Sort of A Plug for Student Scholarship Organizations…
You may not agree, but I’m gonna start this post with a premise that I truly believe to be a statement of fact: the Georgia public education system is fucked. For whatever reason, as Georgia stares down the gaping maw of a budget crisis, it seems logical to the Georgia state legislature to target the already imperiled public education system with massive budget cuts, while other positively useless government funded projects and programs (useless to you and I, of course - not to the corporate interests which stand to make a buck because of them) continue to receive funding. I think I heard on the radio that the education system was the top target for budget cuts. Fuck if I understand why that makes sense. I guess Sonny and the Republican legislature figure that if they run the public education system all the way into the ground, there’ll be no choice but to privatize it – throw it to the wolves of “free enterprise”, make it into a way for rich people to make themselves richer rather than a program which serves to make the citizens of Georgia better, smarter, and more productive.
Anyway, I didn’t start this post to go off like that – but I sort of had to, to lay the foundation for what this post is really about.
It’s about a way I’ve discovered wherein I can actually divert up to $2000 of my tax responsibility to education, rather than let the pork ranchers in the Georgia state legislature use my money to further their ends. Now, granted, I’m diverting my $2000 to private schools, and that may make me a bit of a hypocrite. In my defense, though, there’s this: 1) I’ve already given up on public education in Georgia. I see no way to rescue it from the inevitable, but I do see this as way to rescue some of our children from the whims of greedy politicians, out-of-control lobbies, and yes – the bullshit called political correctness, because 2) the $2000 will go to a Student Scholarship Organization (SSO), which is a non-profit group that funds scholarships which specifically go to students in the public school system, enabling them to attend private schools when they might not ordinarily be able to afford it.
That’s right. Because of 2008’s House Bill 1133, taxpayers in Georgia can contribute up to $2000 to an SSO, which serves to fund scholarships specifically aimed at public school students who want to attend a private school but can’t afford it. They then get a dollar for dollar tax credit on their state taxes.
That effectively means all Georgians can all take $2000 of their tax responsibility – which certainly ISN’T going to education anymore – and MAKE IT go to education. It might not directly impact them – they might not know a child who will benefit – but at least they know where their money’s going, and at least they know that the somewhere is a good thing, a great thing for someone. In fact, when you make your $2000 contribution, you can actually designate the school you want your money to go to. It’s that specific.
Now, some of you may know that my children go (or will go in the case of Eli) to Woodward Academy, one of the top private schools in Georgia. Let me tell you how they will benefit from me diverting my money to their school.
They won’t.
At least not directly. The only students eligible for SSO scholarship money are those already enrolled in public school who want to cross over, or children who are just entering school. Eli WOULD be eligible under the auspices of the law, but Woodward simply doesn’t provide ANY scholarships to students K through 6. So the only way my children could ever see any of the money would be if I sent them to public school in the 6th grade and then put them back into Woodward. And screw that.
But, given the economic climate today, even Woodward is suffering some level of financial woes. Shit’s just more expensive, and the money isn’t coming in like it used to. So the way I see it, if I can give Woodward some money to use for scholarships, my $2000 will offset those expenses for them and allow they to free up money that MIGHT eventually help my kids.
Even without that self-serving incentive, I see the opportunity to take $2000 of my tax obligation out of the hands of the current state legislature as something I can get behind. Fuck me if that isn’t a Tea Party-ish sentiment, but since the current Georgia legislature is mostly comprised of good old boy Republican clowns, why not? When they start spending my money on things I approve of (like putting money back into the public education system, like funding public transportation, like maintaining wildlife preserves statewide), then maybe I’ll let them have the $2000.
It’s ironic that the same state legislature who’s mis-spending our money in a wanton fashion is the same one that passed a bill which actually allows us to take money out of their hands…. The only trouble I see is that, if enough of us participate in HB 1133, then a lot of money will get diverted out of an already tight budget. But that WOULD be an interesting experiment, wouldn’t it?
For more information on SSOs, and in particular, GOAL – Georgia’s leading SSO - visit http://www.goalscholarship.org/
The Part They Left Out
There’s a new Internet meme floating around - an e-mail that goes like this:
“Ten men decided to have a business lunch once a week. They always met in the same restaurant and the bill was always $100.00 for all 10 men. If each man was responsible for his share of the bill, each would pay $10.00.
The men decided to divide the bill based upon their ability to pay, inspired by the government’s progressive approach to collecting income taxes. The formula they eventually agreed upon included the following payment arrangement:
Man #1, #2, #3, and #4 paid nothing.
