Why I Cannot Vote for Hillary Clinton

Hola mi gente,
Please consider supporting my writing by donating HERE. If you can’t donate, consider sharing the link with your contacts. Thank you.

I’m Not With her

Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
Martin Luther King, Jr. -- Letter from a Birmingham Jail

I am not voting for Hillary Clinton. My decision isn’t because of some imagined misogyny on my part or because I dislike her personally. It isn’t based on the scandal around her emails or because of some concern over her character, though those are concerning. No, my reasons for not voting for Hillary are pretty much straightforward: I vehemently disagree with her ideology.

My core values centered on economic and racial justice shape my own politics. History shows those values do not shape hers. Even with her current concessions to the Sanders campaign (which will most likely change) nothing Clinton says or intends to do if elected will fundamentally transform the circumstances of the most vulnerable in this country. Like the rest of U.S. politicians, he is a corporate neoliberal cheerleader intent on maintaining the status quo. I have had my fill of them since before Clinton, pt. 1.

What in Clinton’s history demonstrates she is a substantive alternative to the status quo? How would her position on free trade, for example, or her view of foreign policy, and on immigration change our course as a nation? Hillary supporters constantly bring up the specter of what our world would like with Trump as president but have been mostly quiet with the fact that Hillary, in her advocacy of one of the worst, most racist crime bills ever signed by a president, basically called black children super predators who needed to be “brought to heel.” Taking that as context, her call for “common sense policing” in the face of the state-sanctioned murders of Black, Latinx, and Indigenous people is scary. How will her presidency transform the conditions of my black, brown, and First Nation people?

Given the state of the country and of black and brown communities, these questions must be asked. But many Clinton supporters are downright contemptuous or label them as part of a left out of touch or irresponsible. For supporters of the Clinton campaign, those who dare to ask these questions, people like me, demonstrate that we don’t understand the incremental nature of US politics or that we have crossed over into some forbidden realm of politics.

Ironically, when Republicans reject Trump on ideological grounds, it is widely applauded. When establishment conservatives argue that Trump isn’t a true conservative, and that they will not vote for him, it is seen as reasonable. But to argue something similar about Clinton is immediately dismissed. We are labeled as “privileged,” a racist implication that is the height of hypocrisy considering we’re talking about a privileged white woman who has a cruel history when it comes to black and Latina women and children.

This is revealing in that in strips away the thin veneer of a robust democratic national dialog. In a historical period in which the center has moved to the right, there isn’t even room for talk (let alone action) for genuinely progressive politics left of center. The political spectrum in the US spans this warped center to the far right and this is the legacy ensured by the Democratic Leadership Council that was championed by the Clintons. Clinton our only viable option is we are told. Get behind her or risk the future of the nation, they say, resembling political Chicken Littles.

This narrowing of the political discourse joins forces with an easy form of identity politics. Many extol the fact that Hillary Clinton would be our first woman president. But, beyond the symbolism, what would that mean for women at home and abroad? As with the election of Obama, Many felt good about the idea of a black president. Now, as Obama prepares to leave office after eight years, African American communities lay in ruins, and we continue to find ourselves engaged in this haunting ritual of grieving in public for another black life snuffed by the police.

It is not enough that Hillary Clinton might be our first president with a vagina. Symbolically that would be significant, but the more important question rests with how her economic policies would affect the lives of working, poor women and children here in the United States and around the globe. How would she shift the frame of US aid policy and its impact on developing countries? How might her hawkishness affect the lives of vulnerable women and children? If none of that matters, then, as the sister, Daughter of Oya, states:

If your feminism holds more space for a racist genocidal imperialist than it does for an entire planet full of women suffering under the barbarity of the system she [Hillary] has dedicated her life to upholding, then your feminism is trash, it’s not going to get you free, and you need to get it together.

In fact, anti-racism and anti-sexism have become easy positions for neoliberal political elites. Today, perhaps understanding that calling black and Latinx children sociopaths would be political suicide, Hillary speaks with ease of “implicit bias” with regard to police brutality. One would gather that she expressing solidarity with people of color, and some assume that her policies reflect her rhetoric. On closer examination, nothing could be farther from the truth. In fact, her top advisors are lobbyists for the private prison industry. It’s just the latest instance of pandering that changes little and allows a few people to feel good about themselves.

I am not saying that anti-racism or anti-sexism (or identity politics in general) don’t matter. But they can’t provide cover for business as usual -- a version of neoliberalism dressed in a multicultural Chanel pants suit.

