American Family Association Finally Comes Out

The AFA today sent out an “Action Alert” email to their constituency about energy costs. They are blaming environmentalists for the rising price of gas, saying that:

We have abundant energy reserves, but the environmentalists won’t let us use them. All efforts to provide for our needs end up in court because of the environmentalists! A handful of environmentalists are forcing all Americans to pay outrageous amounts for gas!

They are lobbying the American people to support the “exploration of energy sources” saying that this “would not materially effect our environment.” Spreading this misinformation is immoral and dangerous.

And I might add, not Christian. Even Pat Robertson appeared in those ridiculous ads with Al Sharpton saying that we have to protect the environment. What would Jesus do? He would want us to protect and be stewards of God’s creation. I am grateful that there is an Evangelical Christian movement that recognizes the responsibility that we all have to protect the environment.

The American (anti)Family Association has finally come clean and shown their opposition to the environmental movement. This organization that supposedly clings to Christian values spews hate-speech and intolerance, and is now encouraging the American people to believe that they should be able to consume as much gas and oil as they want without regard to their impact on climate change. I can’t say that I’m surprised, but I am perplexed. The values just don’t match up.

I like to use the AFA script pages to write my representatives. Go to this link and type in your zip code, and it will take you to a page where you can fill in the blanks. Here is what I wrote:

Dear Senator/Representative:

The rising price of gasoline is hurting nearly every family in America.  But I believe that every one of us has a responsibility to live in a more environmentally sustainable manner.

It is time for Congress to get serious about making green living a priority in this country. We need to curtail our dependency on oil and to curb our consumption of gasoline and our contributions to greenhouse gases that are contributing to global warming.

We need to develop green-color jobs, create public transportation systems that work, build sustainable communities where people can walk or bike easily from home to work to buy groceries, etc. We need to make recycling easier, and we need to outlaw the use of plastic shopping bags. We need to work to change our culture so that people can live more sustainably. We need to stop consuming goods that only end up in a land fill after two years. We need to set national standards for decreasing carbon emissions.  We need to protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge from Big Oil.

As one of our Nation’s leaders, you have a responsibility to help find solutions to the climate change problem. The future of our planet, of our children, our families depends on it.

National Conference for Media Reform

I’m not entirely sure how I stumbled onto these guys, but I sure am glad I did. This weekend Free Press hosted a the National Conference for Media Reform (NCMR) in St. Paul (St. Paul has got it going on these days!). Since discovering Twitter, I have been looking for cool feeds to follow, and I have become aware of a few folks who started following me. Pretty neat.

I found Free Press website and book marked them in Ma.gnolia back in April, but didn’t think about it much again after that. Admittedly, I get kind of lazy about the websites I save there, just kind of harding them for future reference. And I do refer back to them, but some times it takes me a while. But I digress.

I didn’t think about Free Press again until this weekend when the Twittersphere just lit up with activity from the NCMR conference. I had no idea it was going on, but I started seeing lots of posts with the #ncmr hash tag, and the tweets included interesting quotes from the speeches and panels they were watching, and there was a post for the live feed of the conference, so I decided to check it out.

It was amazing! The likes of Bill Moyers, Dan Rather, Ariana Huffington, Amy Goodman, and Van Jones were all there talking about media’s responsibility to help the public hold politicians accountable, and the necessity of media to stay independent in order to accomplish this.

It was all so inspiring. I’ve been tuning in as I can this entire weekend, in between chores and errands. Bill Moyers address is a must-see, and there is another video of him being accosted by a Fox News reporter that makes me just love Moyers more than I did before. The video is going viral, which is very exciting. Word is getting out!

I highly recommend checking out any of these videos. Lawrence Lessig’s is really good. Van Jones had me clapping and cheering here in my living room (I’ll post later when its uploaded). Dan Rather is just a cool guy. I missed Amy Goodman, but I hope they’ll post her speech soon.

I hope the few friends who read this blog and any who stumble upon it will check some of these out. It made me feel inspired to keep blogging, to keep doing my small part of expressing myself, spreading the encouragement to others to do the same, and to use the new media tools to build a progressive movement and community.

Accountability and Forgiveness

Now that Barack Obama is the Democratic presidential candidate, it is time to unite the party. I am relieved that we have finally one person to get behind. The infighting and mudslinging of the past six months has really gotten to me, and I fear has done a lot to hurt our chances of unity and success.

I have long been perplexed by the rabid supporters of either Clinton of Obama, those who say they will absolutely not vote for the other if their candidate loses. What’s the alternative? McCain? Another Ralph Nader? How does that help us?

This morning I was thinking about forgiveness. I really hope that Clinton’s supporters will not further alienate themselves from the rest of the progressive movement. I think the only way that is going to happen is if they can practice forgiveness. Not to say that they need to change their perspective of values, but they do need to open their hearts to other perspectives and values, ones that are more akin to their own than they know.

I have been more inclined to support Obama than Clinton all along because of her vote to support the war in Iraq. That was really the deciding factor for me. Other than that, I really liked both Clinton and Obama, and have thought of them both as viable candidates. I want to hold Clinton accountable for her vote, and to date she hasn’t said anything that satisfies me as an answer for why she did it. I really wish she would just apologize instead of try to justify her actions. I would feel a whole lot better about her.

However, I do get it. She, like so many others, bought into the lies that the Bush Administration told to justify the invasion six years ago. Unlike her, I was never persuaded that the war was justifiable, but given the information she had at the time, I believe that she felt she was making the best decision. And like any politician, she has had to make compromises to continue to move her agenda forward.

