground" to our "enemy" - apparently Islam, rather than terroritst.

Not only are there 2 other mosques already near the WTC site, they've been there longer than the WTC itself. As the NYTimes points out, the Masjid Manhattan (which is known to lean toward a conservative interpretation of Islam, but nothing nearly as radical as the Jihadis) was founded in 1970 and is a mere 600 feet further away from the WTC than the proposed center. That's right - this entire battle is not about whether or not there can be a Mosque near the WTC site, but whether a newer mosque can be built 600 ft closer. That's about 1/9 of a mile, just to be clear. One and a half (short) blocks.


Oh, and not all Muslims in the world are our "enemy." We were once fighting an ill-begun "War on Terror," but at no point did we declare "War on Islam," despite Huntingdon's ridiculous re-appropriation of the Clash of Civilizations argument (scholarship note: the entire "proof" that Christianity and Islam have an inevitable cultural hostility was originally conceived by the venerable colonial historian Bernard Lewis in the 1950s, only it wasn't about religion. Lewis coined the term as a way to explain how Russians and Americans could never cooperate, and how we would - for all time - seek the annihilation of each other because of our entirely incompatible cultural values. In the 1990s, Lewis revised his opinion to apply to "Christendom" and "Islam." Samuel P. Huntington picked up on this and translated it into a prediction of near-apocalyptic 'civiliazation war.' Neither scholar is especially respected for their logic or record of successful prediction. The definitive refutation is by the renowned Edward Said in an article called "the Clash of Ignorance.")

The Masjid Manhattan website, for example, explicitly states the following:
"Masjid Manhattan and its members condemn any type of terrorist acts. In particular, the attacks of 9/11 where non-Muslims as well as Muslims lost their lives. Islam always invites for peace; therefore Islam is not responsible for the actions of some ill individuals who, independently from what Islam advocates, have hatred against humanity. As Muslims and as Americans, we will never forget the beloved ones who perished that terrible day of September 11, 2001."
In fact, many Muslims were killed on 9/11 as they went about their daily jobs as federal employees in the WTC. Some Muslims are even so vehemently against the actions and ideology of the Jihadis that they spend their life promoting the US image abroad and touting the US as a champion of religious tolerance; a place where Muslims can enjoy all the same rights and priveledges as everyone else.

One such Muslim is Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. He is a Columbia grad with an MS in Plasma Physics who has devoted his life to Sufi Islam - a difficult-to-describe alternative interpretation of Islam that focuses on inner peace and social harmony. Sufis are considered heretics by Islamic fundamentalists like al-Qaeda, and as such hated with a passion that even exceeds the venomous anti-American fervor with which we are familiar. Despite the personal danger Imam Feisal has gone on 4 international missions at the invitation of the US State Department as a goodwill ambassador, spreading his positive assessment of US freedoms and tolerance to other Muslims through the Middle East and Asia.

How ironic, then, that one of the most active anti-terror pro-US Muslim advocates of religious tolerance is himself the victim of American intolerance because of his religion. Imam Feisal is one of the chief architects and proponents of the new Islamic cultural center in New York.



What is most disturbing to me is the selectivity over the past decade with which we, as Americans, have become comfortable applying the constitutional guarantees. As a grade schooler I learned that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and pursuit of Happiness." Those same inalienable rights were further spelled out in the Bill of Rights, and these included rights of privacy, free speech, legal counsel, religious practice, etc. The funny thing is, when I asked my teacher the definition of "inalienable," she told me that they were rights which could never be denied anyone - for any reason. They were endowed by "the creator" on all mankind - every human being walking the planet. Our founding fathers formally declared the existence of certain rights that belong to all living people, regardless of religion or citizenship (and I think we did them one better by - eventually - adding race and gender to this list).

As I grew older, I understood that there could be mitigating circumstances - jail time, for example - when some of these rights could be restricted, but even then only within clearly defined limits. While many of the rights were specific to citizenship - like voting - many others seemed to express human universality. I was shocked, then, when the decision was made during the Bush administration that non-citizens were exempt from what I understood to be basic human rights. Torture (by name or not), privacy invasion, and legal limbo all became de jur abuses that could never be enacted against a US citizen, but which could be repeatedly inflicted on non-citizens without remorse. Then suddenly, US citizens - especially those of the Muslim faith or Arab decent - were subject to the same abuses without much more social protest than the batting of an eye. Apparently, the rights bequested to us by the founding fathers were indeed quite alienable, and easily so.

I bring this up because I see in the current event yet a further step down this dangerous disgusting path. There is no reason to block this project. There is no legal means to block it. They have every right imaginable to do exactly what they plan. And yet there are calls by US citizens - even policy makers - to do just that. To override the basic laws of our country - of our society - in what I can only attest to misplaced blame and ignorance-based retribution.

the only good news I take out of this issue is that - this time - the directive to trample the constitution, willfully break our own laws, and engage in morally corrupt actions is coming from the fringes, and not from the upper echelons of government power. This time, the people entrusted with protecting the constitutions aren't the ones trying to subvert it.

