Dear Mr. President,
This week I'll be applying to join the US Boat to Gaza, (the ship you probably recall is named after your book.) It may not be the most conventional way to spend spring break, but I think that it's exactly as self-indulgent as I'm willing to be. I have no idea what the odds are of me being selected to actually go, but I suspect that I'll always regret it if I don't at least apply.
Even if I don't make it to Gaza in 2011, the discussion of the gaza blockade has taken to the sides of city buses right here in Seattle. I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this. While I wholeheartedly agree with the message and support the intentions of those running the ads, I don't know how effective this is as a strategy. Is $1794 better spent on an ad campaign that might not change any minds, or would it have been better used to send help to the people affected by the policies being protested? The awareness created might be considerable, but I'm not sure it will lead to the public outcry necessary for any substantive policy change.
When I lived in DC, the metro tunnels were routinely home to issue ads. One was the picture of a baby (presumably Palestinian( wearing a pro-hamas headband, and said "This child could grow up to be a: ( ) Doctor ( ) Lawyer (x) Terrorist" (The ad can be seen here thanks to flickr user louko.) The ad made my blood boil. I have visceral reactions every time I passed by it. Targeting the blameless children of this conflict seemed especially sickening, and to have it shouting at me from every wall every day of my commute ensured that I began and ended each work day so angry I could barely speak. The very nature of advertising made discussion or argument or dissent with the people placing the ads impossible. I think my intense reaction to these ads has made me hesitant to feel any joy at seeing ads supporting my views. I understand that the very effective (and well-financed) tactics of the Israeli lobby and PR organizations need to be balanced somehow, but I don't feel great about sinking to their methods.
The most I can hope for is conversation. If it gets people talking, thinking, questioning the policies supported by their taxes (often without their knowledge) I will swallow my objections and applaud the efforts of the organization purchasing the ads. The argument that a controversial, thought-provoking ad like this one is at least better than another Macy's ad is not lost on me, either. Do you think this is a helpful or appropriate forum for foreign policy conversations?
I should probably go work on my application. I know you don't agree with the mission of the US boat to Gaza and you could certainly never support it publicly, but I hope that, even if it is only in private, you find a moment to consider your own responsibility for the people who end up on this ship and for the policies that have made such an organization necessary.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
I encourage all of my readers interested (and fully aware of and prepared for the risks) to apply to the US Boat to Gaza. If you don't want to go yourself, a financial donation will help purchase supplies to deliver to the people of Gaza, as well. Other great gift ideas for those concerned with social justice can be found in Nicholas Kristof's latest New York Times column, or on etsy.com
Showing posts with label The Audacity of Hope. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Audacity of Hope. Show all posts
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Day 311- Another side of the story
Dear Mr. President,
While there may be a few who have forgotten why, exactly, so many of us disapproved of the policies of President Bush, I am certainly not among their number. The former President's recent publicity tour promoting his memoir has provided ample opportunity for him to remind us all why we were so glad to see the sunrise on January 20, 2009. I understand his need to tell his version of events, to make the case for his decision and attempt to persuade many of us to forget the things we knew. I have tried to give the former President the benefit of the doubt. I believe that his Presidency, for all of its many, many mistakes, occurred during some of the most difficult years in modern American history. (The role those mistakes played in said difficulties is certainly not inconsiderable.)
Still, listening to his attempts to defend his record is difficult. A man who basically avoided the press and refused to justify or explain any of his decisions while in office manipulating the incredibly short-term memory of many Americans (and especially of the media) is difficult to watch. I may be so upset that little short of a war crimes tribunal will actually satisfy my need to see President Bush answer for his crimes, but certainly the situation warrants more than the softball questions of Matt Lauer. I have to question my desire to see the former President interrogated. On a practical level, it would be entirely unproductive. No one tortured under his orders will be healed by seeing him answer questions. No one made homeless, injured or killed by the inept handling of Hurricane Katrina will be restored. No one laid off during the recession will be reinstated.
I think my desire to see President Bush explain himself comes from my suspicion that his worldview entirely justified the decision of his Presidency. Because I cannot imagine a world where what he did (and failed to do) is acceptable, I need to understand his perspective. And so, while I will not read his memoir, I will continue to follow his media appearances in an attempt to understand how, exactly, he sleeps at night.