Man #5 paid $1.
Man #6 paid $3.
Man #7 paid $7.
Man #8 paid $12.
Man #9 paid $18.
Man #10 paid $59.
After a number of weeks of the 10 men reliably frequenting his establishment, the owner of the restaurant decided they deserved a discount. He offered to reduce the total cost of the men’s lunch by $20.
This created a bit of a problem among the gentlemen, because the four men who paid nothing felt cheated that they were not sharing in the windfall. The others complained that if the $20 were to be distributed proportionally based upon the amount each paid each week, Man #10 would receive over half of the total discount amount.
So the restaurant owner proposed this solution:
Man #1, #2, #3, and #4 still paid nothing. They were unhappy at being excluded from the benefits of the reduction, but a discount from zero is still, in fact, zero.
Man #5 now also paid nothing. His contribution went from $1 to $0, so he received a 100% discount.
Man #6 now paid $2, receiving a 33% discount.
Man #7 now paid $5, receiving a 28% discount.
Man #8 now paid $9, receiving a 25% discount.
Man #9 now paid $14, receiving a 22% discount.
Man #10 now paid $50, receiving a 15% discount.
So they completed their meal and left the restaurant. Once outside, an argument ensued.
Men #1 through #4 were displeased that everyone else received a benefit except them. Man #5 was upset that he only got $1, while Man #10 got $9. Likewise Man #6. So these men beat up Man #10, took his money and left him bleeding on the sidewalk.
The men returned to the restaurant the following week for lunch, but of course Man #10 was a no-show. So when the bill arrived, the remaining men discovered they couldn’t afford to pay even half the bill.”
No one’s sent ME this particular e-mail, because they know that A) I’ll probably disagree with their point and B) I’ll have a ready answer. Still, I spend a lot of time nowadays immersed in social media and lurking on the Internet, so this e-mail came onto my radar pretty readily.
Needless to say, I think the analogy of the effects of our graduated tax system is an overt oversimplification of what’s really going on, that it’s tweaked to make one point without taking certain things into account, AND that it’s ultimately damaging to the conversation we SHOULD be having about the direction our country is going.
To drive my point home, please allow me to add some undisclosed facts regarding the story at hand.
What the author of the story failed to mention was that, every time the end of their meal came, Man #10 would assure the rest of his fellows that he’d finish up paying the bill, and told them to leave their portion and go home. They did. Then Man #10 would call the manager of the restaurant over and tell him that, even though his agreed upon portion of the bill was $59, he really didn’t feel he should pay that amount. He told the manager he’d pay a significantly lesser amount, and that if the manager disagreed, he’d make sure that the manager would lose his job.
The manager was a greedy man, eager to please his boss, the restaurant owner, because he was getting a steady and generous paycheck. Still, he was unwilling to tell Man #10 “No”, because he knew that Man #10 was a powerful and rich man, and could in fact do exactly as he threatened.
So the manager told Man #10 not to worry, that he’d work it out somehow. Man #10 left, satisfied and smug, and the manager set to work trying to figure out how to make up the difference in the 10 men’s bill.
After some consideration, he went next door to the Chinese restaurant, then across the street to the Swiss bakery, and simply borrowed the money from them. He did this over and over again whenever the 10 men came in, until the restaurant had amassed a tremendous and un-repayable debt.
So there you have it - the rest of the analogy.
Now, before I continue, I’d like to also point out a flaw in the original. While the parallels between it and reality are clever, if oversimplified, one thing happened in the original story which hasn’t happened in “real life”. So far, no one’s pummeled Man #10 and left him bleeding in the gutter with his wallet emptied. Because of that, the original analogy falls apart. It ends, in fact (and rather unclimactically), with the men returning again and again to the restaurant, with Man #10 leaving with his portion of the bill promised but unpaid again and again, and with the restaurant sinking further and further into debt.
At this point, you’re either going to take my continuation of the analogy and use it in your discussions against people who try to use it to argue against a graduated tax system, or you’re gnashing your teeth in a mild (or maybe not so mild) fury because in a way you know I’m right, and in a way, you’re absolutely sure I’m oversimplifying matters and tweaking the “facts” to my own end. Which I am.
To those of you who applaud my audacity, I say, “Yes, please. Take it and run with it. Use it. Enjoy.”
To all of you, though, I offer this thought: I understand that the analogy, including my addition to it, is simply not an accurate portrayal of the whole story - the real tale is way too complicated to analogize adequately. The difference, though, is that I am not using the analogy to make a point about our political process and income tax.
