Bringing Theme and Storefront Together

This morning I woke up eager to feed my summer reading appetite. Harrisonburg is the proud owner of three bookstores. Two of these, howerver, are “new” bookstores (Barnes & Noble and Books-A-Million) complete with competing coffee house chains (Starbucks in the B&N and Joe Muggs in B-A-M).

However, Downtown Books sits cozily next to the quaint barbershop where I go to get a haircut and local gossip. I can’t say that I’ve ever been impressed by the store. Out front are boxes of obviously abandoned/worthless books with hand-made “Free Books” signs on each one. The 1956 American Annual was interesting, but of no use to me.

I wandered inside, and I found a cluttered, disorganized, cramped bookstore. Many of the books, outdated VHS tapes, and novelty cards could have been removed for a more functional store that could elicit attraction from those passing by. After about ten minutes of franticly searching for a pattern to the shelving, I ended up running into the proprietor, a very large man dressed in the uniform of a man who enjoys blending into the background of life. He was surrounded by books. I conciously looked for an entrance or exit from his small, self-built cubicle, but found none. His ability to enter and leave this tiny area was lost on me.

After finding a section that seemed to be the “classic sellers” corner, I found about 9 books I would love to complete, including “Nothing But Blue Skies” by Thomas McGuane, an author I’ve recently come to love. I scooped up what intrigued me, and plucked “Wuthering Heights” for Tory.

I found a small opening in the owner’s literary castle, and asked how much the bundle would cost. To amazement, he scanned the back of some of the books which had probably been on the shelf for a few years, and quoted the cover price. Disgusting. I was able to nab a three books for cheap, but still paid cover price for Tory’s selection.

Here’s where things get interesting. Leaving the store I noticed the owner put a postcard in my 80s-era copy of “The Sun Also Rises” by Ernest Hemmingway. On it read “Downtown Books” in a tacky, 80s font, and then with regular pirate flair, it pronounced “Read or Die!” with the appropriate skeletal companion.

This was not the book store they claimed to be.

With Harrisonburg’s sudden art-scene revival, thriving underground community, and increasingly vibrant group of downtown locations, they’re obviously attempting to tap into this growth; and failing.

The disconnect between the up-beat, hippie tinged, bartering bookstore their connections with the public portray themselves as, and the mis-managed, horribly priced bookstore they are.

It is imperative that in our generation we make sure that our the themes we portray are honest representations of the people or brand goals in the company they portray. Successful companies that are built on themes and beliefs (Teach For America, Apple, Google, etc) are concious of this theme-storefront connection.

I admit that my experience today is a small one, but the storefront must be able to be obvious connected to the public images in front of people who have never experienced the company.

I think Downtown Books has a fine public face, but the storefront needs work. This is an easy lesson to constantly keep in the front of your head.

-W. Thomas Webb

Music of 2008

It’s time I actually wrote all of this down. I’m going with a top-20 (instead of 10) list because I need the room to get everyone on I think should be on.  Many good albums came out at the end of the year, so I haven’t had time to process them to the degree I like. Contrastingly, I found a few favorites early on in 2008 that could, or could not, stand the test of time against my newer attractions. Lastly, some of these albums aren’t great musical works. Some of them I simply enjoy listening too that much. Enjoy, and comment to let me know what you think!

