words. are. life. to. me.
the true colors personality test has just helped me understand that life.
knowing that i'm predominantly green (as opposed to gold, blue, or orange) - i.e. more analytical than the personality quadrant (expressive, driver, analytical, amiable) gave me credit for being - and that only 7% of the population is green explains why i never feel understood. knowing that i am green (deep-thinking, seeking correlation) followed by a toss-up between gold (driver, task-oriented, structured) and blue (amiable, focused on relationships, passionate, artsy) shows me the reason behind my desire for a connection to a spiritual community. it also shows me my intense passion for poetry - the most condensed version of meaningful art. and for writers - the juxtaposers of correlative information. and for philosophers - the students of the universe. and for theologians - the students of the Divine.
this is why i love Jesus. and Buddha. and Ralph Waldo Emerson. and Barack Obama. and Elizabeth Gilbert. and Lauren Zuniga.
thank the universe.
i feel so much peace right now.
Showing posts with label barack obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label barack obama. Show all posts
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Sunday, February 7, 2010
National Public Radio - too public?
Ever since I started interning for a gubernatorial campaign, I listen to NPR on the radio on the way to the office. Linked is a story from their website about the U.S.'s CIA and other covert groups performing drone strikes in the middle east. The main issue with the strikes (other than their covert status) is the civilians who are sometimes killed in the process. As is the norm in the news media (particularly broadcast), the broadcaster invited scholars and other knowledgeable parties to discuss the story and give their opinions.
As I listened to the story, I wasn't able to decide if I think drone strikes are against America's ethical code or if they are a necessary evil, a means to an end. The confusion of that story, and the implications it could make toward our president and our secret services make me wonder if the public always has the right to know. Even the scholars were torn in their opinions of the matter, so can we assume that the average American really understands the issues, really knows what is at stake?
Perhaps I am a cynic, or a snob, but I don't feel like the average American knows enough about covert operations, the Secret Services, or the power of political leaders in non-democratic nations to be able to make a moral judgment on the government's decision to perform drone strikes.
This is not just about the ethics of war. This is about the media system we have set up where the public knows everything. Are covert operations really covert if everyone hears about them? Are the Secret Service truly secret if all the media outlets are telling their story? Don't get me wrong. I was once a journalism major. I love NPR. But should some topics be off limits? Is a free press always in the best interests of the nation? Are the rules different in war time?
As I listened to the story, I wasn't able to decide if I think drone strikes are against America's ethical code or if they are a necessary evil, a means to an end. The confusion of that story, and the implications it could make toward our president and our secret services make me wonder if the public always has the right to know. Even the scholars were torn in their opinions of the matter, so can we assume that the average American really understands the issues, really knows what is at stake?
Perhaps I am a cynic, or a snob, but I don't feel like the average American knows enough about covert operations, the Secret Services, or the power of political leaders in non-democratic nations to be able to make a moral judgment on the government's decision to perform drone strikes.
This is not just about the ethics of war. This is about the media system we have set up where the public knows everything. Are covert operations really covert if everyone hears about them? Are the Secret Service truly secret if all the media outlets are telling their story? Don't get me wrong. I was once a journalism major. I love NPR. But should some topics be off limits? Is a free press always in the best interests of the nation? Are the rules different in war time?
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
change
"i'm starting with the man in the mirror
i'm asking him to change his ways
and no message could have been any clearer
if you want to make the world a better place
take a look at yourself and then make a change"
-michael jackson
"yes we can heal this nation
yes we can repair this world"
-barack obama
why is that people rarely come together for anything other than death? michael jackson's memorial was beautiful. watching everyone on cnn and on facebook updating their statuses and showing love was great. it made me think about how the last time i saw anything that beautiful, that unifying, was at the hand of president obama (his inauguration, election night when he won, his landmark speeches). but prior to the election year, i rarely saw people joining hands with people they had never met and had almost nothing in common with. "bliss was it in that dawn to be alive, but to be young was very heaven" (william wordsworth).
this all means even more to me right now. i have recently felt my heartstrings connected to the state of oklahoma, as if i belong here. as if i have red dirt running through my veins and a tornado wreaking havoc inside my ribcage. over the last week, it had begun to look like oklahoma is a state that has yet to fall instep with the mantra of "united we stand, divided we fall." state representative sally kern has written a proclamation blaming the president, homosexuals, and debauchers for our economic crisis. she claims that a return to morality and religion is the key to turning the financial tide. and she defames america as an immoral nation.
