Alice in Berkeley

Mock turtle It was a very good time. To celebrate my 70th birthday, many of my favorite people from all around the continent gathered in Berkeley to eat and drink and perform a dramatization of Alice in Wonderland. 

I started things off with some narration and later read the part of Father William, who was, you will remember, too old to do much of anything other than turn back-somersaults and balance an eel on the end of his nose. 

I also insisted on playing the Mock Turtle, as you see, so that I could describe the regular course of schooling:

Reeling and Writhing, of course, to begin with, and then the different branches of Arithmetic—Ambition, Distraction, Uglification, and Derision.

The Mock Turtle also gets to sing "Beautiful Soup," which begins:

Beautiful Soup, so rich and green, 
Waiting in a hot tureen!
Who for such dainties would not stoop?
Soup of the evening, beautiful Soup!

Here's the text, for you to read—or to perform—for your own celebration:

Alice in Berkeley

Lift every voice and sing

Obama-victory

Lift every voice and sing
Till earth and heaven ring,
Ring with the harmonies of Liberty;
Let our rejoicing rise
High as the listening skies,
Let it resound loud as the rolling sea.
Sing a song full of the faith that the dark past has taught us,
Sing a song full of the hope that the present has brought us,
Facing the rising sun of our new day begun
Let us march on till victory is won.

Thanks, Shepard Fairey, for the poster. Thanks, James Weldon Johnson, for the song. Thanks, Barack Obama, for the inspiration.

But I won’t be worried long

Tao
Yes, I admit it, I’m a worried man. There’s the crazed and sexualized campaign: bomb bomb Iran and a whiter shade of Palin, terrorists and angry old men and ignorant pit bulls with lipstick. There’s the punctured biosphere: extermination of 25 percent of all mammals, our near relative the gorilla leading the way. There’s the plunge to a four-figure Dow, to say nothing of the inscrutably balanced but strangely threatening Tao. A worried man, that’s me.

But I won’t be worried long. Today, 29 days before the election, Barack Obama moved into a winning position in electoral-college votes. That cautious statistician Mark Blumenthal over at Pollster.com now shows the preternaturally calm senator ahead of his erratic rival 296 to 163 (26 more than enough to win), cruising along on a 7-point lead. It’s enough to allow even a worried man to exhale. And perhaps to exclaim in Bahasa Indonesia "WADU!"—which is, being interpreted, "WOW!"—as my granddaughter Micaela did last week in Bandung. Look at this, Micaela!

That’s a dynamic map, you know, so by the time you see this post, Senator Obama may well have picked up another state or two. Hope, you know, and change, that’s the mantra, the magic map responding to our every fervent wish.

The next state to move from yellow to blue may be the Old Dominion, two polls today showing startling Democratic leads of 12 and 10 points. I attribute it all to Ralph Stanley, the great Virginia banjo picker and singer—best known to us urban types by his contributions to the Coen brothers’ movie O Brother, Where Art Thou?—who has endorsed Obama in a radio ad for the folks in Roanoke and Bristol and points in between, delivered with all the weight and grace of his 81 years.

So if Ralph isn’t worried any more, I won’t be either. We’ve got a long road ahead, those 29 interminable days, but (thanks to Kathy G.) here’s a much younger Ralph and his brother Carter showing us the way (that’s Tao to you).

Keep the faith, as we were taught. Finish the course. I’m off to Reno this weekend, knocking on doors for the party of hope. I won’t be worried long. WADU!

McCain’s legacy: mooseburgers for all!

Mccain_bush_hug
John McCain learned his cynical irresponsibility from George Bush, who once said, "History. We don’t know. We’ll all be dead." And when we’re dead, we can’t be held responsible. Anyone who’s still hanging around after that is on his own, here in the Ownership Society.

McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin exposes the real engine that drives his campaign of honor and glory: it’s nothing more than a narcissistic lust for power, underlined by his astonishing unconcern for the country after he dies. McCain wants only to reign, and he does not care what happens to the rest of us when his strutting hour upon the stage is done. Let them eat mooseburgers!

Minette Marrin is a conservative American, long resident in England, whose heroine is the British bulldog Margaret Thatcher. She is appalled at McCain’s hypocrisy (via Juan Cole):

Would you give
power of attorney over your entire life to someone you had only met once, or
possibly twice? Of course not. You would give the matter and the person very
serious consideration. Yet McCain in effect is offering power of attorney
over all the affairs of the United States and over all Americans, including
me, to a woman he had barely met. I myself wouldn’t hire a house-sitter on
such scant acquaintance.

Palin herself may not know what a vice-president is for, but McCain surely
must.…

I had thought that McCain was, for a politician, an honourable man. Certainly
honour is one of his top selling points. But who can think so now? In
choosing a woman he doesn’t know or understand, purely for electoral
advantage, he reveals a dishonourable lust for office, a disrespect for
women generally and a dishonourable indifference to the future of his
country. After all, if this known unknown woman does become president, it
will almost certainly be because he himself is dead – quite possible given
his age and health – and past caring.