Top 20 Albums of 2008

1. Lil’ Wayne – The Carter III

2. Vampire Weekend – Vampire Weekend

3. Bon Iver – For Emma, Forever Ago

4. The Raconteurs – Consolers of the Lonely

5. Panic at the Disco – Pretty Odd

6. Fleet Foxes – Fleet Foxes

7. Kings of Leon – Only By The Night

8. Noah and the Whale – Peaceful, The World Lays Me Down

9. Kanye West – 808s and Heartbreak

10. Coldplay – Viva la Vida

11. Metallica – Death Magnetic

12. Cadillac Sky – Gravity if our Enemy

13. Cold War Kids – Loyalty to Loyalty

14. The Cool Kids – The Bake Sale

15. Hollywood Undead – Swan Songs

16. The Black Keys – Attacks & Release

17. Shiny Toy Guns – Season of Poison

18. Weezer – The Red Album

19. Lady GaGa – The Fame

20. Common – Universal Mind Control

And the world comes crashing down…

I was listening to a lot of podcasts today, as I’m deep in debt to my desire to keep up with the world around me, and have recently neglected to keep up with my subscriptions. Going through the Center for Strategic and International Studies podcasts, I came across a movie review. The movie is “IOUSA” and speaks about the debt we are passing along to the next generation. I thought the podcast author’s review was poignant and amazing. I have not seen the movie, but I will be soon.
“Today I’d like to talk to you about a movie that is running in some theatres across the country entitled ‘IOUSA.’ I’d like to title my comments here today ‘IOUSA: An Explanation.’  Now you know when we all go to movies, we see these ratings before we go in. Well, the rating on this movie asserts that it is PG, that some material may not be suitable for children. You’ve seen it hundreds of times.  Well, in this case, it couldn’t be more wrong. All of the material in this film, IOUSA, is really obscene. Obscene in the extreme. Especially when it comes to the outlook for our children, and their children.

If young people now could only grasp the complexity of their predicament. If they could appreciate the magnitude of the big ticket problems that are being passed on to them. If they had any inkling of the inter-generational equity fights that they have in store with the boomers and other. If they could only begin to understand the foregone opportunities that they face… those children would weep in their popcorn. I guess its better to let them busy themselves with a kind of ‘other’ intellectual masterpieces we see around us these days, like the Mall Cop. Well let me tell you, they’ll be horrified by the real life saga soon enough.

…

The film deserves better, both in terms of timing, and those who see it. It is the story of how the U.S. has managed to indebt itself to the point of paralysis, even before the full brunt retiring “Boomer” cohort takes hold. Beyond that, it is the autopsy of a systematic breakdown in leadership on both sides of the isle, a case-study of how easy and painless it is to pass problems along to the next generation.“

I’m not sure who the author of this speech was, there is none given. What am I to think of this? First, I understand that I am taking a lot in trust from the speaker. At the same time, I cannot mistake a warning I have received from well-versed camps of professors and activists warning me of the weight I have not yet felt on my shoulders. This enticement will probably make me search out this movie. Best of luck to me!

___________

In another podcasts which is making a bold attempt to train me for the LSATs (again) my interest was piqued by a great quote the strange-voiced narrator, Andrew Brody, uses to end each podcast.

“Stay skeptical, think critically, and assume nothing.”

I absolutely love this quote. Im attempting to “make it my own” so to speak. Sorry, Brody.

See you soon,

- Webb

Nukes, Life, and School

Nukes? Why yes, dear Watson. They’re truly elementary. What I’m not alluding to is the destructive capabilities of nuclear weapons, but instead of the peaceful potential of nuclear power. First, let’s get something very, very, clear. I do not, in any way, support the ignorant and vastly assumptive resolution to nuclear fuel, just put it in big containers in a mountain. I find it hard to believe that we would hide ourselves behind the assumption that thousands (tens of thousands? hundreds or thousands? millions?) of tons of nuclear fuel with massive destructive power will simply sit idly in a mountain for millions of years. Here’s the assumptions of this argument.

1) Future inhabitants of Earth will solve our problem by finding a good way to dispose of nuclear waste.

2) We can’t find a way now.

3) Nothing will go wrong in millions of years.

4) We will be the preeminent military power in the world for millions of years, never giving another country an opportunity to blow up these stores, thereby screwing over our nation.

Those are just a few of the numerous, ridiculous assumptions that we must make on our own behalf to justify our measures for disposing of nuclear waste. My solution is to “pull a Manhattan Project”, but instead of making nuclear materials, lets find a way to solve the nuclear waste issue. I propose this for a few reasons, but first, a little history.

The Manhattan Project cost (in 1940s dollars) $2 billion. This is about $24 billion today. In conjunction with Canada and the UK, we gathered the best engineers of the time and went from knowing that Uranium lets off a lot of energy, to building a weapon that could wipe small countries off the map, and brought an empire that said it would fight until the last man to its knees. This took 4 years, and a quarter-trillion dollars.

Move to 2008. We’re attempting to kick our nuclear waste problem down the line. The world seems to hate us, we’re embroiled in two foreign wars, our dollar is falling, we are losing pride, and energy costs are out the roof. In 1940, we were strapped for cash, prices were sky-rocketing, people were getting tired of war, and we seemed to be at a crossroads. Along comes FDR, and his revolutionary idea to simply sit down and fix the problem of winning the war – build a big-ass bomb. Lets just reverse the equation. If we are successful, the positive output from being able to deal with nuclear waste is amazing. Here’s a few reasons.

1) Energy.