One day, years and years from now, I hope that you will also write a memoir of your time as President. I enjoyed your first two books immensely, and I think that, even if I struggle with your justifications for the decisions I don't agree with, I will at least appreciate the quality of your writing.
(And I'm certain you won't go with quite so insipid a title, if only because it doesn't seem possible.)
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
While there may be a few who have forgotten why, exactly, so many of us disapproved of the policies of President Bush, I am certainly not among their number. The former President's recent publicity tour promoting his memoir has provided ample opportunity for him to remind us all why we were so glad to see the sunrise on January 20, 2009. I understand his need to tell his version of events, to make the case for his decision and attempt to persuade many of us to forget the things we knew. I have tried to give the former President the benefit of the doubt. I believe that his Presidency, for all of its many, many mistakes, occurred during some of the most difficult years in modern American history. (The role those mistakes played in said difficulties is certainly not inconsiderable.)
Still, listening to his attempts to defend his record is difficult. A man who basically avoided the press and refused to justify or explain any of his decisions while in office manipulating the incredibly short-term memory of many Americans (and especially of the media) is difficult to watch. I may be so upset that little short of a war crimes tribunal will actually satisfy my need to see President Bush answer for his crimes, but certainly the situation warrants more than the softball questions of Matt Lauer. I have to question my desire to see the former President interrogated. On a practical level, it would be entirely unproductive. No one tortured under his orders will be healed by seeing him answer questions. No one made homeless, injured or killed by the inept handling of Hurricane Katrina will be restored. No one laid off during the recession will be reinstated.
I think my desire to see President Bush explain himself comes from my suspicion that his worldview entirely justified the decision of his Presidency. Because I cannot imagine a world where what he did (and failed to do) is acceptable, I need to understand his perspective. And so, while I will not read his memoir, I will continue to follow his media appearances in an attempt to understand how, exactly, he sleeps at night.
One day, years and years from now, I hope that you will also write a memoir of your time as President. I enjoyed your first two books immensely, and I think that, even if I struggle with your justifications for the decisions I don't agree with, I will at least appreciate the quality of your writing.
(And I'm certain you won't go with quite so insipid a title, if only because it doesn't seem possible.)
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Day 206- The Audacity
Dear Mr. President,
This morning I woke up to news of a US organization working to send their own aid ship in defiance of the Gaza blockade. This ship will be called The Audacity of Hope, and, because it has also been endorsed by Rashid Khalidi, it is being linked to you by some right-wing media sources. I can see why it might be annoying to suffer the criticisms of political convictions you don't actually have, so I would imagine that you viewed this news as one more headache. I heard it, and, for a moment, all I wanted to do was throw out my plans for the next year and join the crew.
I've spent the day talking myself out of it. As much as I want to go, to stand with those brave people willing to defy the unjust and cruel policies of the Israeli government toward Gaza, I have obligations. Completing my education this year is something I need to do, not only for myself but for all of the people in my life who believe that I can. Going out into the world to fight oppression and injustice is something that will have to wait another year. Still, I believe with all of my heart that this is the right thing to do, and so I am donating what I can to their efforts. The magnitude of Israeli crimes toward the Palestinian people and the people of Gaza, especially, demand resistance.
I do regret any political problems this mission will cause for your administration, if only because I think it is a shame you haven't adopted official policies that would warrant this criticism from the right. In your book, you talk about the courage it takes to keep having faith in our country, in change, in a better future. Your whole moral and philosophical worldview seems to demand equal rights, freedom, and the end of oppression. So I don't think you should be offended by the name of the ship. Hope has been an audacious thing for Gaza, and for those who would see it freed. That the Americans organizing this act in the spirit of your writing is not nearly as surprising or difficult to accept as your own willingness to set that spirit aside when convenience or politics demand.
I know, my provocation likely falls on deaf ears. You will not support this ship, if anything, you are likely to denounce it and seek to distance yourself from Khalidi. I know this. But I have the audacity to believe, still, that I could be wrong. That your courage and your convictions might not be strangers on this issue forever. I have faith that you could change your mind, and see that, no matter how hopeless, the fight against this kind of injustice is always worth whatever criticism it will face. The people of Gaza deserve the same justice, opportunity and hope that you promised to America. Can you fault the Americans who would invest time and money, put on hold their lives, risk physical safety and freedom to make it happen? Does it make you, even in secret, even just a little bit proud?