i am not in denial. bad things happen everywhere, including the u.s., including oklahoma, but pointing fingers has never solved problems. and as a person who believes that, above all else, Jesus was a representative of love, it kills me to see people standing in Christ's name singing "God bless america" while villifying people's freedom of sexuality. it broke my heart to watch people proclaim division and animosity and then sing our "star-spangled banner."
i believe in the united states of america. i believe that when people unite themselves around a cause, there is nothing they cannot accomplish. it is true that the rule of the majority can sometimes yield unfavorable results, but that is why this is the "home of the brave" not just the "land of the free." we must take responsibility for the causes we rally behind. and we must never forget that freedom always comes at a price.
i guess i'm just hoping that people continue to think globally, to think about others as well as themselves, and realize that the good things we want are waiting for us to make them happen. someone else needs to stand up and be the one so that one can become two, two can become four, four can become forty, and forty can become the majority.
but today, let's all start with the man in the mirror.
r.i.p. michael jackson
i'm asking him to change his ways
and no message could have been any clearer
if you want to make the world a better place
take a look at yourself and then make a change"
-michael jackson
"yes we can heal this nation
yes we can repair this world"
-barack obama
why is that people rarely come together for anything other than death? michael jackson's memorial was beautiful. watching everyone on cnn and on facebook updating their statuses and showing love was great. it made me think about how the last time i saw anything that beautiful, that unifying, was at the hand of president obama (his inauguration, election night when he won, his landmark speeches). but prior to the election year, i rarely saw people joining hands with people they had never met and had almost nothing in common with. "bliss was it in that dawn to be alive, but to be young was very heaven" (william wordsworth).
this all means even more to me right now. i have recently felt my heartstrings connected to the state of oklahoma, as if i belong here. as if i have red dirt running through my veins and a tornado wreaking havoc inside my ribcage. over the last week, it had begun to look like oklahoma is a state that has yet to fall instep with the mantra of "united we stand, divided we fall." state representative sally kern has written a proclamation blaming the president, homosexuals, and debauchers for our economic crisis. she claims that a return to morality and religion is the key to turning the financial tide. and she defames america as an immoral nation.
i am not in denial. bad things happen everywhere, including the u.s., including oklahoma, but pointing fingers has never solved problems. and as a person who believes that, above all else, Jesus was a representative of love, it kills me to see people standing in Christ's name singing "God bless america" while villifying people's freedom of sexuality. it broke my heart to watch people proclaim division and animosity and then sing our "star-spangled banner."
i believe in the united states of america. i believe that when people unite themselves around a cause, there is nothing they cannot accomplish. it is true that the rule of the majority can sometimes yield unfavorable results, but that is why this is the "home of the brave" not just the "land of the free." we must take responsibility for the causes we rally behind. and we must never forget that freedom always comes at a price.
i guess i'm just hoping that people continue to think globally, to think about others as well as themselves, and realize that the good things we want are waiting for us to make them happen. someone else needs to stand up and be the one so that one can become two, two can become four, four can become forty, and forty can become the majority.
but today, let's all start with the man in the mirror.
r.i.p. michael jackson
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
what does Jesus think about politics?
this morning, i was going through my routine - check google mail, check school email, check facebook, check myspace, check blogs, browse twitter - and i came across something that confuses me.
a friend of mine posted a link to a news story from the huffington post about a resolution going through the oklahoma state house of representatives.
the resolution blames president obama for the recession - citing not just his expensive stimulus package, not citing his ideas for health care reform, but blaming it on his "cancellation" of the white house recognition of the national day of prayer and his support of "immorality" in the skin of the lgbt community. the resolution implies that the economic recession is punishment for america's lack of adherence to biblical principles. you can see the full resolution in the story and see for yourself if i've summarized it well.
the call to action at the end is to once again make morality and religion the priority of the state. for those of us who have lived here our whole lives it is hard to entertain the notion that anything other than christian evangelism is at the forefront of oklahoman thought.
but, to take this a bit farther, my question as a person who is trying to seek the LORD and do what is right in the eyes of G-D is: what would Jesus do?
does Jesus believe in separation of church and state?
does He believe in democracy in general?
does He think citizens should be able to take part in their government?
would Christ condone representation of the masses and the idea that a government be conducted by the people?
does Jesus think that members of the lgbt community have fewer rights than heterosexual americans?
how do you stand for Christ and be an active citizen at the same time? or can you?
a friend of mine posted a link to a news story from the huffington post about a resolution going through the oklahoma state house of representatives.