I’m using the analogy to make a point about abusing analogies to make political points.
Ah, Hypocrisy
The following post comes not because I have any real interest in what happens in Alabama politics, and not because I personally have any interest in going to a country music-themed entertainment complex. I’m about to tell you this story because it’s an outrage which we all should be aware of, and that we should all fight to make sure doesn’t happen in areas where WE live, work, and play….
First, some background. Why? Because you need context. You need to understand why a not-so-humble blogger based in metro Atlanta is pretty annoyed at the governor of Alabama. You keep reading, and soon you’ll be annoyed by him as well.
Background Bit #1: Alabama has a number of anti-gambling laws on the books, which is understandable considering the number of highly religious people who live in Alabama, and the long-term anti-gambling stance that religious people tend to take. There is a bit of a loophole, however: while the usual staples of gambling (blackjack, poker, slots) are expressly forbidden, BINGO is not. Now, when you think of Bingo, you probably think of old blue-haired ladies playing with numbered cards on long fold-out tables at the local VFW. Well, welcome to the 21st century, chum! Electronics and digital technology have made the old models of all sorts of things obsolete, or nearly so. And that includes Bingo.
Background Bit #2: A couple of years ago, an ingenious entrepreneur named Ronnie Gilley saw an opportunity to turn the travel corridor in Southeast Alabama into a bona fide destination spot. For years, millions of people have traveled THROUGH the area, mostly on Highway 231, hellbent on getting to Biloxi or Florida. Gilley reasoned: why not turn a pasture that people would ordinarily drive right past into a multi-faceted entertainment complex that would make them want to stop? The idea came to fruition, and thus was born Country Crossing, a country music-themed multiplex featuring restaurants, hotels, concert halls, and a huge electronic Bingo parlor.
Background Bit #3: Playing Bingo at Country Crossing is just like playing Bingo at the VFW. Except you can play faster. Except it’s on a computer screen. You typically pay to play at the VFW. You pay to play at the Crossing. And just like at the VFW, the money you pay is eventually won by the players themselves or contributed to charity. This is unlike “real” gambling, where the “house” is ever-present and often wins. (Just so no one comes back and challenges me on this point, I have to state that Country Crossing does skim a very small percentage off the top to pay its overhead.)
Enter the Governor of Alabama, the illustrious Bob Riley, Republican Extraordinaire. Riley has opposed Country Crossing from the get-go, claiming that the venture constitutes an illegal gambling operation that will eventually spread like a virus across the Southeast, causing Alabama to become a crime-infested state run by disrespectable gambling bosses and the mob, who control the government and manage crime in all its nefarious manifestations: prostitution, drug-running, gun-running, murder, extortion.
Those of us who’ve studied debate and argumentative semantics recognize this as a “slippery slope” argument, where the most extreme possibility is immediately presented as the most likely scenario. Riley has no legitimate basis for his position. Sure, his vision of Alabama’s downward spiral COULD happen. But the likelihood is very, very small.
By assuming this position (heh), Riley has allied himself with a number of religious organizations in Southeast Alabama, most notably the Concerned Wiregrass Citizens. Now, while I may disagree with many of their convictions, and I may disagree with using politics as a pulpit for religious agendas, I refuse to outright blast people of a more religious tendency than myself, chiefly because I admire their conviction, short-sighted and misled as it may be. Religious conviction has led to some of the most deplorable situations in history (most wars are religious in nature, 9/11 was religious in nature, etc.), but being a person of some conviction myself, I still kind of identify with their fervor.
Even when they’re wrong. But I will not blast them for being misguided - in fact, one of the points of this post is to demonstrate how I sympathize for them. Still, here’s my argument against them.
Consider:
- The unemployment rate in Alabama is roughly 9%. Country Crossing employs 1300-1500 people by itself.
- Residual business - at places like the gas stations, motels, restaurants, and retail stores that exist in and around Houston County (where Country Crossing is located) - have seen an increase in revenue. They no doubt are hiring more people themselves, to handle the increase in business.
- In and around Houston County, there’s been a somewhat of an economic boom, flying in the face of all other negative economic data. Country Crossing contributed $1.8 million dollars to Houston County’s 2009 budget surplus. Dire warnings from the state’s budgetary officials still ring ominously, but surely Country Crossing, were it allowed to stay open, would have offset or even stopped the impending budget cuts. Hell, imagine the tax revenue a place like that would generate in the long term….