But the volume we're hearing from the fringes, and the influence that they're being allowed to have over mainstream politicians and our reductionist mass media is more than disheartening - it is disappointing.

I have long said, in respect to the ups and downs our country experiences, that America usually gets what she deserves - for better and for worse. But do we really deserve to bankrupt our own moral heritage?

I hope not, and greatly anticipate being impressed with the open-mindedness of American public opinion when this is all over. Plus, their plans look like a beautiful building, and New York could really use fewer broken down warehouses, and more vibrant cultural centers. In fact, it might even make a nice complement to the WTC site as a tourist draw.

All this flap about Park 51 has actually sparked in me a desire for something even more radical. What I'd really like to see is not an Islamic athletic club located 2 blocks away from the WTC, but instead a full-blown mosque, church, synagoge, and various other temples right at the center of the new memorial. I want to see hundreds - thousands - of local and tourist faithful offering prayers to the God of their choosing that the terrible events of 9/11 never be repeated - anywhere - and that those who foster hatred and intolerance be wiped aside by the better aspects of human compassion and mutual respect. I want to hear a khutba (sermon) about the blasphemy of killing innocents echoing by loudspeaker all the way from Times Square to Battery Park. I want a living testament to the ideals of religious freedom and the conquest of moral fiber over ignorance and fear.

More than even that, I want to live in an America that would support that kind of project - an America where people uphold Freedom of Religion even for religions other than their own. The row caused over the Park 51 project only demonstrates how far our America is from the one I want to live in.


Weber
::(lame)Texpatriot

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

The Fixer

One area in which I have struggled in my on-going job search is the quest to "tag" myself with a clear, identifiable, and alluring label that adequately describes the depth and breadth of my skills, abilities and experiences. I send my resume out into the HR abyss, listing such former jobs as Radio Station Manager, Jazz Book Publisher, and Bishkek Journalism Intern, and I don't hear much in response. Some companies are kind enough to inform me that, while I am a qualified applicant, their applicant pool is very competitive, etc.

Just yesterday I received an especially blunt response from one prospective temp employer (in the field of international development, no less) who needed someone to do presentation layout - a field in which I have quite a bit of experience, albeit between the lines.
"Radio? Oh no, that's not the kind of skills we need at all."
While disheartening in itself, this shouldn't be taken as apocalyptically as I initially did - this was only a temp job. They didn't care about 'career transitions' or 'diverse abilities,' they wanted a generic office temp, and while I hany many of the same skills, my resume is anything but generic.

But this only demonstrates how severe my labeling problem can be. In discussing this difficulty with one particularly enthusiast uncle, he explained it to me thusly (paraphrased): "Ryan, you're a fixer. You fix things, and it doesn't matter what you're doing or what obstacles you're going to face, you will find a way to make things work."

The enthusiasm is appreciated, if somewhat over-stated. However for some time I have used a similar description rooted more strongly in my Boy Scout background by referring to myself with a "Pocket-knife" analogy. Whatever need may arise, I will find a way to equip myself with the right tool to get the job done - or barring that, I will ad hoc with what I have on hand. My reference recalls a 'MacGuyver' figure - the Richard Deane Anderson version, not the live-action Mark Hamil cameo "Guyver" manga - but perhaps a less literal interpretation might fit with another fictional character, the Pretender. This child prodigy super-genius was able to instantly teach himself whatever skills he needed to be an instant expert in any field for one day - Surgeon on Monday, Sculptor on Tuesday, Wall Street Broker Wednesday, etc. I'm no super genius, nor do I ever attain full expertise, and on top of all that, "Pretender" is a rather poor lure when trying to attract an employer's eye.

I'm grappling with how to describe a prospective employee (myself and those of similar ilk) who have especially strong independent/ creative problem-solving abilities, who demonstrate not only diverse talents, but the ability to rapidly assimilate new skills and adapt to changing demands and shifting deadlines/priorities. Someone who thrives in fast-paced environments, but isn't constricted to reflexive action or short-term projects.

For now, let's go with "Fixer."

But let's be clear - It's not easy to be a Fixer, nor always appropriate. Not only does the title require a high degree of intellectual dynamism, it also demands a strong enthusiasm for mundane details and affinity for elbow-grease. Academia is no place for a Fixer. Likewise, unlike our friend the Pretender, the Fixer would not make a good psychologist, actor, school teacher, accountant or lawyer, just to name a few. While there may be cross-over, these professions require specialized training and in-field experience. The very core of the Fixer is the ability able to cross disciplinary boundaries, bridge skill sets, and hybridize industrial knowledge. There can be no Department of Fixerology as the Fixer must, by definition, be able to cultivate new skills as needed, often on the Fixer's own initiative, and as often as not through self-teaching, rather than formal training or professional development.

So who needs a Fixer?

Any employer that needs a worker who can manage budgets, projects, logistics and timelines. Anyone who expects their position to entail specialized software and/or complex equipment. Anyone who needs a take-charge individual to 'grip-it and rip-it.'