Finally, the best a Clinton supporter can offer as a reason to vote for her is not anything that Clinton brings to the table. Rather, it’s him. The most persuasive reason to vote for Hillary Clinton is Donald Trump. Trump is worse. I know that. The prospects of a Trump presidency -- what would be a deadly combination of arrogance and ignorance -- ought to frighten anyone. It frightens me. But as the candidate who I will be casting my vote for, Jill Stein, has correctly pointed out, what we fear from Donald Trump, we have already seen from Hillary Clinton.

But what I have a very hard time understanding, especially form people who call themselves progressives living in New York, is why they would cast a vote for a candidate who is to the right of Ronald Reagan on many issues. It’s the Electoral College, stupid. Hillary is certain to win New York, that’s a done deal, why are you voting for a pro-fracking, pro-free trade, pro-mass incarceration candidate unless that is where your values actually reside?

Here is a piece of adult-like wisdom, my friends: we can’t continue to live with the current level of income inequality. Hard working people are working longer hours for less pay. And politicians like Hillary Clinton and their benefactors continue to argue for trade policies that have decimated the working class in this country. We can’t continue to lock up black and brown people or watch them killed in cold blood by people sworn to protect us or fail to publicly educate all of our children. We can’t continue, as Hillary’s record shows she will, to bomb people around the world into oblivion.

We can’t even begin to entertain a robust idea of the public good when filthy rich people believe that the only role of government is to facilitate the transfer of public dollars into private hands, and the function of politicians is to make us believe that it is in our best interest that we allow such a thing to happen.

In the final analysis, Donald Trump is simply an indication of the rotted heart at the heart of this country. But so is Hillary Clinton. That fact alone cannot be the only rationale to support Hillary Clinton. Something more substantive is required of us -- of her.

I am not with her. I will not vote for her. I will vote down ballot, focusing my attention on congressional, state, and local elections. And I will post my vote for Jill Stein. I refuse to support a political machinery that repeatedly turns its back on my people and the most vulnerable in this country, because people have been led to believe they have nowhere else to go. That false belief betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of this period of democratic awakening.

Fear is not enough. I have fought all my life so that I could live a life not based on fear and what is ugly and cruel. I have fought to live a life based on love and what is good in all of us. We find ourselves in a moment in history, in which the very life of the planet hangs in the balance. Running around in fight or flight mode, our collective amygdala on fire, is not the way to go.

My name is Eddie and I’m in recovery from civilization…

Racism and #OccupyWallStreet

¡Hola Mi Gente!
I’ve been spending almost all of my free time at the #OccupyWallStreet (OWS) site. By the time I get home, I barely have enough time for myself, let alone write. I will say that what’s happening is one of the most exciting, politically speaking, in a long time.

Sometimes you can often tell the effectiveness of a person or a movement by the amount of venom spewed at it. The corporate-owned media still cannot effectively put a spin on the movement because its strategy and conceptualization is foreign to the current paradigm. Fox News accuses us of being anti-Semites one day, secretly run by George Soros the next, dirty hippies and clueless, self-indulgent trust fund babies from the beginning, and more recently, a movement secretly run by, yup, ACORN.

The rest of the cable news infotainment media are little better, though Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann both seem to have a better grasp. And now I’m hearing from the black/ brown blogosphere that OWS is -- racist!

I believe that all these people should hold a meeting and decide once and for all, what we are. Though I don’t have the time (wish I had a laptop!) necessary to address the following, I feel a need to speak on it.

[On a side note, I was beyond ecstatic to learn one of my heros, Ms. Davis, visited us this past Sunday.]

* * *

Race, Class, Gender, Power and #OccupyWallStreet

And I guess what I would say is that we can't think narrowly about movements for black liberation and we can't necessarily see this class division as simply a product or a certain strategy that black movements have developed for liberation.

-- Angela Y. Davis

I consider myself a feminist. I am down with women’s rights because I don’t see them as separate from my own. Yet, I have to understand and recognize that as a man raised is in a misogynistic society, I most likely carry vestiges of that social conditioning and that in order to be more liberated, I have to own up to and learn to unpack that conditioning.

I am down with equal rights for my LGBT brothers and sisters, but I have to understand that my perspective is somewhat informed as a heterosexual male in a society that oppresses homosexuality.