- One of the chief arguments against gambling is the tendency for crime to increase in areas where gambling takes place. Ironically, last year Dothan, the principle city in Houston County, saw a 30% DECREASE in the crime rate. You know why I believe that is? Because the correlation between a bad economy and crime is higher than the correlation between gambling and crime.
Now, if you equate crime to “sin”, then Country Crossing could actually be contributing to a decrease in sin. And if you equate gambling to sin, well…. Bingo isn’t exactly gambling, is it? And despite Riley’s impassioned wailing and gnashing, the Alabama law is at the very least vague about it all.
Basically, the benefits of Country Crossing’s existence far exceed the detriments. The owners and managers have worked hard to make sure Country Crossing provides a safe, family-friendly yet fun environment for the people of the area as well as for visitors. And the economic upside is undeniable.
So what’s the problem, really? Well, funny you should ask.
The problem with Country Crossing is that it has the potential to draw clientele away from the Native American casinos in the Southeast as well as from nearby Biloxi. So it APPEARS that some of the purveyors of those establishments took proactive steps to make sure that the threat of competition didn’t happen. Allegedly, a certain Governor received millions of dollars in campaign contributions in exchange for making sure that Alabama didn’t open up any thing that might attract business away from the existing establishments. Day after day reveals increasingly incriminating deals, that - while they aren’t necessarily illegal - do constitute a glaring conflict of interest.
As it stands right now, the Governor has threatened to enforce a raid on the establishment, with the raiding officials having pretty much carte blanche on what they do with all the confiscated machines. A raid, in fact, almost took place a few weeks ago, but a local judge stopped it with a court order - a court order which has, in turn, been overturned by the Alabama Supreme Court. So Country Crossing is closed. A legislative hearing and vote is upcoming that will allow the citizens of Alabama themselves decide on which side of the gambling law the Bingo machines stand.
One caveat, to cover my ass legally: Riley vehemently denies any knowledge of any wrong-doing by his associate Michael Scanlon (famous for HIS involvement in the Jack Abramoff scandals). He also vehemently denies any knowledge that the anti-gambling organization which he supported, the U.S. Family Network, was funded by casino-owning Choctaws in Mississippi. Finally, he denies that his current stance on the Country Crossing issue is politically motivated. None of the allegations against him have been proven in court. Yet. But an investigation is underway, and the evidence is mounting.
Do I believe Riley has the best interests of the average Alabama citizen at heart? Here’s my answer:
He’s a politician.
And - IF Riley is indeed guilty of the charges laid at his feet - here’s why I am really, really pissed at him.
First of all, being a Republican, Riley probably claims to be a capitalist and economic conservative. Most Republicans I know stand adamantly behind the free market system, trusting that - if left alone and not tampered with - the market will correct any aberrances and fluctuations that occur within it. Competition drives prices down, etc. etc. Well, what if people in positions of power work behind the scenes to make sure there IS no competition? What if certain people stand up in front of us and claim that we should let the market act unimpeded, and yet they’re there, manipulating the market out of our line of sight?
Second, if this is all true, then Riley took advantage of local religious groups’ good intentions to help make good on his promises - promises he allegedly made to garner campaign contributions and monetary support for his election. I find the continued (mis)use of the fundamentalist Christian base as a means to further political gain deplorable. It’s bad enough to be disingenuous to the average person, but to be disingenuous to a person who truly holds the conviction you’re just giving lip service to?
It remains to be seen what will come of all this. Will Country Crossing reopen? Will Alabama be able to take advantage of the economic benefits that a place like that would surely generate? Are the Bingo machines a violation of Alabama’s anti-gambling law? Will Riley be exonerated?
Who knows. All I know (besides the fact that I’m annoyed by it all), is that there will only be one real loser in the struggle, no matter what happens: Riley will stay a rich Republican regardless. Ronnie Gilley, smart guy that he is, will find some other means of making his entrepreneurial dreams come true. The casinos in Mississippi will continue to operate and profit.
The losers will be the people of Alabama - the ones who would benefit from Country Crossing’s existence, and the religious ones opposed to its existence, who are once again seeing their convictions exploited and betrayed.
For more information, visit these sites. (Yes, some of them have an agenda. Reader beware, okay?)