But there is a catch. While it may be desirable to hire a Fixer, and proportionally difficult to be a Fixer, it is not especially tricky to claim to be a Fixer, even if your abilities don't in fact measure up. Such a deception cannot last long in a real office environment, but on a 2-D resume it is almost impossible to refute or confirm. The very diversity, lack of specialization, and action-oriented nature of the Fixer shows up on a single-sided piece of paper indistinguishable from the Fixer's arch-nemesis - the Slacker.

Is it any wonder then, that jobs don't advertise for Fixers? they look for 'experienced specialists' and those with 'administrative capacity.' What they need is a fixer, and either they don't realize it, they don't want to invite Slackers, or they simply lack the lingo.

And let's be honest, "Fixer" is not an ideal term. It describes not a quality or even a method, but a result. It is an adverb, not an adjective, and it describes not what the applicant is, but what he can do.

So let's posit the inevitable question: What do you call an unemployed Fixer? A Fixer with nothing to fix? A frozen action verb?

At best, the Fixer is in stasis. At worst, the Fixer ceases to exist in some way.

so what does an unemployed Fixer do?

Does he write blog after blog about his situation?

Or does he Fix it?





Weber
::(lame)Texpatriot

Friday, August 13, 2010

Job Hunt DC

Here is a conversation that I have 2-3 times per week with each of three entirely separate, non-automated human beings:

"Hello, I'm calling to confirm my availability for work every day this week and check for any open assignments."

"Great to hear from you. We don't have anything open right now, but I will call you if something comes up. Keep checking in."

So, to be clear, if an assignment comes up, they will call me. But only if I keep calling them.

This is the bizarre chess match of Temp agencies in Washington, DC. AS I discussed earlier, temp work in the District is unlikes its mega-politan counsin in the Apple, where the critical mass of mindless tasks collide with a shiftless class of generic professionals in a blinding explosion of opportunity and tedium. While DC thrives on the type of meaningless bureaucracy and legalese that feeds this chain reaction, it also provides and ever-expanding fuel source of government employees and starry-eyed 21-year-olds willing to do the most debasing tasks in pursuit of connections.

Getting ahead in the swampy wasteland of DC Temping - and employment in general - requires you to follow 2 golden rules:
1) Put yourself out there.
2) Look the part.

These guidelines are a little more complex than they sound. 'Putting yourself out there' means attending as many professional and social events as possible, and working hard to learn about who you meet, what they do, and how they could help you. Details about the job you're looking for and your "unique talents and extensive professional experience" cannot merely be slipped into casual conversation, but must be made the focus, regardless of the context. Watching the mascot 'Presidents Race' at an MLB Nationals game is a perfectly adequate time to mention the work you did on the 2009 Kyrgyz Presidential Elections, for example.

But be warned: this avalanche of information is no accidental tsunami - concurrent with telling a crowd of strangers all about why they should hire/recommend you is the much dicier game of what not to say. Political opinions are out - at least until you establish the bias of your party. College stories are another obvious omission. But important too are more subtle deflections of truth. I may be unemployed for months, but in conversation I am, at most, "between positions," and even then all further details must be scrapped and the subject rapidly changed.

'Looking the part,' rule #2, is no less a Janus. Your goal is to appear as clean-cut, polished and confident as every other identical suit-and-tie clone with a template resume to match, but yet somehow to 'stand out' through your 'intangibles.' Festive Jerry Garcia ties and creative fonts are like bringing a switch blade to the nuclear holocaust. Somewhere between the single-spaced lines of your 12 pt. Times New Roman cover letter must lie the key to unlocking the majesty and power of your candidacy, but these must remain hidden in the forest of formality and cryptography a la the DaVinci Code.

















But one must do what one must do.

I was especially excited, then, when I read an ad on Craigslit for a "Job Fair" taking place downtown from 9am - noon that same day. Reading the ad at 10:13, but knowing the preeminence of Rule #1, I had a dangerously quick shave, threw on my suit, printed off a dozen fresh resumes, and was out the door by 10:39. The event advertisement mentioned open positions in the fields of public policy, international development, and the non-profit sector.

The truth of the situation became clear when I stepped into the lobby. Every nook, cranny, flat surface and decorative ottoman was occupied by 20-, 30- and even 40-somethings in their sharpest pinstripes, pointed collars, and glistening leather shoes. Despite their best efforts, they were having trouble living up to the professionalism of their attire as they hunched over too-small clip boards and filled out job history forms, personal information questionaires, I-9 tax forms and even a grammar test with the office-supplied cheap bic pens.

This was no "job fair" - - there were no jobs! - - it was a temp recruitment drive, refilling their stables with new meat in anticipation of whatever future assignments may be coming over the next several months. There were no employers in the building, only "account executives" who thought they might be contacted by public policy, non-profit, international development firms in the future to satisfy their short-term/ non-career needs.

Adding (unintentional) insult to (unavoidable) injury, one account exec. took a glance around the room and chortled, "Hey, it's the Secret Service in here!" I do see the humor, from her perspective, of a dozen plus intelligent, well-dressed and serious adults sitting around silently in a cramped lobby waiting on forces beyond their control. But from the other side of the dime, I witnessed a huddled mass of human beings striving to bury any traces of their anxiety and financial insecurity behind the aforementioned MIB facade. The cinematic convention of revealing aliens or grotesque magical creatures underneath ordinary exteriors never seemed more appropriate.