the resolution blames president obama for the recession - citing not just his expensive stimulus package, not citing his ideas for health care reform, but blaming it on his "cancellation" of the white house recognition of the national day of prayer and his support of "immorality" in the skin of the lgbt community. the resolution implies that the economic recession is punishment for america's lack of adherence to biblical principles. you can see the full resolution in the story and see for yourself if i've summarized it well.
the call to action at the end is to once again make morality and religion the priority of the state. for those of us who have lived here our whole lives it is hard to entertain the notion that anything other than christian evangelism is at the forefront of oklahoman thought.
but, to take this a bit farther, my question as a person who is trying to seek the LORD and do what is right in the eyes of G-D is: what would Jesus do?
does Jesus believe in separation of church and state?
does He believe in democracy in general?
does He think citizens should be able to take part in their government?
would Christ condone representation of the masses and the idea that a government be conducted by the people?
does Jesus think that members of the lgbt community have fewer rights than heterosexual americans?
how do you stand for Christ and be an active citizen at the same time? or can you?
Friday, May 29, 2009
Obama hires fund-raisers
Check out the article (click on title).
Um, I don't know that I really think that's a problem, not a big enough one to complain about anyway. If these people gave lots of money to the campaign and encouraged others to give lots of money, it could be because they believe in what the President wants to do. It could be because they wanted to buy themselves an ambassadorship, but so what? If these men start doing things that are selfish and not in line with the President's objectives, then we can say he made a bad decision in hiring them. But if they work to further his cause, then there's no problem.
Does it matter if they are career politicians or random other important people? Only if you are a career politician. That's just life.
Um, I don't know that I really think that's a problem, not a big enough one to complain about anyway. If these people gave lots of money to the campaign and encouraged others to give lots of money, it could be because they believe in what the President wants to do. It could be because they wanted to buy themselves an ambassadorship, but so what? If these men start doing things that are selfish and not in line with the President's objectives, then we can say he made a bad decision in hiring them. But if they work to further his cause, then there's no problem.
Does it matter if they are career politicians or random other important people? Only if you are a career politician. That's just life.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
National Debt?
OK, this post has a disclaimer:
I am not an expert, or even an educated observer on the topic of money in general and national money more specifically.
Also, I am a big fan/supporter of President Obama, but I that doesn't keep me from being open and willing to hear a well-formed argument that he's doing something wrong.
Lastly, I highly encourage, even solicit debate on this topic or any other that I blog about.
Now...
As a junior in college who has only taken one course in politics and that was freshman year where I regularly fell asleep in class, I will admit there is a lot I don't know about "the way things are" in America today. But I seem to remember reading in a text book somewhere that the national debt has been steadily rising, never falling, since forever (or maybe since FDR's Reconstruction or something). If this is true, isn't it a little silly of the critics to be freaking out because the President's new economic plan is going to increase the national debt by $2.3 trillion more than they anticipated?
On the flip side of the same argument, what must America do to make more progress toward capping the national debt, or paying it off (who'd have thought)? Is this impossible? Something tells me that it's not because if it were, we wouldn't spend so much time talking about it. It's just harder than people want to work for an abstract number in the sky.
Does anyone have any insight on this? Please share.
I am not an expert, or even an educated observer on the topic of money in general and national money more specifically.
Also, I am a big fan/supporter of President Obama, but I that doesn't keep me from being open and willing to hear a well-formed argument that he's doing something wrong.
Lastly, I highly encourage, even solicit debate on this topic or any other that I blog about.
Now...
As a junior in college who has only taken one course in politics and that was freshman year where I regularly fell asleep in class, I will admit there is a lot I don't know about "the way things are" in America today. But I seem to remember reading in a text book somewhere that the national debt has been steadily rising, never falling, since forever (or maybe since FDR's Reconstruction or something). If this is true, isn't it a little silly of the critics to be freaking out because the President's new economic plan is going to increase the national debt by $2.3 trillion more than they anticipated?
On the flip side of the same argument, what must America do to make more progress toward capping the national debt, or paying it off (who'd have thought)? Is this impossible? Something tells me that it's not because if it were, we wouldn't spend so much time talking about it. It's just harder than people want to work for an abstract number in the sky.
Does anyone have any insight on this? Please share.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Barack Obama for President 2008
I don't see how you can NOT believe in this. If this doesn't give you hope, if it doesn't light a fire underneath you, if it doesn't make you want to trudge through snow to the polling place, then I don't know that I have any business with you (politically speaking).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)