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/destinations/2009-12-27-alabama-casinos_N.htm
http://www.wtvynews4.com/home/headlines/83844907.html
http://www.countrycrossingalabama.com/
http://www.wtvynews4.com/home/headlines/83012247.html
http://www.rileyswebofdeceit.com/bob-riley-fraud/riley-senate-investigations
Just Because It’s Cold, Doesn’t Mean It’s Not Getting Warmer
One thing most of us in the U.S. can agree on: it’s cold outside. While we’re all freezing our collective asses off, though, some of us are taking the extra step to use the unusually low temperatures to debunk the reality of global warming.
“Oh shit,” some of you are saying now, “Will’s gonna give us an earful about how we need to save the environment. He’s gonna transform into Al Gore and preach to us about our responsibility to the planet.”
Well, I’m not. Not quite. Because it’s probably pointless to try and argue facts vs. “facts” with most non-believers. It’s kind of like a person who believes in God arguing with a devout athiest – regardless of how well either side presents his argument, in the end only stubbornness wins.
To the extent that I feel I need to defend the facts, I’ll only cite three things. The first is a quote lifted directly from the web site of the Environmental Defense Fund: “Furthermore, a single year of cold weather in one region of the globe is not an indication of a trend in the global climate, which refers to a long-term average over the entire planet.”
Let’s say you have a desert. And one summer it rains in that desert for a week, when ordinarily it’s dry as a bone. That doesn’t mean the place is no longer a desert – you just have an isolated weather phenomenon that flies in the face of the overall conditions. Same with this cold snap and global warming. I don’t think that’s hard to understand, but some people seem to have a problem grasping the concept.
For further edification, here’s a second citation – I’ll simply refer you to the Voice of America article titled “Meteorologists: Global Warming and Cold Weather Go Hand-In Hand.” The title says it all, but you should still take the time to read it.
Finally, I’ll cite this quote, also lifted from the EDF web site: “The most respected scientific bodies have stated unequivocally that global warming is occurring, and people are causing it by burning fossil fuels (like coal, oil and natural gas) and cutting down forests. The U.S. National Academy of Sciences, which in 2005 the White House called ‘the gold standard of objective scientific assessment,’ issued a joint statement with 10 other National Academies of Science saying “the scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action.”
The only debate in the science community about global warming is about how much and how fast warming will continue as a result of heat-trapping emissions. Scientists have given a clear warning about global warming, and we have more than enough facts — about causes and fixes — to implement solutions right now.”
Given all that, I think I’d rather spend my time here ruminating over WHY someone would deny something that I think’s undeniable. I have three theories, all or none of which might pertain to “non-believers” out there. I invite you to bring forth other theories – if they’re viable and interesting, I’ll certainly post them.
Oh, and I’m not talking about those scientists, politicians, policy-makers, and pundits who are actively debunking global warming. I KNOW why they’re doing it. Money. They’re getting paid, re-elected, or whatever, to say the words put into their mouths by those who see the changes that need to be made as a threat to the bottom line.
I’m talking about the average person who, for whatever reason, chooses to disbelieve the truth.
OK. Here we go with theory one:
Some people hop on the anti-global warming bandwagon because of its nonconformist appeal. For some, because of the dogma they USUALLY have to adhere to in their workaday, do-what-you’re-supposed-to-or-God’s-gonna-get-you lives, it’s cool to FINALLY be able to cling to a “rebellious” notion, one that flies in the face of long-accepted facts and established trends. Disbelieving the facts of global warming is a way for them to “buck the system.”
Theory two:
Others feel the need to toe the party line – if it’s what their favorite pundit or their Sunday preacher says, then it must be true. Ironically, it bears pointing out that the scientific community mentioned in the EDF quote above was lauded by the Bush Administration, and that the VOA article I linked to emanated from the Bush White House – the same Administration and White House which rejected the Kyoto Protocol and had a notorious reputation for being pro-industry and anti-environmental. So, if THAT administration is unwilling to dispute facts, well….
The sad thing to me is that the threat of global warming OUGHT to transcend party politics. Alas, though, for some that’s all there is….
Theory three:
Finally, I think it’s a way for some people to alleviate the guilt they feel for “contributing” to global warming by driving, cooking with gas, spraying aerosols, and farting. If it’s not real, then they’re not guilty of anything, right?
Well, I have another solution for their guilt.
In New York there’s a famous “National Debt Clock” which continually ticks off the increasing amount of money our government owes. I don’t know if the subsection of the clock is still active which displayed the amount each individual family owed; it was still there when I left the city.
I remember that every time I passed the clock, I’d see how much I personally “owed” and I’d laugh. Sure, no doubt I owned some of that debt, being a beneficiary of a variety of government programs, but I always felt that my portion had to be significantly lower than the posted average.