That particular outing was not an astonishing success, nor has it yet led to anything substantial. Still, refer to Rule #1.

Some of my other temp efforts have produced slightly more tangible results. Recently I got a receptionist gig that paid me $10 an hour, and all I had to do was sit behind a giant desk and redirect about 3-4 phone calls per hour, each totaling less than 1 minute. In other words, for the actual work I did, I was paid about $2.50 per minute. That's better than a skeevy late night phone service.... Or so I've heard.

Point is, they let me read up on Kyrgyz news, fill out job applications, work on my Ellington side project, and watch CNN on the lobby flatscreen - ok, that last part is less than ideal. Nothing like spending 4 hours watching continuous CNN coverage to really reduce my respect for that organization. I used to apologize for them - 24 hours is a lot of time to fill - but no more. I still think it's the best TV news channel, but I'm resetting the bar to the lowest possible notch.

But I digress...

Temping has been very tough, with not a single assignment in 1.5 months of constant checking, 2-3 times per week. But it is also looking up. I've had 3 assignments in the past week. None are very illustrious, nor do any of them have potential beyond 1-day assignments. So it isn't all smiley faces and cupcakes. But it's no razor blade in the caramel apple, either.

Weber
::(lame)Texpatriot

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Universal Cover Letter of Ryan

If a double-edged sword presents a conundrum because it cuts in both good and bad directions, then unemployment most surely be the scimitre equivalent of a tricorne. It can be good, bad, and worse, all simultaneously. The obvious benefit of having no professional responsibility, and thus ample free-time, is narrowly outweighed by the crushing boredom and futility that being truly under-employed/engaged brings, but the complete lack of income that accompanies this tug-and-pull of empty hours is a source of constant concern with only the briefest interludes of feigned amnesia.

I certainly am not the first of my generation - or any generation - to rue the injustice of being able-bodied but under-utilized. Nor does 2 months of job hunting after a hoity-toity graduate program entitle me to any impressive amount of gravel in my gut or badge of suffering. In any contest of "who-has-it-worse" one-ups-manship, I would be out in the first round. I might not even quality.

But on the up side of things, while my foray into the realm of depraved unemployment is still exceedingly short, uncommonly privileged, and 'depraved' only in the most ludicrous upper middle-class hyperbole possible, I do occupy the unusual position to approach my situation with a great deal more levity than the thousands (millions?) of others for whom the recent financial crisis and current job market seem abysmally dark.

And so I present, with only the mildest fear that it may one day reach an HR department, my "Cover Letter for Everyone" - the exact intersection of the details that every employer wants to hear and the mad-libs responses that I'm willing to admit. My responses are in CAPS, but you should feel free to fill in your own alternatives, as supplied or otherwise:


Human Resources
YOUR COMPANY NAME
??00 STATE NAME Avenue, Suite 200
PROBABLY NOT Washington, VA or MD 2XXXX

DAY BEFORE CLOSING, 2010


Dear SIR/ RECRUITER/ MRS. ROBINSON,

I was very excited to see on ANY WEBSITE MORE RESPECTABLE THAN CRAIGSLIST that YOUR COMPANY has recently advertised an opening for my IDEAL/ ACCEPTABLE/ FORMER position. After researching your organization and speaking with ANYONE I CAN FIND on your staff, it is clear that I am HIGHLY QUALIFIED/ QUALIFIED/ EAGER for this position, and would bring to your organization a diverse package of professional experience, practical innovation, and RELEVANT/ TOPICAL/ SUBTROPICAL expertise. As an INDUSTRY/ GLOBAL/ INTERSTELLAR leader in the field of WHATEVER FLOATS YOUR BOAT, your company attracts many qualified applicants. My candidacy, however, stands out because of my experience and success in MANAGEMENT/ TEAMWORK, excellence oral and written communication skills, and personal drive for professional success. ONE/ TWO/ AT THE MOMENT, NONE of my accomplishments demonstrate the same traits and abilities that make your EMPLOYEES/ ACCOMPLISHMENTS/ PROFIT MARGINS (among) the best in the world.

As an INTERN/ COFFEE-JOCKEY with RADIO FREE EUROPE/ WHATEVER in BISHKEK/ WHEREVER, I was expected to operate with minimal supervision and support local staff as well as international managers. My primary responsibilities included INTERNET RESEARCH/ SURVEY MONKEY/ FACEBOOK on topics of MAJOR/IF ANY interest, such as the MANAS AIRBASE/ KYRGYZ PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS/ KUMIS RECIPES. Working in this CROSS-CULTURAL/ FAST-PACED/ QUADRUPEDAL environment presented many challenges, but I was able to overcome LANGUAGE/ PERSONAL/ BARBED-WIRE barriers, and even helped BRIDGE/ FOSTER/ MATCH.COM new connections between KYRGYZ/LOCAL and INTERNATIONAL/FUNDING organizations. This experience also built upon my interest in issues relevant to YOUR COMPANY such as INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT/ ELECTIONS POLICY/ OBSCURE SEAQUEST TRIVIA. I returned with a great enthusiasm to LEARN MORE ABOUT/ EFFECT POSITIVE CHANGE IN/ FINALLY GET STARTED WITH my professional career.