As a man, I take for granted many things that others can’t. For example, something as mundane as walking down the street is infinitely different for a woman than it is for me. I take it for granted that I can walk in public and not dread having complete strangers aggressively proposition me sexually, or make comments about the size of my cock, or my supposed sluttishness. I can walk down a dark street without the fear of rape being foremost in my mind. I take these for granted -- most women can’t.

I am down with “the cause” as they say, down with equality and freedom, and am committed to helping create a true democratic process a reality. I work as an activist, mostly in progressive, nonprofit organizations (or I did, LOL!). Still, that doesn’t mean I live outside of the context of a society that is racist, misogynistic and homophobic, along with many other forms of oppression.

One day, a colleague approached me obviously distressed. She was angry for what she saw as forms of oppression operating within our organization. “We should be better than this,” she said almost in tears.

I challenged her. I challenged her idea that as a nonprofit, as progressives working together for progressive causes, that we’re somehow different from the larger society we were seeking to reform. I told her that what should separate us from the rest of society is the knowledge and recognition of how we are all conditioned to internalize forms of oppression. I told her that our work is to create the world we seek by becoming, not by doing.

This was over ten years ago, and this woman, who I consider a friend as well as a professional ally always reminds me of that day because she says it was an epiphany for her (it was a revelation for me as well).

Which brings to my main point today: is #OccupyWallStreet “racist”? My answer would be a resounding, “no!” On the other hand, it would be incorrect to say that the same forms of oppression that plague our larger society don’t exist within the #OccupyWallStreet movement. That would be bullshit. But why would anyone expect any different? We, for that matter, no one, don’t exist in a vacuum outside the social context that we’re attempting to critique and change. However, to characterize the movement as “white” or “racist” is utterly without merit. It’s no different than Fox News claiming we’re a bunch of anti-semites, or the Wall Street Journal editorializing on our perceived naiveté.

One day, while sitting in on a working group, a white man stated that using “progressive stack” (the practice of giving priority to traditionally marginalized voices) was unfair and racist. Before I could say anything, one white woman, a white man, and gay white male immediately responded, pointing out that it was his race-blind perception that was racist. The white woman was most vehement: “The only ones I see fuckin’ complain about progressive stack are entitled white guys and you need to get over it!”

By the time I got to him, he was simply parroting the tired cliché that all forms of preference were racist. I corrected him and told him progressive is prejudiced (in a just manner) but not racist.

Two weekends ago, while facilitating during a training, another white male expressed that he most appreciated progressive stack because he saw it as an empowering tool that encouraged and nurtured the voices he, as a white male, almost never got to hear. Yesterday, I heard a man open up to the group in a very emotional and painful way, how being active in the movement has affected him. He stated that while he always felt he was open-minded and tolerant, being confronted with the reality of oppression on a daily basis (as happens at OWS) and seeing how he almost unconsciously contributes to that oppression has changed him profoundly.

I often joke with some white males I meet that I make immediate assumptions about them simply because they’re young and white. I tell them that I immediately assume they’re from Armpit, Iowa somewhere raised growing corn on some sheep-fuckin farm somewhere. LOL! I am only half-kidding: if I am honest with myself, I have to admit that I have to constantly confront my own biases, prejudices, and assumptions as well.

What I can say is that the #OccupyWallStreet movement is grappling with issues of race, gender, power, and class in ways not seen in many other places. There are workshops on oppression addressing the conflicts, arising from the many isms that plague our larger society. And while it’s far from ideal, I see a willingness, indeed, a hunger, to confront and unpack all this baggage. Being at the NYC Occupation, I get to talk with many people from other occupations. I have sat down with and shared experiences with and learned from people from occupations in Oakland, Philadelphia, Chicago, Florida, activists from Europe and China, Palestinians, all looking for ways to address the inequities that exist globally.

It’s far from the ideal, but movements aren’t built simply from the bullshit rhetoric of hope and change. Movements aren’t built from like-minded people from similar backgrounds coming together. On the contrary, real movement-building consists of bringing together previously disenfranchised and segregated groups, groups that may hold old resentments, conflicts, and grievances. Movements are built on helping those of us (the 99%) empower ourselves and agreeing to recognize that these inequalities exist but will never change until we acknowledge them and learn how to properly address them. This is not a “white” movement -- it will never exist as a racist white movement because that movement already exists. We’re here, and we’re looking to include, to find ways to include, my black and brown brothers and sisters. We’re looking to make it welcoming and safe for women, for the transgendered, the homeless, the hungry, the disenfranchised, and we’re struggling to hold it all together under incredibly difficult circumstances. The question for me, as a Latino, is whether my brothers and sisters will answer the call or go back to voting for the empty rhetoric of “hope” and “change.”