That may or may not be true, but what IS true is that you and I, average individuals who go about our daily lives just like most average individuals, do not “own” a relatively significant portion of the global warming “debt.” There are a vast array of other entities who are MUCH higher contributors to global warming – your morning commute is NOTHING compared to them.
There. Feel better?
You see, you really don’t need to change your behavior that much. All you have to do is BELIEVE. I think that if enough people begin to accept the facts that have been in front of them for a long, long time, then eventually that belief will insinuate itself into politics and industry leaders, who are the ones who can REALLY affect change. And then they, in turn, will act on their beliefs.
Now, there are those who think that this sort of slow evolution is too slow – that we need to ACT NOW to save the planet. They may be right – evidence does point to the possibility that climate change is a ticking time bomb.
And it IS a given, too, that if people would take the time and energy they waste arguing against the facts, and instead use that time and energy to do the little-bitty things they COULD do to help slow the effects of global warming, then they’d discover yet another way to alleviate their guilt.
We gotta start somewhere, and believing is a start. Change your attitude. Save the world.
Join The New Effort to Lift The Stupid Sunday Alcohol Sales Ban in Georgia
During the last Georgia legislative session (back in February, to be precise), a bill came before committee which would lift the statewide ban on alcohol sales on Sunday. The bill failed. While in the state of Georgia we are finally allowed to purchase alcohol in bars and restaurants on Sunday, alas, we cannot go to our local grocery or liquor store to purchase something we can enjoy in the privacy of our own homes.
Yeah... not open on Sunday. WTF?
Now a new effort has begun to lift the ban, and grant the decision to allow alcohol sales to individual municipalities. While the original effort focused on lobbyist efforts, this one will focus more on publicity and public awareness. In a sense, that is one of the purposes of this post – to let readers know what has happened, and what they can do to make sure that it doesn’t happen again.
According to Zak Koffler of the Young Democrats of Georgia, during the presentation of the bill earlier this year, “Members of our state legislature decided to pander to the religious extreme to gain support for their campaigns for higher office. Among those leaders are names that you will be hearing a lot of in the near future: David Shafer, Casey Cagle and Eric Johnson.” Indeed, Shafer, Johnson and Cagle are considering running for either the state governorship or lieutenant governorship in the future, and the money and influence of the powerful fundamentalist lobby is an important political consideration.
Some points for you to consider as you explore further:
- I am biased, and shamelessly so. In some articles I wrote elsewhere, I covered the details of why the ban makes little sense: the first one is here, the second here, and the final one here.
- Support for this bill is bi-partisan. Politicians on both sides of the aisle recognize that “safety” concerns are mostly bogeymen, that revenue from Sunday sales will help area businesses, national businesses, as well as government coffers, and that the ban on Sunday specifically is a direct violation of the separation of church and state.
- Everyone involved recognizes that religious extremists are not the only people who oppose the bill. Some other businesses do as well – but they are a small and not nearly as “persuasive” group. Also, and yeah this is kind of callous on my part, their losses would be minimal compared to the gains everywhere else.
- This is not an “attack” against religion. The truth is, this is a blow for personal freedoms. What you do on Sunday should be up to you: if you want to spend the day interacting with your God, then you should be allowed to do so. By the same token, if you want to get a six pack and watch the game at home then… you should be allowed to do so.
All this said, if you want to get involved, either visit the Young Democrats of Georgia web site, or message Zak Koffler himself on Facebook.
Just Sayin’
Living as I have and as I do in Atlanta and New York, I have a LOT of gay and lesbian friends – not just people I KNOW who are gay and lesbian. Friends. It’s to the point that, while I am aware of their sexuality, between us it has become such a non-issue that the subject scarcely ever comes up.
Then I go to a poetry or writing event which seems to lean heavily toward gay and lesbian, or I see an announcement for something like MondoHomo or Gay Pride, and my (shameful) knee-jerk reaction is: Why? Why do you feel the need to be so in-your-face about this?
AND THEN along comes something like Proposition 8, and Miss California, and I think: Oh yeah. That’s why.
Vegas vs. The ATL, Part Two
So what is about Atlanta that makes me dislike it so?
I thought about it, and came to a whole BUNCH of conclusions – a range of assorted things that irk me on a daily basis, every time I step out my front door and go to interact with the city. But then I thought – is there some underlying thing which foments my daily dismay, some underlying cause of which all these irksome things are only symptoms?
I think the answer is yes, and I think the answer is this: Atlanta is in the throes of a perpetual identity crisis.