Though he didn’t know Palin personally, he must have known a few facts about
her. He must have known that she compares feebly with previous
vice-presidential candidates. Her education is minimal, her real political
and managerial experience very slight.… Being a vice-president is not just a
matter of PR and homespun rhetoric, or used not to be.…

In short Palin is an ill-educated, inexperienced hypocrite. The Republicans
are trying to sell her to the voters as something she isn’t, and McCain
hardly cares what she is. It’s a bad day for my native land.

And mine. John McCain may think he’s immortal and therefore that he is not placing us in danger. Alternatively, he may wish ill on the country he thinks has not sufficiently honored him and consider Sarah Palin an appropriate punishment.

Or he may already be past caring.

These are the times that tax men’s souls

Mccain_schwartzenegger
Under the feckless reign of George Bush, the US has fallen deeper and deeper into debt. We fight expensive wars, subsidize Exxon, and spend vastly more every year than we take in. We pay for our profligacy by borrowing money from the Chinese instead of taxing the rich. John McCain, George Bush, and all their well-connected friends pay less than their fair share, despite the enhanced opportunities they enjoy. The United States government cannot continue down that path.

The government of California cannot, either. Five years ago, Arnold Schwarzenegger juked his way into office, pretending to be a realist while slashing $4 billion a year in vehicle registration taxes, taxes that are required to provide the services Californians need. He has continued to play games with the state’s finances every year since, selling bonds to pay operating expenses and avoid any tax increases. After his latest ploy, mortgaging the state lottery, was rejected by the legislature, he did finally propose a tax increase, but it’s a one-percent rise in the sales tax that would fall disproportionately on poor and middle-class citizens.

Brad DeLong points out that we cannot continue forever to live beyond our means, expecting the services of government while dunning our grandchildren for the costs. After eight years of Republican no-tax fundamentalism, we have few choices now, and they do not include the option of reducing taxes even further on those who receive the most from society. As DeLong writes, we must "raise taxes to cover … the long-run fiscal gap …, and
so bring the federal budget back into balance over the long run." All realists agree, even the most conservative:

As the late Milton Friedman liked to put it: to spend is to tax.
If the government buys things, it must get the money to buy them from
somewhere. It can get the money from three places. It can tax. It can
borrow–but then the borrowing has to be repaid with interest, and the
more is borrowed the higher the interest and the worse the value the
taxpayers ultimately get for their money when they are taxed to repay
the borrowing. Or it can print the money and so inflate the
currency–but that too is a tax, and an especially unfair, painful, and
destructive one, as lots and lots of people victimized by inflation
find their wealth doesn’t buy what it used to and what they expected.

[Raising taxes] is not optional–not, that is, if we want to
continue to have a rich country in the long run. And the politicians
who have told you that [it] is optional from Ronald Reagan to George
H.W. Bush to Robert Dole to George W. Bush and now John McCain are not
your friends, or America’s friends.

DeLong has much more to say. Read it all here.

Michael Searle and the cottage

Cottage
Michael Searle died last month, at the age of 59. He was a therapist, a musician, and a cyclist. He was also my beloved neighbor, and this is the eulogy I delivered at his memorial service yesterday in the Finnish Brotherhood Hall of Berkeley:

This is a story about neighborhoods and neighbors, a therapeutic narrative about the people you live close to.

Twenty-three years ago Mike and Julie Searle moved into the house next door to us on Virginia street, and Debby and I have been fortunate to share this corner of the world with them ever since. Their daughters Kyla and Nora and Gemma were born here, and we have enjoyed watching them grow from Totland toddlers into the strong, beautiful young women they are today. The Searles, the whole family, have been the best neighbors one could ever hope for, unfailingly warm and friendly, full of light and life.

But Mike and I got to know each other well only twelve years ago, when we built a cottage together. There’s nothing like a shared construction project to get to know someone. Mike needed an extra room for an office, and I needed more storage space, so we decided to build a little two-room structure together in our back yard. A six-week project, we thought, nights and weekends, perhaps including one week of full-time work.

But we didn’t want to just throw up a drafty, utilitarian shed. We wanted it to be a beautiful piece of work, a building we would enjoy living with. So we started with a craftsman-style design, cedar-shingled and long-eaved, that complemented our houses and fit in with the neighborhood. We removed the fence between our properties, and set to work, often helped by Julie and Debby and Jim and other friends.

We took care with every step, digging and pouring the foundation, building the walls, roofing, sheetrocking, painting, shingling. And every time we had a choice to make—between the easy and the complicated, between the quick and the long-lasting, between the utilitarian and the beautiful—we made the more difficult choice. Which was also, of course, finally the more satisfying choice.