F-U-C-K hope and empty words, the time to act is now. If you’re waiting for the perfect moment at the perfect time in the perfect place, then you’re not living, you’re busy dying.

My name is Eddie and I’m in recovery from civilization.

An Open Letter to Conservadems

¡Hola! Everybody...
No, I didn't watch, listen to, or pay much attention to the “Whitestock” parade of fools that occurred this past Saturday. Suffice it to say that ignorance was on parade for the whole world to see and right now, I’m not taking any phone calls from my European friends, who have had a field day (at my expense) for at least the last ten years, what with Dumb Fuck Bush and now the Teabaggers*.

I will say this much: last Saturday’s “Restoring Honor” epic failure was nothing but pure unadulterated ignorance being manipulated by some crafty people (and no, Beck nor Palin are crafty). They will be gunning for us this November, and taking into consideration that the Obama administration has thrown progressives under the bus, and has spent most of its time heeding the advice of the corporate wing of the DNC, be prepared for major losses. Consider the teabaggers as a final fitful death rattle from a demographic pining for the Stone Age of Jim Crow, xenophobic anti-immigrant fervor, forced closeting of the GLBT community, perpetual war, and the subjugation of women. And they will get their last gasp, even if it means destroying the very freedoms they claim to hold sole ownership of...

The following is something I picked off a comment thread. It's been altered to suit my purposes, but if you’re an intelligent progressive (professional or otherwise), if you believe that going back to a time that never was to values that pertained only to 9mostly male) whites is the wrong way to go, then pay heed and pass it around. It needs to be heard.

* * *

-=[ An Open Letter to Progressives and conservadems ]=-

Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear.
~William E. Gladstone, 1866

This is for Liberals and progressives for when the fuckin “clowns” come around. BTW, it wouldn’t be a bad idea to send this to the corporate wing of the DNC. They’re sucking major dick and throwing progressives under the bus (again).

Grow a pair. A huge pair. A huge pair of balls (Testicles) or Eggs (Ovi). Let the Goobers know we ain’t playin'.

Confront conservative propaganda! Their polices have been utter failures. Mention that fact often (and forcefully). It’s easy to support. Whether in education, economics -- almost every social policy sphere -- conservatives are epic failures. To the Conservadems: If you really want to run a successful campaign to win re-election, you need to denounce the lies that the American public has been subjected to by the extremists on the right (and essentially all conservatives). Why vote for a fake conservative Goober when there many real goobers waiting to take over?

1. When a dumb teabagger/ conservative/ troglodyte calls you a “liberal,” it’s time to let the world know that progress is not a dirty word. Progress is moving forward. It’s in synergy with evolutionary forces -- what got us out of caves and made life more enjoyable, convenient, and comfortable
2. Conservative is another word for the desire to live in the same caves mentioned in #1 above.
3. When the wingnuts claim Democrats are the “tax and spend” party, you need to nail home the concept that republicans are the “Borrow and spend” party. Every record deficit of the modern era has been the result of wrong-headed conservative ideas. Again, this is easy to support. Mention it often (and forcefully).
4. Liberals need to be ballsy about stripping away the lies of conservatives. The Democratic Party, if they are to be the party of the common people, needs to get behind that idea.
5. Do you really feel the need to cater to morons that think President Obama is an “elitist,” a Muslim, and un-American? Those people are not going to change their racist minds -- no need to bother attempting to alter the minds of people that belong in an asylum. Conservative ideology is all about authoritarianism. It’s taking us to certain utter failure. If you don’t believe me, then check out if wages for the middle class have kept up with the times. Then after you do that, take a look at the wealth gap between CEOs and the common worker.
6. While on the topic of racism, it was the Texas republican organization that was selling “Obama Waffles” at their convention in 2008. It was a right wing conservative group that portrayed Michelle Obama as a monkey in a photoshopped photo, as well as the Obama White House with a foreground of a watermelon patch. The wingnuts are a bunch of racists -- time to call the goobers out. You have little time to do so; I suggest you get on the ball. Historically, conservatives have fought tooth and nail against every progressive ideal, including the civil rights movement, the women’s movement, and struggles of the LGBT movement for equality.
7. For some bizarre, inexplicable reason, liberals and the corporate wing of the Democratic Party just allow this stuff to become reality by not denouncing it on an hourly, daily basis.
8. Call a spade a spade or, a “moran” a moron. People will stand up and listen when you have the fuckin cojones to call someone out. I mean, “death panels”? Are you serious? Who in the world would ever believe America would have “death panels,” other than a fuckin inbred idiot that couldn’t find his own asshole with two hands? But you allowed the republicans to control the conversation. Which brings me to point #9
9. Control the Terms of Debate. Do not let a conservative set the terms of the debate. Question their played out metaphors; for once you frame the debate. You define the terms. The Democratic Party has allowed the goobers from the right to hijack the agenda and have failed miserably on this count, so expect significant losses come the November elections. Not to fear, grow a set/ few and we’ll get it back -- if we vote for liberals with BIG BALLS and BIG EGGS.