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
If you'd like to donate to the Audacity of Hope, please visit US to Gaza.
This morning I woke up to news of a US organization working to send their own aid ship in defiance of the Gaza blockade. This ship will be called The Audacity of Hope, and, because it has also been endorsed by Rashid Khalidi, it is being linked to you by some right-wing media sources. I can see why it might be annoying to suffer the criticisms of political convictions you don't actually have, so I would imagine that you viewed this news as one more headache. I heard it, and, for a moment, all I wanted to do was throw out my plans for the next year and join the crew.
I've spent the day talking myself out of it. As much as I want to go, to stand with those brave people willing to defy the unjust and cruel policies of the Israeli government toward Gaza, I have obligations. Completing my education this year is something I need to do, not only for myself but for all of the people in my life who believe that I can. Going out into the world to fight oppression and injustice is something that will have to wait another year. Still, I believe with all of my heart that this is the right thing to do, and so I am donating what I can to their efforts. The magnitude of Israeli crimes toward the Palestinian people and the people of Gaza, especially, demand resistance.
I do regret any political problems this mission will cause for your administration, if only because I think it is a shame you haven't adopted official policies that would warrant this criticism from the right. In your book, you talk about the courage it takes to keep having faith in our country, in change, in a better future. Your whole moral and philosophical worldview seems to demand equal rights, freedom, and the end of oppression. So I don't think you should be offended by the name of the ship. Hope has been an audacious thing for Gaza, and for those who would see it freed. That the Americans organizing this act in the spirit of your writing is not nearly as surprising or difficult to accept as your own willingness to set that spirit aside when convenience or politics demand.
I know, my provocation likely falls on deaf ears. You will not support this ship, if anything, you are likely to denounce it and seek to distance yourself from Khalidi. I know this. But I have the audacity to believe, still, that I could be wrong. That your courage and your convictions might not be strangers on this issue forever. I have faith that you could change your mind, and see that, no matter how hopeless, the fight against this kind of injustice is always worth whatever criticism it will face. The people of Gaza deserve the same justice, opportunity and hope that you promised to America. Can you fault the Americans who would invest time and money, put on hold their lives, risk physical safety and freedom to make it happen? Does it make you, even in secret, even just a little bit proud?
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
If you'd like to donate to the Audacity of Hope, please visit US to Gaza.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Day 68- Courage & Consequence
Dear Mr. President,
As an author, I'm sure you appreciate the challenges of writing honestly, and well, about yourself and your own experiences. Many authors attempt to do this, but I think very few succeed. Today, another example of such an attempt goes on sale. Last night, (really, only a few hours ago,) I was putting out Karl Rove's new book for display. Mr. Rove's book, Courage and Consequence was bound to pique my curiosity. For one thing, the title suggests that Karl Rove, in an attempt to broaden the appeal of his book, targeted the "Jane Austen" demographic, a group of readers rarely sought after by the publishers of political memoirs. Additionally, the blurb on the back of the book describes Rove's as, "a life spent in political combat and service to country, no matter the costs." I'll grant that as Deputy Chief of Staff, Mr. Rove served his country; the language used in the book, however, seem to indicate that Mr. Rove believes he has sacrificed himself for his country, somehow, and I fail to see the evidence supporting such a contention.
For the time being, as I am still a seller of books, I believe that every one, even Karl Rove, has a right to have their story told. No matter what my profession, I will always oppose censoring or suppression, even the voices of those that I disagree with. The smug, self-satisfied, extreme close-up of Mr. Rove's face on the cover of this book, however, tests this conviction more than any author since Robert Spencer. Whenever books like this come out, where the author is so clearly trying to retell a familiar story in a way that casts them in a more forgivable role, I always wonder how many minds they really feel they will change. Most of the people who buy this book will already agree with everything Mr. Rove has to say. A significant portion of rest will only be picking it up to find their name in the index. I can't imagine Rove will win over many skeptics.
