Good News for a Change
Babylon shook today, with all three branches of the federal government reflecting the best news our nation's had in awhile.
- Both Houses of Congress changed hands, with Democrats picking up both the House of Representatives and the Senate, empowering the corporate centrist party (with a loud and growing progressive wing) to investigate corruptions pervading the recent history of Repubican rule, from the the energy task force chaired by Dick Cheney that in 2004 the Supreme Court insulated from public transparency to the 2003 Republican extortion of legislators that resulted in one of former Republican Congressman Tom Delay's many ethics rebukes and legislation allowing the pharmaceutical industry to suck yet more blood from senior citizens.
- Traitor and arrogant buffoon Donald Rumsfeld (AKA the incarnation of hubris) resigned his post as Secretary of Defense, sealing the historical narrative that will come to define the American invasion of Iraq as analogous to that of Vietnam 30 years earlier. During his press conference announcing "Dummy Rummy's" resignation, our illustrious leader George W. Bush admitted that he had previously lied about his intentions with respect to the Secretary's future in his administration, and conceded that he and his cronies received a "thumpin" (without a "g," mind you) at last night's "rodeo." He also suggested that his failure to predict the change in the Congressional leadership "shows how much I know."
- The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in the Carhart cases, presenting the most serious challenge to reproductive freedom since the first round of cases involving Dr. Leroy Carhart six years ago. The cases differ from their predecessor mostly in that (a) Congress compiled "findings" that so-called "partial birth" abortion (the term is right wing contrivance whose ambiguity was actually an independent ground for the Supreme Court's invalidation of the first round of laws in 2000) is never medically necessary — despite the mounting evidence and emerging consensus within the medical community that "dilation & extraction" procedures are often the safest alternative for women seeking abortions in their second trimester; and (b) the replacement of retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor (the 5th vote in the majority that defended reproductive freedom in Carhart I) by Justice Samuel Alito, who as a young lawyer bragged about his efforts to reverse the line of privacy cases culminating in Roe v. Wade. While Justice Anthony Kennedy's support of the legislation struck down by the Court in 2000 has grown legendary since, his questioning during today's argument suggested to observers that his mind was open and that expansions in the state of medical science — not to mention the Court's institutional interest in maintaining its own independence from Congressional fiat — may have convinced him to reconsider his position.
Lest believers in a brighter future get ahead of ourselves, however, I'll merely suggest that the real question is now how assertively will the incoming Committee chairs wield their new influence, and whether corporate or bona fide progressive Democrats come to define the forgoing agenda. The right wing is down, but it's far from out, and we have yet to even address the more longstanding threat to meaningful justice or equality in America: the overwhelming dominance of corporations in both major political parties.
I remain hopeful, but still skeptical of what goes on in this town….
It seems to me
we have an opportunity
to let all people see
what it means to be free
but more likely it will be a hoax
hundreds of confused folks
standin around with no kind of direction
until somebody gets excited and runs for an election
and then shuns the people who didn't support his campaign
feedin and greedin off their labor so he can gain fame
always forgetting in the end that it’s the same:
lame liars losing lavishly to those who don’t pose
with rows of pretty poster children
tryna make the most of what they’re given
but livin’ in a land that tells lies:
all you can do after college is serve fries
unless you’re hellafied smart.
It don’t hurt to have a start involving parents with some cash.
Don’t even need your own stash
to get a hundred yard head start in the white man’s dash.
we need some MASH in the public education system
fixin’ oscillation between frustration, inspiration
for those pursuing dissemination of education,
everybody always bitchin bout how we can’t educate
but no one tries to ruminate on possible solutions.
Instead, we remain mired in confusions,
focusing on kids in schools with guns,
when the real problem’s a lack of funds.
Property taxes buy teachers with PhDs
for the rich suburban white kids, while the rest of these
kids without the head starts get teachers with big hearts
but not so much incentive – they have to get inventive
to find books for the children they’re supposed to teach
Solutions slipping off the tongues of politicians
pandering to the public to pursue their ambitions
purchasing munitions that we don’t even need
in order to appeal to their constituent’s greed.
Who needs education?
We’ll just lock up kids with weed,
breeding an abominable political creed
We need to be freed from our so-called democracy,
rediscoverin’ tender loving appreciation for the beauty of creation
chasin’ the sensation of connection
with the entire global – one human kind – nation
erasin’ frustration over victimization
by pursuing the eradication of domination.
Talkin’ ‘bout corporations, globalization
after being slaves, now consumers on plantations,
our orientation, imposed on all locations:
increasing the size of corporate capitalization.
A lot of this line of thinking in poetry that Daisy describes seems to be the reverberation and absorption of lit crit theories from the late 1980s and the 1990s into the creative world–the use of semiotics, deconstruction, and reader-response theories to analyze literary texts. A lot of this theory–Roland Barthes, Jonathan Culler, Stanley Fish, and those critics with the Cher-like popularity of being known only by a single name, Foucault and Derrida–a lot of it is pretty interesting to read, contemplate, and apply to texts. I encountered most of this in the early 1990s in lit grad school