Yours,

Eddie

* The original Tea Party crowd was not after independence but was willing to settle for a few seats in Parliament. If the Tea Party had been successful we would still be a colony of Great Britain.

James Baldwin on Obama?

¡Hola! Everybody...
I've beebn terribly busy this summer. This summer's been no fun at all and if it weren't for the Russian Kitten from Little Odessa, it would've gone down as a compolete utter fail.

Anyway, I wanted to leave a quick note...

Today I bought my first Ebook ever (I purchased a Nook) and it's the book I've been waiting for all year: Baldwin's "The Cross of Redemption: Uncollected Writings." (stay tuned for a post next week on my ebook/ Nook experiences)

I am a HUGE Baldwin fan, the man has been a life-long mentor. In any case I came across the following passage (written in the early 60s):

"Bobby Kennedy recently made me the soul stirring promise that one day -- thirty years, if I'm lucky -- I can be president too. It never entered this boy's mind, I suppose -- it has not entered the country's mind yet -- that perhaps I wouldn't to be and in any case, what really exercises my mind is not this hypothetical day on which some other Negro "first" will become the first Negro president. What I am really curious about is just what kind of country he'll be president of."

MUTHAFUCKA!!!

The TGIF Sex Blog (Gay & Lesbian Liberation)

¡Hola! Everybody...
What a shame it is that in this country the nomination of a qualified and brilliant legal mind is met by the festering sore of racism... Scalia is “hot headed,” but Sonia Sotomayor is “ill-tempered.” Bush the Elder cited empathy as one of the virtues he considered in selecting Clarence “Slappy” Thomas. When applied to Sotomayor, empathy signifies that fave of linguistic code of angry white men everywhere: affirmative action.

This is more than madness; it’s a cancer poisoning our society. My hope is that when Sotomayor ascends to the highest court in the land (and she will), that she becomes a thorn in the side of the right wing mediocrity of the current SCOTUS.

* * *

-=[ Gay & Lesbian Liberation ]=-

A Letter to the Revolutionary Brothers and Sisters

-- Huey Newton, from Berkeley Tribe, September 5-12, 1970

[Note: Lost in the euphoria (for some) of Obama’s pick of Nuyorican Sonia Sotomayor was the setback handed down by the California Supreme Court for those seeking to create a nation that respects the rights of all citizens. In what has to be one of the most warped decisions in recent jurisprudence, California upheld the notorious Proposition 8 referendum -- even after it had previously held that gays should have the right to marry. In light of rampant homophobia in communities of color, I’m offering a piece was written by Huey Newton, a leader of the Black Panthers, a radical black political and social service organization of the 60s and 70s. This letter represents one of the first overtures made by a nationally recognized leader to the lesbian and gay communities, thus helping legitimize homosexuality as a political issue.]

A Letter from Huey Newton to the Revolutionary Brothers and Sisters about the Women’s Liberation and Gay Liberation Movements

During the past few years strong movements have developed among women and among homosexuals seeking their liberation. There has been some uncertainty about how to relate to these movements.

Whatever your personal opinions and your insecurities about homosexuality and the various liberation movements among homosexuals and women (and I speak of the homosexuals and women as oppressed groups), we should try to unite with them in a revolutionary fashion. I say “whatever your insecurities are” because as we very well know, sometimes our first instinct is to want to hit a homosexual in the mouth, and want a woman to be quiet. We want to hit a homosexual in the mouth because we are afraid that we might be homosexual; and we want to hit the women or shut her up because we are afraid that she might castrate us, or take the nuts that we might not have to start with.