If anything, I am most surprised at my own reaction to the publication of this book. I get angry, fiercely angry at the account Mr. Rove gives, casting President Bush as the misunderstood hero. I think I am angry because it doesn't seem fair that the conservative spin machine has extended so far into my bookstore, instead of keeping to the talk radio and TV news as I feel it should. I think I am angry because I am afraid that I might not be completely right, that Mr. Rove may have reasonable, even valuable perspectives on things I am unwilling to hear, as they may threaten my own beliefs. I'm not sure what the most productive way of dealing with these feelings might be, but for now I've settled with photocopying his face off of the cover and plastering it all over my boss's office. Mature, it is not, but at least I feel a bit better.
After your own time in the White House is finished, will you write another memoir, Mr. President? You seem to be more inclined toward writing as an end in its own, which is likely why your books sell so well and are so enjoyable to read. If you do, I hope you are able to bring the frankness of your first two books to your reflections on life in the White House.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
As an author, I'm sure you appreciate the challenges of writing honestly, and well, about yourself and your own experiences. Many authors attempt to do this, but I think very few succeed. Today, another example of such an attempt goes on sale. Last night, (really, only a few hours ago,) I was putting out Karl Rove's new book for display. Mr. Rove's book, Courage and Consequence was bound to pique my curiosity. For one thing, the title suggests that Karl Rove, in an attempt to broaden the appeal of his book, targeted the "Jane Austen" demographic, a group of readers rarely sought after by the publishers of political memoirs. Additionally, the blurb on the back of the book describes Rove's as, "a life spent in political combat and service to country, no matter the costs." I'll grant that as Deputy Chief of Staff, Mr. Rove served his country; the language used in the book, however, seem to indicate that Mr. Rove believes he has sacrificed himself for his country, somehow, and I fail to see the evidence supporting such a contention.
For the time being, as I am still a seller of books, I believe that every one, even Karl Rove, has a right to have their story told. No matter what my profession, I will always oppose censoring or suppression, even the voices of those that I disagree with. The smug, self-satisfied, extreme close-up of Mr. Rove's face on the cover of this book, however, tests this conviction more than any author since Robert Spencer. Whenever books like this come out, where the author is so clearly trying to retell a familiar story in a way that casts them in a more forgivable role, I always wonder how many minds they really feel they will change. Most of the people who buy this book will already agree with everything Mr. Rove has to say. A significant portion of rest will only be picking it up to find their name in the index. I can't imagine Rove will win over many skeptics.
If anything, I am most surprised at my own reaction to the publication of this book. I get angry, fiercely angry at the account Mr. Rove gives, casting President Bush as the misunderstood hero. I think I am angry because it doesn't seem fair that the conservative spin machine has extended so far into my bookstore, instead of keeping to the talk radio and TV news as I feel it should. I think I am angry because I am afraid that I might not be completely right, that Mr. Rove may have reasonable, even valuable perspectives on things I am unwilling to hear, as they may threaten my own beliefs. I'm not sure what the most productive way of dealing with these feelings might be, but for now I've settled with photocopying his face off of the cover and plastering it all over my boss's office. Mature, it is not, but at least I feel a bit better.
After your own time in the White House is finished, will you write another memoir, Mr. President? You seem to be more inclined toward writing as an end in its own, which is likely why your books sell so well and are so enjoyable to read. If you do, I hope you are able to bring the frankness of your first two books to your reflections on life in the White House.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Day 51- Filibusted
Dear Mr. President,
Senator Evan Bayh's op-ed this morning makes several excellent points. Many of his complaints about the frustration process of getting anything done in the Senate echo sentiments from The Audacity of Hope, which, to me, indicates strongly that the Senate is a dysfunctional institution, as you and Senator Bayh wrote from positions the minority and majority, while reaching the same conclusions.
Especially with regards to re-thinking the rules surrounding the filibuster, I think Senator Bayh's ideas have a lot of merit and should be implemented. It is sad, really, that he had to retire, to go out without worrying about re-election and to cause enough of a media uproar to be heard. He seems like an honorable, well-intentioned individual, and the Senate would be better off with more like him.
As a former Senator, you understand the frustration of the institution first hand. You did not spare the Senate any of your disapproval during the State of The Union, and I would have liked to believe that might have generated more progress than it has. I don't think it is unreasonably partisan of me to say that the right benefits most from this. On principle, be they in the minority or the majority, the GOP wins elections by campaigning against the federal government, against "big" government. Holding up the progress in the Senate supports their narrative that federal powers are slow, clumsy and ineffective.