I think about all the cities I mentioned last time I posted: New York, Las Vegas, Austin, St. Augustine. I think about a whole bunch of other cities that I’ve visited: New Orleans, Chicago, Nashville, Milwaukee. And when I think of them, I think of specific things which identify them, at least to me. You know those maps for kids that have a bunch of major U.S. cities marked on them, and where each city is, there’s this picture which kind of shows you what that city has to offer: like New York has the Statue of Liberty, and Orlando has Disney World? That’s the sort of thing I’m talking about.
And while Atlanta usually has something on those maps, that something is usually a giant peach.
What kind of identity is a peach?
My wife says Atlanta is just trying to offer something different for each individual. I think that’s admirable. I also think it’s impossible. Whether you’re a person or a city, I say figure out what you are and BE THAT. Las Vegas has a lot to offer people, but it is defined by the Strip. New York is among the greatest cities in the world, because it embraces its metropolitan air: its overabundance of skyscrapers, taxicabs, and multilingual inhabitants. Austin is a the quintessential college town situated at the heart of a bustling Southwestern city, where you can see a hybrid parked right beside a rusty pick-up sporting a gun rack.
Atlanta, though. What is Atlanta?
Is it an “international” city, what with its enormous airport and international businesses? Well, we do have communities of first and second generation citizens, and visitors from around the world. But they come and go, and most people from other countries tend to stick to themselves. If we are an international city, I get no sense of it. Most of the people I interact with are very white or very black – and very American.
Is it a cultural city? Well, we have museums, theaters, a zoo, lots of festivals, and plenty of places to hear music. But they all seem to pale in comparison to other museums, et. al. that I’ve visited. It seems rare to me that we actually get a top tier museum exhibit, or a once in a lifetime show at the Fox. We have the Georgia Aquarium now, and that’s something, but I want more. I want a museum that approaches the Smithsonian, theaters that can compare favorably to Broadway, festivals like SXSW.
Is Atlanta a Southern city? A lot of great cities embrace their “Southernness”, but Atlanta, at the heart of Dixie, sometimes seems to be ashamed of its history. And some of that I understand – but could there be some way of positioning ourselves such that we recognize the past and embrace the lessons learned from it?
Is Atlanta a sports city? A decade ago, I would have said sure, what with the Braves consistently making the play-offs and the Falcons actually making the Super Bowl. Lately, even though everyone in Atlanta seems to be a fan of some team or another, most of the teams based in Atlanta or near Atlanta are doing only fair-to-middling to outright shitty. There are shots at glory – like Georgia’s College World Series appearance last year and the Hawks’ current shot at the play-offs – but these always seem to be losing propositions.
Is Atlanta a business city? This comes closer to hitting the mark, I think, than anything. We are, after all, the home of Coca-Cola, CNN, UPS, Home Depot, Chik-Fil-A, and Delta Airlines. But, unless you’re an employee of one of these companies, does their proximity to you affect you substantially more than it would if you didn’t live here? I can watch TCM in Las Vegas. I can drink a Coke in New York. Besides, how many of the metro area’s 5.5 million people actually work for a “name brand” business?
The fact that Atlanta can be construed to be any of these things, with NONE of them standing out, means we’re having an identity crisis. We’re all of these things without being any of them.
And this identity crisis, I believe, contributes to the odd contrasts and utter stupidity that I find when I go out: some people don’t know how to behave, politicians don’t know how to govern or manage money, hostilities arise from misunderstandings and misconceptions, and everything seems like a tug-of-war. If you want to get all macrocosmic, then it’s like Atlantans are all pawns in some great power struggle – except that no one knows who the powers are, no one understands the rules of the game, and no one knows what we’re struggling over.
As I said, I love the life I’ve built for myself and my family. I value my friendships and business relationships here. Hell, I like my actual HOUSE and the street I live on. I just wish the city I lived in was a city that I could point to and say, “Yeah. Here in Atlanta, this is what we do. This is who we are. ”
Hopefully, Atlanta can figure out what its identity is. Other than a peach.
Vegas vs. The ATL, Part One
I just got back from Las Vegas. I’ve been there about a dozen times, and I think it’s one of the coolest towns in the United States.
I also think it’s one of those dichotomizing cities, one that you either love or hate, with no in between. I’ve personally never heard anyone say that Vegas is “okay.” It’s either, FUCK YEAH or HELL NO.