We must gain security in ourselves and therefore have respect and feelings for all oppressed people. We must not use the racist attitude that the White racists use against our people because they are Black and poor. Many times the poorest White person is the most racist because he is afraid that he might lose something, or discover something that he does not have. So you’re some kind of a threat to him. This kind of psychology is in operation when we view oppressed people and we are angry with them because of their particular kind of behavior, or their particular kind of deviation from the established norm.

Remember, we have not established a revolutionary value system; we are only in the process of establishing it. I do not remember our ever constituting any value that said that a revolutionary must say offensive things towards homosexuals, or that a revolutionary should make sure that women do not speak out about their own particular kind of oppression. As a matter of fact, it is just the opposite: we say that we recognize the women’s right to be free. We have not said much about the homosexual at all, but we must relate to the homosexual movement because it is a real thing. And I know through reading, and through my life experience and observations that homosexuals are not given freedom and liberty by anyone in the society. They might be the most oppressed people in the society.

And what made them homosexual? Perhaps it’s a phenomenon that I don't understand entirely. Some people say that it is the decadence of capitalism. I don’t know if that is the case; I rather doubt it. But whatever the case is, we know that homosexuality is a fact that exists, and we must understand it in its purest form: that is, a person should have the freedom to use his body in whatever way he wants.

That is not endorsing things in homosexuality that we wouldn’t view as revolutionary. But there is nothing to say that a homosexual cannot also be a revolutionary. And maybe I’m now injecting some of my prejudice by saying that “even a homosexual can be a revolutionary.” Quite the contrary, maybe a homosexual could be the most revolutionary.

When we have revolutionary conferences, rallies, and demonstrations, there should be full participation of the gay liberation movement and the women’s liberation movement. Some groups might be more revolutionary than others. We should not use the actions of a few to say that they are all reactionary or counterrevolutionary, because they are not.

We should deal with the factions just as we deal with any other group or party that claims to be revolutionary. We should try to judge, somehow, whether they are operating in a sincere revolutionary fashion and from a really oppressed situation. (And we will grant that if they are women they are probably oppressed.) If they do things that are unrevolutionary or counterrevolutionary, then criticize that action. If we feel that the group in spirit means to be revolutionary in practice, but they make mistakes in interpretation of the revolutionary philosophy, or they do not understand the dialectics of the social forces in operation, we should criticize that and not criticize them because they are women trying to be free. And the same is true for homosexuals. We should never say a whole movement is dishonest when in fact they are trying to be honest. They are just making honest mistakes. Friends are allowed to make mistakes. The enemy is not allowed to make mistakes because his whole existence is a mistake, and we suffer from it. But the women’s liberation front and gay liberation front are our friends, they are our potential allies, and we need as many allies as possible.

We should be willing to discuss the insecurities that many people have about homosexuality. When I say “insecurities,” I mean the fear that they are some kind of threat to our manhood. I can understand this fear. Because of the long conditioning process which builds insecurity in the American male, homosexuality might produce certain hang-ups in us. I have hang-ups myself about male homosexuality. But on the other hand, I have no hang-up about female homosexuality. And that is a phenomenon in itself. I think it is probably because male homosexuality is a threat to me and female homosexuality is not.

We should be careful about using those terms that might turn our friends off. The terms “faggot” and “punk” should be deleted from our vocabulary, and especially we should not attach names normally designed for homosexuals to men who are enemies of the people, such as Nixon or Mitchell. Homosexuals are not enemies of the people.

We should try to form a working coalition with the Gay Liberation and Women’s Liberation groups. We must always handle social forces in the most appropriate manner. And this is really a significant part of the population, both women and the growing number of homosexuals, that we have to deal with.

* * *

Love,

Eddie

A Crumb...

¡Hola! Everybody… Has anyone else noticed that the more Obama pulls away from McCain the more the media spin on the election changes? For example, I noticed an increased coverage of McCain under the guise of “What should McCain do to close the gap?” kinda/ sorta spin.

Also, why was it that it was left up to David Letterman to draw a parallel between McCain's scurrilous attacks regarding the “association” between Obama/ Ayres and McCain’s own longstanding friendship with convicted felon and very likely treasonous Gordon Liddy?

Liddy, you may not know, was part of the Reagan crew that created a shadow government for the sole purpose of bypassing our constitution and laws. I believe it’s omissions like this that force the vast majority of Americans to distrust the corporate-owned media.