In his 1996 State of the Union address, President Clinton famously declared "the era of big government is over." I think this may have pleased a number of people, but it helped few. Perhaps if the era of the self-serving government, the ego-boosting, money-raising, hyper-partisan government, if the era of bad government could be drawn to a close, real progress could finally be made.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Senator Evan Bayh's op-ed this morning makes several excellent points. Many of his complaints about the frustration process of getting anything done in the Senate echo sentiments from The Audacity of Hope, which, to me, indicates strongly that the Senate is a dysfunctional institution, as you and Senator Bayh wrote from positions the minority and majority, while reaching the same conclusions.
Especially with regards to re-thinking the rules surrounding the filibuster, I think Senator Bayh's ideas have a lot of merit and should be implemented. It is sad, really, that he had to retire, to go out without worrying about re-election and to cause enough of a media uproar to be heard. He seems like an honorable, well-intentioned individual, and the Senate would be better off with more like him.
As a former Senator, you understand the frustration of the institution first hand. You did not spare the Senate any of your disapproval during the State of The Union, and I would have liked to believe that might have generated more progress than it has. I don't think it is unreasonably partisan of me to say that the right benefits most from this. On principle, be they in the minority or the majority, the GOP wins elections by campaigning against the federal government, against "big" government. Holding up the progress in the Senate supports their narrative that federal powers are slow, clumsy and ineffective.
In his 1996 State of the Union address, President Clinton famously declared "the era of big government is over." I think this may have pleased a number of people, but it helped few. Perhaps if the era of the self-serving government, the ego-boosting, money-raising, hyper-partisan government, if the era of bad government could be drawn to a close, real progress could finally be made.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Day 35
Dear Mr. President,
Today I'm watching my nephew, Asher, who will be two years old in May. He saw my copy of The Audacity of Hope and pointed to your face on the cover. I tried to teach him how to say "President Obama", but so far all he's got is "bama." I try to think about the America that Asher will know, if he'll come of age just as lost and disillusioned as my generation has, or if he will face an entirely new set of challenges. I appreciate the discussion of what we're leaving for the next generation- the deficit, clean energy, new industry, and the environmental impact. I know you have young children, yourself, and will therefor need no personal face to remind you of how important your legacy will be. Just know that there's a little boy in Seattle trying to master his ABC's, refine his utensil-wielding skills, and say his President's name. He's not worried about having clean water, or job security, living in a safer, more peaceful world, but his aunt is.
The problem with me is that I may have gotten the hang of my ABC's, but I still don't know what I'm supposed to be doing to improve things. I work for a corporate bookstore. I enjoy the work immensely, I love reading and recommending books, and the community of knowledge that my coworkers and customers create when we talk about reading. That being said, I'm not wild about many of the business practices of my company, and our future prospects aren't great, as more of the market is being taken over by online retailers and e-books. I've tentatively started to look for new jobs, sent in a few resumes, but wasn't generally troubled by the lack of response. Until this week. I've gotten a couple of solid prospects, positions with better salaries, better benefits, and better long-term opportunities. Unfortunately, none of them are with bookstores. I'm torn between doing work I love for a company I don't, or working for better pay & better conditions, doing something I'm less than passionate about.
I think, whichever job I take, I'm only treading water, so to speak, while I continue my education. Once I finish school, I'll have to push myself to discover my potential; find my purpose, define my goals. Right now it's OK to be a sales girl or a receptionist or a barista, because later I'll find a "real job." Or so I tell myself. The trouble is, i don't have the answers, or even a clear idea of the right questions, about my future. For now, I get by, reminding myself to be content that I have a job, at all. Still, sometimes I wish my ambitions were easier to quantify.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Today I'm watching my nephew, Asher, who will be two years old in May. He saw my copy of The Audacity of Hope and pointed to your face on the cover. I tried to teach him how to say "President Obama", but so far all he's got is "bama." I try to think about the America that Asher will know, if he'll come of age just as lost and disillusioned as my generation has, or if he will face an entirely new set of challenges. I appreciate the discussion of what we're leaving for the next generation- the deficit, clean energy, new industry, and the environmental impact. I know you have young children, yourself, and will therefor need no personal face to remind you of how important your legacy will be. Just know that there's a little boy in Seattle trying to master his ABC's, refine his utensil-wielding skills, and say his President's name. He's not worried about having clean water, or job security, living in a safer, more peaceful world, but his aunt is.