YOUR COMPANY's commitment to quality work, customer satisfaction and ACCOUNTABILITY/ INTEGRITY/ GOOD EMPLOYEE BENEFITS aligns precisely with my VALUES (if Conservative org)/ PRINCIPLES (if Liberal), goals and motivation. I am EAGER/ WILLING/ DESPERATE to further discuss how YOUR COMPANY will benefit from my talents and experience, and would welcome your questions. You can reach me by PHONE/ E-MAIL/ NUDGE at your convenience. Thank you for your CONSIDERATION/ ECONOMIC OPTIMISM/ SENSE OF HUMOR.

Sincerely,

YOUR NAME HERE.


Weber
::(lame)Texpatriot

Saturday, August 7, 2010

Temp Insanity

Unemployment sucks, but some days working as a Temp isn't much better. This kind of hard-earned wisdom you would expect to come from a gristled veteran with years of experience.

In my case, it took a half-day.

While I'm looking for a permanent position in DC, the necessities of rent payments and the excesses of boredom have led me to pursue a variety of temporary employment strategies, including various Craigslist odds and ends, and no fewer than 3 different temp agencies. However, summer in DC is not the best season for temping. Much like New York, DC is a mecca for ambitious college students looking to supplement their shiny resumes with internship experience. But very unlike New York, DC barely has enough workload to keep all these idle hands busy, with the end result being that temp work dries up in the summer heat like a Saharan kiddie-pool. So after more than a month of constant calling, I had yet to receive a single work assignment.

This all changed Thursday evening, when my friendliest agency called to alert me to a one-day job doing simple data entry for a private practice lawyer they work with regularly. I was to show up for work at 10 am on Friday, dress professionally, and work until the project was completed. My employer, I was assured, was a very nice "older gentleman" who, for the remainder of this post, will go by the pseudonym Mr. Bird.

And so, on the following morning, I got properly cleaned up, made the standard Metro commute, and arrived at the designated suite in the appropriate large generic office building promptly at 9:55 am. The door was locked, but this is not entirely uncommon, and I rang the "doorbell" to get buzzed in. To no avail.

By 10:10, still standing in the hall with my messenger satchel and lunch in a plastic bag, I was beginning to worry. Out in the lobby - I could hear because of the open atrium - I heard what seemed to be an irate mid-30s African-American woman come bustling in and screaming at the security guard. Luckily, I was saved from further awkwardness by the arrival of Mr. Bird, who came out of the elevator looking slightly flustered and tried to simultaneously close his dilapidated umbrella and get the office door unlocked. He was only partially successful.

Apparently, at least at this DC law firm, Friday is synonymous with vacation. None of the three secretaries were in attendance, leaving only their sweaters wrapped around the back of their well-stuffed office chairs to greet incoming visitors. In the entire office, which must have regularly housed a dozen lawyers, only 2 other middle-aged men in suits roamed from room to room. There was a repetitive beep sounding from a back corner that echoed through the entire place - apparently they had set off the office alarm, and lacking secretaries, had no idea how to deactivate it.

Mr. Bird led me back to his office in the corner, and asked me to sit down while he booted up his computer and checked e-mail. My first clue that this was going to be a rabbit-hole kind of day was not the ghost-town office or the chirping alarm, but the crackle and tone of my childhood that Mr. Bird's computer made as he logged on to read his e-mail: it was a dial-up modem.

I sat and watched Mr. Bird check his e-mail and write a few quick responses with the chirping alarm in the background the tick-tock of his ornate antique wooden clock, carved to look like a medieval castle, sitting on the end table beside me. Turning to me, the kindly older gentleman (somewhere between a well-worn 60 and a spry 75) was continually distracted by his still-uncooperative umbrella. It had seen better days. He had taken it home on Thursday when sudden thunderstorms rocked downtown DC, and was now returning it - dry, but for some reason open - back to its regular office cubbyhole. The top was tattered, but the real problem was the closing latch - it just wouldn't hold. After several minutes of unsuccessfully trying to explain my duties to me while fidgeting with the umbrella, he trailed off and devoted his full attention to the thing. "I really should replace it," he mumbled, and kept stabbing at it to secure the latch. Taking note of the awkwardness at hand, he commented, "I'm always here for the entertainment of others." Once finally successful, he proudly and carefully put it away into the patent-leather umbrella case he kept in his desk, the kind that I'd seen among my own lawyer-father's possessions, but which I assume haven't been sold in the Western hemisphere for several decades.

My job was to transcribe his handwritten notes regarding what billable hours he attributed to which clients and input them into his computer billing program, which would then generate reports and invoices. He had 2 months of back-log, called the temp agency whenever he needed to catch up. This was, by far, the most straightforward aspect of the entire day.