BTW, you notice how the McCain campaign goes from smear to smear and never touts its own policies? That’s because his economic policy is to do more of the same -- give all the tax breaks to the richest 1%.

* * *

-=[ Luck ]=-

On the subway… so many things happen, there’s so much to take in. One of the hidden joys of the subway is the Poetry in Motion series. It’s a series of posters highlighting the poetry of some of America’s great and some not so well-known poets. One day, you’ll find yourself packed into a subway, lift your eyes and you’re blessed by line or two of sublime beauty. The following is one of my favorite Langston Hughes poems. I saw it once after a particularly hard day and it brought a smile to my lips…

Sometimes a crumb falls
From the tables of joy,
Sometimes a bone
Is flung.

To some people
Love is given,
To others
Only heaven.

-- Langston Hughes (1902-1967)

From The Collected Poems of Langston Hughes

Sunday Sermon (Who Are You)

¡Hola! Everybody…
The most common question from people I meet via the internet comes from their curiosity about where I get the material I write. For me, it’s not so much as looking for something to write, but what to write about. There’s much in here, as in life. There’s much in life – always – even when your filters blind you to the fact of reality… If you’re alive and bored, then you have committed a great sin, for even boredom is interesting if you bring the fresh light of a child’s wonder to it…

In the beginner’s mind there many possibilities, but in the expert’s there are few…

* * *

-=[ Who Are You ]=-

“I’m going to make a seawall
with my small happiness…
I don’t want the sea to know
that pains go through my breast.”
-- Julia de Burgos, Seawall

I once met a woman who worked mightily to convince me she loved me. She sent me messages everyday, assured my doubting heart. She spoke with such complete conviction and happy anticipation of what “our love” would lead to; she knew that whatever, we would somehow be a part of one another’s lives. She couldn’t wait for us to consummate our love! And though my practiced heart had reservations, I allowed it to fly on those wings of words and for a brief moment we soared.

This woman disappeared from my life and in actuality, never expended an ounce of energy to bring flesh to her words. I know practically nothing of her and she slowly faded from my life.

Did she get her claws in me?

Yes.

She was in there – deep -- because I let her in. The red flags and the alarm systems were going off and if her pronouncements were a terrorist threat we’d be in yellow or red alert or whatever dysfunctional response conservative buffoons running this country came up with.

Yet I allowed this woman into my heart. I was thinking to myself that I’m fortunate that I possess some measure of integration. For while she did manage to come inside Love and there is some measure of hurt, I had already learned that we cannot shield ourselves from pain. I have learned that every vulnerable moment is an opportunity to awaken to our true selves.

But I’m getting ahead of myself today. Let me begin again with the following advice. I almost never offer advice, for I find it disabling and condescending. But let me offer this if just this once:

Don’t allow life to harden your heart.

I know you have been heart – many times. I also know that you may despair of ever finding a true soul who will love and understand you. I’ve been there, I know what that feels like.

And sometimes your broken heart surrenders to anxiety, anger, resentment, and blame. And yes, I know there are sick people out there, Hungry Ghosts, who in their mad grab for emotional sustenance will do or say anything. Theirs is a painful hell.

But if you look under your hard-won armor, you will find a softness. My sad heart teaches me compassion. So, in a very real way, this woman taught me to love. She can’t really hurt me, whoever I am. Yes, she can hurt my self-concept and make me doubt my self-esteem, but that’s small. In truth, the divine spark of which I am made – of which we are all made of -- can never be hurt. My Higher Self encompasses and embraces her madness. Truthfully, we are one. The ache of my heart is a profound blessing that I can turn into a tool for living my life as an offering. And, people? The only true prayer is to live your life as an offering of your deepest gifts.

Your ego is a thought borne of fear. The ego is merely a belief system we create to shield ourselves from the pain and hurt of life. It is but a fragment of your mind. It is such a small part, that if you would realize the larger whole, it would resemble the smallest sunbeam of a vast Sun, or like an almost imperceptible ripple that calls itself The Ocean.

It’s our seawall and we can no sooner hide our pain from the ocean as cover the sky with our hand.

Don’t accept this little, defended, fenced-off aspect as who you are. In fact, the sun and the ocean are nothing compared to your true Higher Self.

The sad thing is that you believe that without the ego all would be lost, while in reality without this clinging to ego all would be Love.

Love,

Eddie