But it was also the more time-consuming choice. The first six weeks went by, and—surprise—we weren’t finished. Then the next six weeks, then the first six months. Weekend after weekend, we continued to put in many hours with our hammers and paintbrushes, sharing the pleasure and the pain of our joint perfectionism. And finally, fifteen months after we began, the office-cum-storage shed was finished. Well, while building it we had called it a shed, but Kyla pointed out that any structure requiring fifteen months of effort should have a more dignified name, and she suggested that we call it a cottage.

So a cottage it became. Finally we were able to start spending our weekends doing other things. That fence separating our properties? We decided not to replace it. Sharing a back yard is easier after you’ve shared a construction project.

Michael Searle was a builder and a sharer. He built a cottage, but he also built a community here, a circle of friends and neighbors who loved him. He shared fifteen months of work with me, but he also, over the years, generously shared his time and his life with all of us, and we will always remember with affection his generosity and strength, his building and his sharing.

Frater, ave atque vale.

Death in Iraq: Day 1,838

Blind_iraqi_woman_1Let us call things by their right names, especially in Iraq. The surge was an escalation. The drawdown is a chimera. The embassy is a fortress. Iraq is a charnel house.

And every day, many more people die, young and old, innocent and guilty, soldiers and civilians, Americans and Iraqis. Five years after the invasion, with mortar shells falling in the Green Zone, chaos and danger are unabated, and the total number of dead can only be estimated:

  • more than 1,000,000 Iraqis, who continue to perish by the thousands every week
  • 4,011 American military personnel, including 145 who died of self-inflicted wounds
  • 309 other coalition military personnel
  • more than 1,000 coalition contractors
  • at least 157 journalists

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, perhaps egged on by his recent visitor Dick Cheney, last week attacked the Mahdi Army in Basra, the country’s second-largest city. But his fellow Shiites refused to lay down their arms. So George Bush, proclaiming "a defining moment in the history of a free Iraq," sent in American warplanes to help his puppet ruler. It was in vain, and Maliki had to send envoys to Iran, seeking out Muqtada al-Sadr to plead for peace. After he acceded to al-Sadr’s terms (supported by the Iranian government), fighting died down. A defining moment indeed: another success for Iran, another defeat for Bush.

The occupation of death continues.

The moral low ground

Bush_scolds_2 Matt Frei of BBC News interviewed George Bush this week, and he found the resident of the White House oddly ebullient for someone whose approval ratings continue to hover around 30 percent. Frei wrote:

Mr Bush seems blissfully undaunted by his abysmal opinion poll ratings at home and abroad.

He feels uncowed by the oceanic gulf between his rhetoric about unity and such and the rather vexing reality on the ground.

So Mr Bush soldiers on, trying to secure a legacy for himself – although some might call it mere damage limitation.

The questioner and the questioned seemed hardly on the same planet, Frei serious and probing, Bush casual and dismissive. Particularly when they talked about torture:

Frei: The Senate yesterday passed a bill outlawing water-boarding. You, I believe, have said that you will veto that bill.

Mr Bush: That’s not -

Frei: Does that not send the wrong signal…

Mr Bush: No, look… that’s not the reason I’m
vetoing the bill. The reason I’m vetoing the bill – first of all, we
have said that whatever we do… will be legal.

Bush’s confusion is total. Though he avoids answering whether his veto sends the wrong signal, he says that he’s vetoing a bill outlawing waterboarding because whatever he does (including, implicitly, waterboarding) will be legal. In fact, if water torture—as the Spanish Inquisition called it—is legal, it can only be legal insofar as Bush has rejected a bill making it illegal. Of course, it remains illegal as the result of other laws that remain in force, but Bush prefers to ignore them.

Frei: But, given Guantanamo Bay, given also Abu Ghraib, given renditions, does this not send the wrong signal to the world?

Mr Bush: It should send a signal that America is going to respect law.… And I’m comfortable with the decisions we’ve made.  And I’m comfortable with recognising this is still a dangerous world.

Frei: Can you honestly say, Mr President, that today America still occupies the moral high ground?

Mr Bush: Absolutely – absolutely. We believe in
human rights and human dignity. We believe in the human condition. We
believe in freedom. And we’re willing to take the lead.

Tellingly, as the BBC video makes clear, during this last speech Bush is shaking his head vigorously from side to side. That is, he is sending a strong signal that commonly indicates negation, that no one should believe a word he is saying. "The moral high ground? Absolutely (not). We believe in
human rights and human dignity (not). We believe in the human condition (not). We
believe in freedom (not). And we’re willing to take the lead (not)."

Some of George Bush’s signals are unmistakable.

Hillarious!

This tone-deaf video is proof positive that the Hillary Clinton campaign has lost its way. Who among you sings like that, dances like that, thinks like that? Montana wheat farmers who yearn for the days of disco? The inner-city gangbangers of Bangor, Maine? Santa Fe seniors nostalgic for the Beatles? All would be disappointed.

It is as though Senator Clinton saw the will.i.am/yes.we.can video and said, "Make me one like that. But nicer. And whiter. And with better music.… Oh, yeah, and shoot it in color!" And lo, they rocked.