After proving to Mr. Bird that I could operate the computer and be relied upon to put the proper account and number of hours (between 0.1 and 1.3, usually) in the correct box, I was left to myself, sitting at Mr. Bird's desk in the vintage 1980s moon chair the he preferred, entering dates, clients and hour decimals on his computer. I received my first startle at 11:00, when the tick-tock/ alarm chirp symphony (still hadn't resolved that issue) was joined by a sudden and rapturous "Koo-Koo, Koo-Koo, Koo-Koo." The clock behind me, having sprung to life behind my back, slowly closed its little tower doors, drawing the carved wooden birds back into their dens.

Shortly thereafter, or about 2 days worth of time logging later, I heard a gruff young police officer ordering people around in the main office lobby. I assumed he was (finally) responding the incessant alarm, but in that assumption I was incorrect. I missed most of the opening words, but the sound of Mr. Bird pleading with the officer, "I feared for my life! That person was trying to run me down. She was going to run me over!" caught my attention.

"Mr. Bird," the officer countered, "after the car stopped, was the window already broken, or did that happen later?"

Whenever Mr. Bird would relapse into his tale of woe, his life flashing before his eyes, etc., the officer would, with increasing forcefulness, interrupt - "Mr. Bird, after the car stopped, was the window already broken? Was it broken, or not?"

The plaintiveness in Mr. Bird's voice was unmistakable, and between each of my key strokes I could hear the cop getting even more assertive.

"We're going downtown Mr. Bird. I'm putting you in handcuffs. You are under arrest for destruction of property."

Mr. Bird waddled back into his office, and I was thankful that the computer screen faced away from the door. "Like I said," he whimpered by way of embarrassed apology, "I'm always here for the entertainment of others." He picked up the phone and placed a call - to his lawyer.

While Mr. Bird was in with me, I could hear the two younger lawyers trying to talk down the police officer. "Isn't there some other way we can resolve this?" "I'm sure Mr. Bird wouldn't do a thing like that." "Perhaps there's someone at your precinct we could call first."

After some surprisingly lucid banter - "Hello Robert, it's been too long. I thought about stopping by your office for lunch the other week - oh what's that, you've moved offices? Well, you really should send an update to your clients, you know..." - Mr. Bird put his lawyer on hold, and went back to the lobby. There, he told the officer, "I have my lawyer on the line and he'd like to speak with you."

"Oh," the officer backed off, "I have nothing to say to him." Then in a return to form, "it doesn't matter what your lawyer says, this is happening."

If I had been on a sitcom, this is probably when the camera would have flashed to a webcam shot of me cringing my shoulders and mouthing the words, "oh, snap!" Instead, I just kept typing with the kind of focus necessary to ignore a black hole swirling into existence in the next room.

Eventually, the other lawyers were able to convince the officer that the best solution would be for Mr. Bird to speak with the irate woman, and for them to work out a solution directly - by which it was implicit that Mr. Bird would pay for her window repair - in cash - and she in return would drop charges against him. This didn't sit well with Mr. Bird, who felt he was the one owed an apology, but neither did the prospect of handcuffs.

Before going downstairs, the police officer added, "Mr. Bird, make sure to have your things. If she agrees, you will need to go directly to an ATM, withdraw money, and pay her in my presence. If she insists on pressing charges, I will have to book you and take you directly downtown."

A minute later, I was alone in the office with the tick-tock of the clock and the beeping alarm.

Based on the accusations of the police officer, who got his story from the woman driving the car, and the skewed perspective of *the assailant* Mr. Bird, here is what I was able to reconstruct had occurred:

On his way to work that Friday morning, Mr. Bird was carrying his little umbrella, returning it to the office after use the previous afternoon. While crossing the street - and there is every indication this was during a designated "walk" signal - a large SUV either ran the light, or attempted to out-run a yellow. In either event, the driver saw Mr. Bird at the last moment and slammed on her brakes, creating a loud squeal of the tires, and narrowly stopping before slamming its grill into Mr. Birds hip. At first in utter shock and terror, Mr. Bird quickly transitioned to anger, especially as the driver not only did not apologize, but quickly cranked her steering wheel and tried to veer around the elder citizen and speed off. In what was admittedly a dark moment, Mr. Bird lashed out at the car with whatever he had at hand - his sad, dinky, decade-old umbrella.

And there the story would have probably ended - an old man gets scared and angry, eventually flailing at a passing SUV to no effect - had it not been that the SUV's rear driver window was partially - but not entirely - rolled down. The increased fragility of the glass in that position allowed Mr. Birds otherwise unimposing tool to become an object of considerable destruction, and the window shattered as it passed him. Though Mr. Bird formally maintained his ignorance of this part of the story, it's hard not to imagine him taking a slight feeling of justice at this turn after the scare he had just suffered, and continued to his office flustered and a few minutes late.

But the driver, once the glass was shattered, did not continue on her merry way. Now irate herself, she must have turned around and followed Mr. Bird the block or so further to his office building, then parked the car in the street to follow him into the building and demand that the security guard on duty call the cops. The story, as she related it to the responding police officers, was surely one about a too-rich-to-car professional type who smashed in her window for no good reason. And the icing on the cake - her baby was buckled into the back seat on the opposite side from the broken glass, making this a child-endangering offense.