Granted, this trip wore me out – four days of running around in the sun and gambling amid the ding-ding of nearby slots and the garish lights of the Strip (although my favorite casino is actually not ON the Strip). But I think my weariness was more world-weariness than actual physical exhaustion, and we can talk about what’s making me world-weary some other time.
When I got home, I was glad to be home, with my children and my wife, in my own home and bed, with my computer upstairs, my notebook at bedside, and my favorite bar down the street.
But I wasn’t glad to be in Atlanta.
I remembered something I said to my buddy Thomas as we were driving around Vegas one evening: “I love my life – my friends, my family, my occupation, my hobbies, my overall lifestyle – but if I could have all those things in another place, I would.” And this is true. The city of Atlanta and its surrounding suburbs contribute absolutely nothing unique to my situation – everything I enjoy can be duplicated to some degree somewhere else.
This is not to say that I don’t treasure the friendships and relationships which I have with unique individuals here in Atlanta – I do – and these relationships are a significant reason for why I stay despite my disdain for the city itself. It’s just that I can imagine that, were I to have spent the last 10 years elsewhere, I probably would have cultivated similar relationships with different people, and quite possibly loved those people as much as I love my friends here.
God, that sounds coldhearted. I don’t mean it to be. I want you to understand where I’m coming from, and that I’m don’t want to be coldhearted. If you know me and you think I love you (or at least like you), then I probably do. I just wish I loved you in a different city.
Anyway, this train of thought naturally led me to another one: wondering what it was about Vegas (and New York, and Austin, and St. Augustine – hell, even Fort Gaines where my parents live and Dothan-Fucking-Alabama where my youngest brother lives) that makes me like it more than Atlanta.
Was it the nightlife? No. There’s plenty of nightlife in Atlanta, and it tends to be less expensive than in Vegas and New York. You gotta drive everywhere, and that’s a bummer, but you gotta drive a lot in Vegas, too. Also, although gambling’s something I enjoy occasionally, it’s not something I long to do a lot of.
Was it the traffic? Well, yes – and no. I hate Atlanta traffic, and it’s worse here than in Vegas. But Atlanta’s better than D.C., L.A., New York, even Baltimore – and I prefer all those cities over Atlanta.
Was it the people? Maybe: Las Vegas is a friendlier town than Atlanta. But again, that’s no measure – people in Atlanta are friendlier than people in New York and Philadelphia, IMO.
So what is it? What makes me not like Atlanta so much?
I have thought about it for several days now, and I think I know what it is….
Not a Christian Nation. Never Were.
“Whatever we once were, we’re no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers….” – Barack Obama
This caused quite a stir when Obama said it during a recent speech in Turkey. I’ve heard a lot of reactions from Christian friends I have – many of them flat out saying that he’s wrong, that we are indeed a Christian nation.
Well, guess what. We ARE NOT a Christian nation, and I don’t honestly believe we ever were or were meant to be.
What HE said.
What we are, and what we should be proud of as Americans is that we are a free nation, where Christians are free to be whatever they want to be with very little fear (notice that I didn’t say non-existent fear) of persecution or retribution.
The reason it may seem to some people that we are a Christian nation is because many of the principles of essential Christianity – that which is the least encumbered by denominational dogma – also happen to be at the core of capitalistic democracy and/or republicanism: ideals like self control, self reliance and determination, generosity, acceptance, hard work, patience, perseverance in the face of adversity, and a belief in the possible achievements of common man.
I don’t think there was ever a conscious effort on the part of our forefathers to create a Christian nation. It just so happened that the founding fathers were at least intellectually familiar with the ideals of Christianity and recognized them as strong ones – strong enough that you could imitate them and base a nation on them. But those ideals are not exclusive to Christianity, not by a long shot.
Now, I have to acknowledge that indeed, many of the people who immigrated to the British colonies in America came to escape religious persecution, and the majority of those were Christian. But I think that, rather than making us inherently Christian, the main effect this had was to make us sensitive to such persecution – and adverse to it as well. (Some may say there are growing exceptions nowadays to this sensitivity and aversion to religious intolerance. Ironically, here in the U.S. most of this insensitivity seems to actually come from the Christian right.)
I also have to say that what’s true of American Christians today – that they can exist in our nation (mostly) unhindered – now holds true for people of other religions as well, be they Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, even atheist.
And that was the point of Obama’s speech – that we are NOT strictly a Christian nation, which would imply that other religions would not be tolerated. Instead, we are something that I think is much more vital and powerful: we are a nation whose citizens need not fear because they believe in a different version of God than their neighbors.