The problem with me is that I may have gotten the hang of my ABC's, but I still don't know what I'm supposed to be doing to improve things. I work for a corporate bookstore. I enjoy the work immensely, I love reading and recommending books, and the community of knowledge that my coworkers and customers create when we talk about reading. That being said, I'm not wild about many of the business practices of my company, and our future prospects aren't great, as more of the market is being taken over by online retailers and e-books. I've tentatively started to look for new jobs, sent in a few resumes, but wasn't generally troubled by the lack of response. Until this week. I've gotten a couple of solid prospects, positions with better salaries, better benefits, and better long-term opportunities. Unfortunately, none of them are with bookstores. I'm torn between doing work I love for a company I don't, or working for better pay & better conditions, doing something I'm less than passionate about.
I think, whichever job I take, I'm only treading water, so to speak, while I continue my education. Once I finish school, I'll have to push myself to discover my potential; find my purpose, define my goals. Right now it's OK to be a sales girl or a receptionist or a barista, because later I'll find a "real job." Or so I tell myself. The trouble is, i don't have the answers, or even a clear idea of the right questions, about my future. For now, I get by, reminding myself to be content that I have a job, at all. Still, sometimes I wish my ambitions were easier to quantify.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Day 31
It's been one month. Tonight, as I have several times this week, I've canceled plans in order to write my letter. I should probably just get better at time management. It's disheartening to have no response to anything I've written, yet, but I'm hoping that including my e-mail address will facilitate this. Anyway, on to today:
Dear Mr. President,
I took a break from reading The Audacity of Hope to finish Joe Sacco's Footnotes in Gaza. I don't imagine you have much time for reading, but if you do have an opportunity, it is an important book.
One of the things Sacco mentions is "story fatigue" with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. This is something I relate to, as I commonly encounter it in friends and strangers; their tendency to sigh, or to stop listening when I talk about Palestine. I find this more exasperating than the ideologues who simply disagree with me. At least they care enough to have an opinion, are aware enough not to feel themselves victimized by the news of another tragedy. It is such a luxury, to be tired of hearing about the conflict. I try not to imagine how it compares to the unending fatigue of living this conflict for decades, because that just makes me angry. With every day that passes, with every story lost in the cacophony of similar-sounding stories, with every canned, talking-point answer, my frustration grows.
The reprehensible treatment of human life in Gaza is unacceptable. Every dollar we give to Israel, every day spent spouting our unending and unconditional support ties the United States more closely to these crimes. And still, you say nothing. Still, you do nothing. Yes, Mr. President, you have an incredibly difficult domestic agenda that must be negotiated and implemented. People in this country are losing jobs, losing health care, losing their livelihood and you're working day and night to turn this around. I understand this. But you're our representative to the world in many ways, and your silence on the complete lack of progress or improvement on the situation in the Middle East is disappointing.
I know we disagree on this issue, Mr. President, but, unlike the GOP leadership, I don't get a debate on it. I'd like you to publicly defend our official position and its consequences; the housing demolitions, the blockade, the random arrests, the collective punishment of innocents, all in the face of criticism from the UN, ICRC and other international organizations. Explain to me, to the rest of the country, and to Palestine why questioning these acts is tantamount to "demonizing" Israel. Explain to me why America supports Democracy everywhere except the Gaza strip. I don't question your right to disagree, Mr. President, but I do wonder if your convictions on this are strong enough to defend the grim reality, and not just to cover up these crimes with the same old platitudes.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Dear Mr. President,
I took a break from reading The Audacity of Hope to finish Joe Sacco's Footnotes in Gaza. I don't imagine you have much time for reading, but if you do have an opportunity, it is an important book.