What exactly happened when Mr. Bird went downstairs - whether he paid in cash or took a ride downtown - was not known to me. I was left alone, with no word about what was happening or whether or not my "boss-for-the-day" would be returning to the office or spending the night in lock-up for bashing in a window in a baby's face (exaggerated).

One and a half hours passed, and I was able to complete all of June and most of July. The alarm was finally silenced, and the clock kept ticking.

Mr. Bird strolled into the office, almost as if nothing had happened, and asked if I was ready for my lunch break. I said that I only had a little further to go, and he corrected himself - he needed to check his e-mails, and wanted me off his computer, so now would be a good time for my lunch break.

I ate my two nutella and blueberry jelly sandwiches in the staff kitchen and jotted down notes from the morning's encounter. Mr. Bird closed his door for 20 minutes, depriving me of a greater insight into events that were already far more public than was any of my business. I returned to entering data, and Mr. Bird proofread my entries, noting (though not connecting the cause of) an especially high number of typos in a particular range of my work. I apologized and made the edits.

Once the work was done, Mr. Bird signed my time card, and I walked it over to my temp agency, just 2 blocks away. It was Friday, and meager as it would be, I wanted some financial reward from this day of anxiety as quickly as possible.

My agent took my card, and asked me how everything went.

"Fine," I said.

"Yeah," she responded, as I turned to go, "That Mr. Bird is such a nice gentleman."

Weber
::lame(Texpatriot)

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

The Little Things

It has been said - by who, under what circumstances, and for how many generations I do now know - that in life, it is the little things that matter. While Newton may have proven that in nature, in fact it is the big things that count - literally those with the most 'matter' - Einstein romantically retorted something about relativity that could be apropos. For my sake, I hope the wisdom of an anonymous, timeless cliche holds out, at least for the next century or so, because it is specifically at the little things that I excel.

Take, for instance, my beautiful wife's most recent 3_th birthday. I got things off to a good start with a wonderful birthday card idea which I foolishly narrated to her as it occurred to me, rather than holding it in reserve for actual use. On the front of the card, it could say "You Only Turn 30 Once" and on the inside: "But You Can Turn 30-ish for at Least a Few More Years."

Brilliant, right? Someone call Hallmark.

It seems that Shelley has been talking about turning 30 or being "almost 30" since we first started dating - when she was 23. Since then, each consecutive year has drawn us one step closer to the abyss, eliciting more and more fervent protestations from me that she is "not quite," "not yet" or "not even" 30. When that fateful day did finally dawn, we inserted a new vocabulary into our chrono-perspective: She was "just" 30.

And while this marked an important landmark in the life of the former Ms. Laabs, we didn't do anything especially noteworthy to celebrate the occasion. There was cake, dinner (not necessarily in that order) and time with family. All good, but not exactly the norm for the big 3-0. No jumping out of airplanes. No all-night benders, reliving the imagined glory days of our still-too-recent youths. Not even a single stripper.

Yes, it was a quiet 30th birthday party, but probably more in keeping with Shelley's actual wishes and current demeanor, despite my best attempts to lure her into agreeing with one of the other options.

So (and undisclosed amount) of time passed, and this August 3rd needed to be made special - at least, a little bit.

Things got off to a good and clever start early in the morning. I've started jogging - intermittently - and was able to use this as a credible excuse to get out of the house at the ungodly hour of 8:30 AM - we're unemployed, sleeping in is the only benefit we receive from our current situation. I took a shorter-than-normal lap around the block, and hit up Dunkin' Donuts on the way home. Living in New York, Dunkin' was never our favorite stop. There were no less than three family-owned delis near our flat that served superior coffee at a cheaper price, with the added benefit of better bagels. But having left Manhattan behind, we've struggled to replace some of its charm, and Dunkin' isn't such a poor consolation prize.

I was able to get home, convince Shelley to stay in bed while I grabbed a shower (it was a short run, but I'm a very able-bodied producer of various excretions and odors). Once cleaned up, I surprised Shelley with breakfast in bed - Bagels with cream cheese, fresh coffee (still hot), and a special "birthday" donut with sprinkles and pink icing. The (additional) icing on this (coffee) cake was that I got the donut for free for filling out an on-line survey, and the coffee had completed Shel's punch card, giving her a free "birthday" coffee next time she goes in. All that success, for only $7 and technically no deception, if a bit of subterfuge.

The rest of the day was for Shelley to use as she saw fit. I took a hiatus from my job search, and she put aside her various volunteer and freelance projects. One thing we've had trouble finding in DC has been shopping - the kind of big-box stores (aside from our friendly neighborhood SuperTarget) that were so common in Texas, but still readily available in NYC. Gap, Old Navy, Macy's, etc. Your basic this-is-what-we-would-window-shop-if-window-shopping-was-fun. While neither Shelley nor I buy much from these stores (not because we're too cool, but because we're poor), wandering through their displays, giving our oh-so-fashionista opinions, and doing the odd bit of dress-up is one of our little weekend/relaxation rituals. Some people bungee-jump; we fake-shop.