Every politician in this country has to compromise. Even the late Senator Paul Wellstone, whom I still miss today, voted for the Defense of Marriage Act. That was a move that was extremely disappointing to me personally. He let me down. However, I know that he never would have wanted to support DOMA. But I know that’s how politics works, and though it hurt me personally, I forgive him.

I forgive them. I forgive Paul Wellstone, and I forgive Hillary Clinton, and I’m even willing to say in advance that I will forgive Barack Obama for compromises that he will have to make in order to succeed with other agendas. Indeed, he already has taken positions that I feel are hurtful to me, but I know that he is the candidate who will lead this nation in the right direction overall, so I forgive him.

That doesn’t mean that I won’t hold him accountable or that I won’t speak out if I feel that something is wrong. But it does mean that I won’t be punishing, withholding my support for him because he does or says something that I disagree with. I won’t take part in hateful, hurtful, and divisive speech because I disagree with and may even be angry at politicians for the decisions they make.

I watched the live feed of Van Jones’ speech at the National Conference on Media Reform today (I will post the link to the video when it becomes available), and he spoke right to this issue. He said that we have to keep the progressive movement together, that we can’t be so stubborn and say that there is only one right way to do things, anything else is a sell-out. If we do that, we will surely fail.

Earlier, I heard a lesbian couple on NPR, avid supporters of Clinton who said they wouldn’t vote for any ticket where Obama was at the top. This stubbornness really saddens and scares me. How can we even talk to each other about how to move the progressive agenda forward? Do people really believe that they’d do better on their own?

I need to practice forgiveness, too, to those whose politics should be aligned with my own but who choose to walk alone instead of in solidarity. I hope that our paths converge again.

I ♥ Pandora

Since I started listening to Pandora, a “music discovery tool”, I have been introduced to a lot of new music that I absolutely love. Po’ Girl, Girly Man, and Kate Rusby, are just a few of the artists that I have learned about that I now listen to regularly. The concept of this technology is still a little mysterious to me. It is the “Music Genome Project,” so basically you create “stations” by selecting what music you want to listen to, either by song or by artist, and it will play songs that you might like based on similar qualities. For the most part, this works pretty well.

Occasionally, however, it is way off. With my Stardust station, for instance, I was aiming for a little cheese, a little Sergio Mendez, Chet Baker, Blossom Dearie, and sometimes it will play songs that make my ears bleed. I keep the volume turned down pretty low so as not to disturb my neighbors at the office, but no matter how quiet, one of those songs come on, and I say to myself “What is that annoying sound?” Sure enough, it’s some horrible Michael Bolton or Celine Dion Song. And if anyone catches me while something like that is playing, I feel terribly embarrassed. But I can just simply thumbs down the song, and it won’t play again. I can also ask Pandora why it chose to play that song, and it will say something like

Based on what you’ve told us so far, we are playing this song because it has basic rock structures, a subtle use of vocal harmony, mild rhythmic syncopation, acoustic rhythm piano, and mixed acoustic and electric instrumentation.

If you like a song, you give it a thumbs up, and the station will base part of its programming on that song. This is cool, too, though I have really screwed up my favorite Girly Man station this way. I was going for mellow folk, and I had it so I loved it, but after a while, I wanted a little more variety. So I added Bon Iver and Belle and Sebastian. Big mistake. It started playing Nirvana and rockous Jeff Buckley tunes, which I love, too, but not while I’m at the office. There I’m going for Jolie Holland and Madeleine Peyroux. I’ve removed some of the song “seeds,” but it hasn’t been the same again.

But in all honesty, I must say that these little hiccups are entertaining, albeit embarrassing.

The social networking aspect of Pandora certainly has potential, and I don’t think I’ve explored it enough. I just discovered the Pandora Twitter feed, which I think will introduce me to other listeners doing interesting things.

I know there are some other music listening services out there. I tried LastFM, and it didn’t really work for me. It is the same idea, giving you music based on other music you like, and it was way off most of the time. I missed Pandora, so I switched back.

I can’t help myself, either. Of course I’m going to support a company based in my beloved Oakland.

Overthinking “Peace” Tweet

One of my Twitter contacts posted the following tweet tonight:

Wondering how many of you my twitter friends, believe in world peace? if you do, copy this tweet in your next tweet.

This got me thinking: Do I believe in world peace?

What does is this question really asking? My first instinct is to say “Duh! Of course I do! I majored in Peace Studies in college.” The language of this tweet is really confusing. Is it telling you to copy the tweet if you wonder how many of your Twitter followers believe in peace? What is the point of this little exercise? Who started this and what do they hope to accomplish?

World peace doesn’t really exist right now. Or more precisely, perhaps, there are many significant wars going on right now that cause peaceniks to feel relatively hopeless.

I suppose I do believe in peace in that it exists in some places in the world right now. More importantly, however, peace is one of my core values, and as a citizen of the world I believe my every action has an impact, and that peace is contagious and inspired. Much like this little tweet.

I decided to edit the tweet a bit:

I believe that world peace is possible. If you do, too, copy this tweet in your next tweet. Pass it on.

But I can’t bring myself to actually send it! I feel a little silly, like I’m making a big deal out of nothing. But at the same time I think it’s kind of important to send the right message to my 26 Twitter followers. And what is it trying to convey? But even though I’ve never even met my Twitter contact in person, I don’t want him to think that I don’t believe in peace. Because I do! What am I trying to convey? So I wrote this blog, which is way too long for a tweet.

Truly, I’m overthinking this. But perhaps that was the original intent. Or maybe its just me.