One of the things Sacco mentions is "story fatigue" with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. This is something I relate to, as I commonly encounter it in friends and strangers; their tendency to sigh, or to stop listening when I talk about Palestine. I find this more exasperating than the ideologues who simply disagree with me. At least they care enough to have an opinion, are aware enough not to feel themselves victimized by the news of another tragedy. It is such a luxury, to be tired of hearing about the conflict. I try not to imagine how it compares to the unending fatigue of living this conflict for decades, because that just makes me angry. With every day that passes, with every story lost in the cacophony of similar-sounding stories, with every canned, talking-point answer, my frustration grows.
The reprehensible treatment of human life in Gaza is unacceptable. Every dollar we give to Israel, every day spent spouting our unending and unconditional support ties the United States more closely to these crimes. And still, you say nothing. Still, you do nothing. Yes, Mr. President, you have an incredibly difficult domestic agenda that must be negotiated and implemented. People in this country are losing jobs, losing health care, losing their livelihood and you're working day and night to turn this around. I understand this. But you're our representative to the world in many ways, and your silence on the complete lack of progress or improvement on the situation in the Middle East is disappointing.
I know we disagree on this issue, Mr. President, but, unlike the GOP leadership, I don't get a debate on it. I'd like you to publicly defend our official position and its consequences; the housing demolitions, the blockade, the random arrests, the collective punishment of innocents, all in the face of criticism from the UN, ICRC and other international organizations. Explain to me, to the rest of the country, and to Palestine why questioning these acts is tantamount to "demonizing" Israel. Explain to me why America supports Democracy everywhere except the Gaza strip. I don't question your right to disagree, Mr. President, but I do wonder if your convictions on this are strong enough to defend the grim reality, and not just to cover up these crimes with the same old platitudes.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Friday, January 29, 2010
Day 29
Dear Mr. President,
I filed my Tax return today, and, to my great surprise, I'm getting a refund more than double what I'd anticipated. This is largely due to the American Opportunity Tax Credit which was, surprise surprise, part of the stimulus bill. I'm going to use half of it to finally pay off my credit card. My best friend, upon hearing of my refund, exclaimed, "let's stimulate the economy!", so you can bet we'll be spending the other half more quickly than we should. I have to say, it's difficult not to feel happy with the Recovery Act when I have such tangible evidence of how I personally benefit from it. I'm a fairly well-informed person, and even I had no idea how much the Recovery Act was going to benefit me. I think, had it been explained better, more people would have supported it, and been happy with your administration's efforts.
Anyway, my worries about credit card and student loan debt, my anxiety about returning to school, my general stress about the state of my finances is greatly alleviated by all of this. Thank you so much. I'm generally not opposed to paying taxes, but I won't lie- it was nice not to pay so much this year. I'm still glad you didn't concede to Republican requests for an across the board tax cut in your discussion with them today. Not cutting taxes for the very wealthy, for people like my former CEO, is an incredibly sensible thing to insist upon, and I feel that you did explain this very well. You do a much better job of admitting mistakes, taking blame, and discussing the ideas of your political rivals than I feel President Bush ever did.
The coverage of the State of the Union address continues to be divided along ideological lines, which is upsetting but in no way surprising. Today I watched Jon Stewart mention his perception of your administration as being a third entity, being isolated from congressional Democrats and Republicans. I don't know how accurate his impression of this is, but I think it indicates the sense people have of the Democratic party being fractured so badly it is unable to effectively lead. I sincerely hope that your State of the Union address helped ease this, and that congressional Democrats rally to the pass the proposals you outlined in the speech. I would hate to lose control of the House or the Senate in November, but if the Democrats don't see the ramifications of their in-fighting and start governing more effectively, we deserve to.
Listening to your speech Wednesday, and your answers to the Republicans today, I have to say you sound just like you did in The Audacity of Hope and its nice to know you're still that optimistic. I can't speak for any one but myself, but for me, at least, that optimism seems to be catching.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
I filed my Tax return today, and, to my great surprise, I'm getting a refund more than double what I'd anticipated. This is largely due to the American Opportunity Tax Credit which was, surprise surprise, part of the stimulus bill. I'm going to use half of it to finally pay off my credit card. My best friend, upon hearing of my refund, exclaimed, "let's stimulate the economy!", so you can bet we'll be spending the other half more quickly than we should. I have to say, it's difficult not to feel happy with the Recovery Act when I have such tangible evidence of how I personally benefit from it. I'm a fairly well-informed person, and even I had no idea how much the Recovery Act was going to benefit me. I think, had it been explained better, more people would have supported it, and been happy with your administration's efforts.