So for Shelley's birthday, what she wanted to do more than anything - more than sky diving, going to the beach, or visiting a fistful of free DC museums - was to find a mall. And we found a doozy. The only Old Navy store located within the Beltway is at the Prince George Mall, actually in Hyattsville, MD, and mercifully on a metro line. For those not familiar with the DC topography, here's the quick rundown.

The District is a diamond, with 10 mile sides, and the SW quadrant suspiciously missing (the residents of Arlington, VA elected to return to the state they abandoned, causing the creation of the term 'retrocession' ). While The District is a clean geometric form, the Beltway is an irregular oval touching the District borders at its 4 points. As a result, large tracts of land lie within the Beltway, but outside the District. They are functionally part of the DC metro, but administratively are under the direction of various Virginia and Maryland counties. The poorest county is Prince George, most often referred to as PGC. For all the gentrification that is taking place, especially in NW DC where we live, the former residents have to go somewhere - usually somewhere cheaper but still close - and often this is PGC.

To its credit, the Mall at Prince George is much less seedy than we expected. The stores were well-appointed, and plentiful. Target, Ross, Macy's, Gap, Old Navy, JC Penny, Marshall's and a veritable bounty of athletic shoe stores. Not shabby. We took our time parousing the wares, and even made it out with a few select items - for example, I got a pair of orange argyle socks - on sale!

Believe it or not, this single outing occupied the majority of our afternoon, and we returned home exhausted and hungry. Dinner was also a point of some contention. Recently, a new pub has opened in our neighborhood that's received rave reviews. It focuses exclusively on American specialty brews, with lots of taps and apparently very good food - including vegetarian dishes. The unquestioned 'it' locale of the neighborhood since opening July 17, Median Pint is outside our usual dinner budget, yet someplace that every Columbia Heights resident apparently *has* to have an opinion about. It was therefore a logical choice for Shelley's Birthday dinner.

So we went to Thaitanic, instead.

And it was excellent. Very good thai food, large portions, reasonably priced, and not at all crowded. We forfeited any hope of earning our Trendsetter merit badge, but the choice did, in its little way, best achieve the objective.

On the way home, we stopped at Target (our preferred discount alcohol distributor) for a bottle of more-than-$7-wine treat, and stumbled into a remarkably affordable printer/scanner on the way to check out. I even convinced Shelley to let me make her a birthday cake - I mean, what's a birthday without a birthday cake? - but at the last minute she threw me a slider - she wanted Birthday (cup)Cake(s). Easy enough.

I made up the batter and loaded a few racks in the over. As per Shelley's wish, we spent the rest of the evening icing cupcakes and watching episode after episode of the Gilmore girls - Season 4 disc 3 if you must know - and retired with ears full of pithy mid-2000s topical references and stomachs full of malbec and Betty Crocker's moist yellow cake.

The following day, life returned to normal. Or at least, as normal as things get right now. Shel took a train and a bus to get to her 3-day-a-week theater volunteer gig, and I was off like a bolt-in-a-suit after catching wind of a last-minute job fair. Despite my todo (sic) list, I managed a few spare moments before Shel got home to produce one last surprise. (Better Nate than Lever has long been one of my favorite expressions, but seems less comical now that I have a little cousin who would presumably be the one sacrificed in this hypothetical tale about a runaway truck driver and the Lever that Keeps the World Spinning).

The cupcakes - already iced, but otherwise somewhat boring and in no way birthday-specific - were in need of some help. I was thinking *sprinkles* - such that when Shelley opened up the cupcake container, her birthday bunts would seem to have spontaneously sprouted confections. Once at the supermarket (CVS failed me), the large tube of mint-flavored "brownie frosting" demanded attention. The idea of writing something on Shel's cupcakes had occurred to me earlier, but all the standard "decoration" icing was all too sweet and generic - Shelley would hate having that get in the way of her delicious chocolate icing. But Mint. Mint goes with Chocolate like Oranges go with whatever winged mythical 3-horned beast rhymes with Oranges.


The results, while not qualifying me as a culinary artists, or even low-level visionary, were a big hit. Total cost of the cake mix, chocolate icing, eggs, oil, Mint and misc: $10.



I should also point out that our friend Sam came over to celebrate Shel's birthday and help us eat the ridiculous number of cupcakes filling up our fridge. He brought a six pack of Italian craft beers - he is lucky enough to call this "job-related research" and a bottle of wine wrapped in a sock puppet. I'm not saying Shelley liked his birthday surprise more than mine... but it was a close race.

I guess my point from all this is not that something NEEDS to be little in order to make a big impact, nor that little things will always be the right solution. But rather it is a matter of precision. As any marksman will tell you, 30 bullets work great, when you aren't skilled enough to get the job done with less.

And am I so-skilled? Not in any heroic a fashion. Nothing I do is particularly remarkable, and rarely impressive as a matter of scale or difficulty level. But perhaps there's something to say for timing - a certain combination of selective listening backed up by small acts to prove you were paying attention. And this is, I believe, what is meant by "the little things." They aren't just any miniature acts, nor is their stature - big or small - even relevant. They are the commitment we put into doing that which will be most appreciated by the people we care about.

And they are no small feats.



Weber
::(lame) Texpatriot