For more on the construction of the White House, go here.
This was a discussion I found myself in recently:
Say a group of like-minded folk are sitting around, and one of them starts to spout off with what in another group would be considered racist, hateful speech (you pick a target for an example; I simply haven’t the heart).
(And yes, I realize this is unseemingly vague as an example, but it’s the end of the week and bear with me.)
Because folks are like-minded in this group — relatively speaking, that is — no one says boo, and the racist/hateful moment passes, and everyone moves on to the rest of their day.
Consider this a twist on the old “if a tree falls in the wilderness” question: If no one objected, was the speech still wrong?
When it comes to domestic attacks in the U.S. since 9/11, the bigger threat is homegrown nut jobs.
Like this guy.
Rock on, Dannel and Cathy Malloy. And thanks, Anna, for sending this along.
If you want more information, go here.
You can read more here.
…there’s the topic of sexual assault in the black community. Thanks, Kellee Terrell.
The erstwhile vice presidential candidate and former Alaska governor and current political campaign endorser is seeking to add to her resume from her Twitter account.
Sarah Palin recently tweeted to “peace-seeking” Muslims and “peaceful” New Yorkeres” to
refudiate repudiate the mosque being built near Ground Zero.
Obviously, emotions are high when it comes to this topic; seeking to participate via 140 characters seems…well…ignorant.
And thanks, Sis. Cynical, for the link.
Some American and Canadian Indians who play lacrosse and wanted to travel on passports issued by the Iroquois Confederacy (also known as the Haudenosaunee) raise the issue:
What is sovereignty, when it comes to American Indian tribes?
The team has since bowed out of the competition. And thanks, Bro. Jay, for the link.
It’s about the anti-radicalization session I attended a few weeks ago.
Now. If you go to the comments — and I rarely do — you’ll find some people who fail to see my vision.
There’s one in particular whom I’ve banned from my work blog because his comments there were so egregious, and now he haunts the web page, over which I have scant-little control.
I also am receiving emails this morning that include comments such as this:
…critics such as yourself are a necessity because humanity is not inheritently [sic] good no matter the country or culture and need the watchdogs. In your case, though, I would like to see a little more appreciation for what this country is and what it stands for.
In fact, the rest of the email is fairly reasonable, though I disagree with the bulk of it. What is interesting to me is that the email-sender at least signed his name, which leads me to believe he is open to talking about this, as am I. So I wrote him back. We may not change one another’s mind, but we don’t have to start from a raised-fists stance.
These public commenters are another matter entirely. Once in a seminary class, the instructor asked us all to act out how we act in a conflict. One woman left the room. Another went into a corner. I walked up and stood inches from the teacher. That seemed the honest thing to do.
My usual stance when confronted is to fire back. It’s in the hillbilly code. This has given me some time to practice turning the other cheek. I am not skilled at it.
I’m sharing the link with you not so you’ll wade in and argue for me. (I thought before I posted this to make sure that was not my motivation. I fight my own battles, thanks.) We all get slammed in ways we might consider unfair. I am finding spiritual practice in not answering back. And some days? It kills me — only not really. I’m 51 next birthday. Isn’t it about time I unfold my fists?