Anyway, my worries about credit card and student loan debt, my anxiety about returning to school, my general stress about the state of my finances is greatly alleviated by all of this. Thank you so much. I'm generally not opposed to paying taxes, but I won't lie- it was nice not to pay so much this year. I'm still glad you didn't concede to Republican requests for an across the board tax cut in your discussion with them today. Not cutting taxes for the very wealthy, for people like my former CEO, is an incredibly sensible thing to insist upon, and I feel that you did explain this very well. You do a much better job of admitting mistakes, taking blame, and discussing the ideas of your political rivals than I feel President Bush ever did.
The coverage of the State of the Union address continues to be divided along ideological lines, which is upsetting but in no way surprising. Today I watched Jon Stewart mention his perception of your administration as being a third entity, being isolated from congressional Democrats and Republicans. I don't know how accurate his impression of this is, but I think it indicates the sense people have of the Democratic party being fractured so badly it is unable to effectively lead. I sincerely hope that your State of the Union address helped ease this, and that congressional Democrats rally to the pass the proposals you outlined in the speech. I would hate to lose control of the House or the Senate in November, but if the Democrats don't see the ramifications of their in-fighting and start governing more effectively, we deserve to.
Listening to your speech Wednesday, and your answers to the Republicans today, I have to say you sound just like you did in The Audacity of Hope and its nice to know you're still that optimistic. I can't speak for any one but myself, but for me, at least, that optimism seems to be catching.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Monday, January 25, 2010
Day 25
Dear Mr. President,
I started reading The Audacity of Hope today. From the start, I've found your longing for a more productive style of politics inspiring, and recognized too much of myself and too many of my peers in your assertion that "a cynical electorate is a self-centered electorate." Our cynicism may not be without cause, but it is a false kind of wisdom, a false comfort in that it plays into the hands of the type of politicians we think it protects us from.
I think we'd really like to believe in America again, believe in it as a force of good, believe in it as an institution of and by and for us, the people. Do we fail the system by refusing to participate, or adequately educate ourselves? Or do politicians fail us by fattening themselves on the spoils of victory and sacrificing the better interests of the people for the better interests of their party? I don't know the answer. I don't know that we can walk things back, undo the divide. I don't know that I want to work with some one to improve health care, if they don't believe my gay friends have a right to marry the ones they love. I don't know if I want to win or to work together.
I want to believe that we can do both. That we can change minds, not just win elections. That every American can participate in the hard work of making our country stronger and healthier and wiser and more just. That we can understand the link between our values and our vote- that politics can be seen as open to every one and not just the wealthy and powerful. I want to believe that we can elect great leaders and have meaningful national discussions about real issues. I want to believe that each of us can change this country for the better.
I wonder if you are still as optimistic as the author of this book. Is it possible to work in Washington and not become just as cynical as the electorate?
I want to believe that it is.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
I started reading The Audacity of Hope today. From the start, I've found your longing for a more productive style of politics inspiring, and recognized too much of myself and too many of my peers in your assertion that "a cynical electorate is a self-centered electorate." Our cynicism may not be without cause, but it is a false kind of wisdom, a false comfort in that it plays into the hands of the type of politicians we think it protects us from.
I think we'd really like to believe in America again, believe in it as a force of good, believe in it as an institution of and by and for us, the people. Do we fail the system by refusing to participate, or adequately educate ourselves? Or do politicians fail us by fattening themselves on the spoils of victory and sacrificing the better interests of the people for the better interests of their party? I don't know the answer. I don't know that we can walk things back, undo the divide. I don't know that I want to work with some one to improve health care, if they don't believe my gay friends have a right to marry the ones they love. I don't know if I want to win or to work together.
I want to believe that we can do both. That we can change minds, not just win elections. That every American can participate in the hard work of making our country stronger and healthier and wiser and more just. That we can understand the link between our values and our vote- that politics can be seen as open to every one and not just the wealthy and powerful. I want to believe that we can elect great leaders and have meaningful national discussions about real issues. I want to believe that each of us can change this country for the better.
I wonder if you are still as optimistic as the author of this book. Is it possible to work in Washington and not become just as cynical as the electorate?
I want to believe that it is.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