Could you imagine never having to fill up your car? Wouldn’t it be magical if all you had to do was buy a car and you knew that it was powered for life? No gas stations, no running costs to visit grandparents, the beach, or a road-trip. Also, don’t worry about all this increased traffic to cause pollution, you’ll be emitting pure steam into the blue skies, and thereby eliminating one of the largest pollution hazards in the world – American car emissions. You wouldn’t have to give up that big ole truck either! Drive that sucker like you’re going to the county fair with your cousin, because you’ll be getting the same mileage (infinite) as your Prius-driving, liberal yuppie neighbor with his mocha-soy-latte and Buddy Holly glasses.

2) Nationalism

For a country that loves to love itself (this is a health attribute for a nation for those self-depricating punks out there) there would be tremendous pride from both conservative flagophiles and spineless liberals who love to complain. We, as a nation, would have invested the time, money, and people into a project that would instantaneously cut major amounts of pollution and energy needs. This is truly something to be proud of. To this day, we are a nation that praises the fact that we worked with Canadians, Brits, Germans, Austrians, Dutch, and a host of other engineers and scientist to solve a major world problem (how to kill them shifty Japs…). Would your kids and grandkidsnot look up to us with pride to know that our generation was the one that gave them a world to nurture and tend rather than fight for the very existence of? This fighting spirit should be inherited by those yet to come, not forced upon them  as a way to keep the world spinning. When we read of our ancestors, we don’t remember the cowards who maintained the status quo for a false security, but we hear the speeches of men before a battle that changed the course of the world, we understand the power of Einstein’s mind, and we furthermore revel in past acheivements that resulted in the quality of life we have today. America’s soul would benefit greatly from us taking the time to solve our nulcear conundrum.

3) Economy

There’s little need to get into details to see the positive effects on our economy. Instead of the average family pouring costs into their car just to get around, that money is now poured into the economy. This also causes major corporations like Exxon and Shell to find something else (hopefully useful) to do with the tens of billions of dollars they make in annual revenue. It might just make them obsolete. The recent stimulous checks did little for our ailing economy, going right back into food and gas for families. With nuclear power, wouldn’t be nice to see food prices go back down and spend $0 a year on energy? Sounds like a plan to me. Of course, there will be some costs. Nuclear plants are hard to insure, there will be costs to get energy to a home, or pay for the intricate details required in building and protecting a car run on nuclear fuel (gotta find a way for nuclear waste not to spill if cars collide!). This way the companies can make money as they should (they are companies afterall) but we, the people, spend very little.

This is my rant on nuclear fuel. We would just get our asses in gear and solve this problem now, a new dawn would approach at rapid speed that could make our world greener, more efficient, and much cheaper! Granted, there are a number of hurdles to cross that very few would be willing to jump, but dreaming is the first step in revolutionary change. The seed has been planted, let’s see what grows.

Oh, life. You are a hard devil to tame. And now, with my senior year, there are a number of questions I have to ask myself in regards to what exactly I’m going to do with it. Currently on the table is: Law School, Masters, Teach For America, Foreign Service Officer, and the possibility of a job with Norfolk Southern in Philly. Alot of these things require tests that I’m hopefully smart enough to pass, but assuming a perfect world, I’ll have alot to chose from (assuming a realistic world, I hope I get to choose one of them). So what to do? I’d love to become a teacher with Teach For America. I had an amazing time as a CCC here at JMU, and I hope to bring my talents into a deserving classroom. I wrote Steve de Man, the Recruitment Director I worked for, a long email about why I wanted to Teach For America. Here’s an excerpt from the email.

I must admit that I do not wish to Teach For America for the fact that I can get a child to do multiplication tables, nor is it for the smiles on their faces or the graduation diplomas. I want to Teach For America to give every child in disadvantaged setting a critical eye and an unshakable voice. With these rudimentary weapons any child from anywhere can suddenly equalize themselves with the world around them, becoming the revolutionaries of a world that until now has only existed in their heads. By empowering these kids, I can assure that their actions in the community and towards individuals promote a world of tomorrow that shines to them, breaking the nihilistic cycle of failure that plagues our disadvantaged students. I can leave that school understanding that their voice, whether one, or a million, can shake the marbled halls of Congress, sway the ear of our nine Justices, and break down the sometimes empty rhetoric of any executive. There are two equalizers in this world, death, and debate. I can spread but one.

…

Whether or not I agree with their politics, I find it a moral responsibility to promote, to the best of my abilities, an activity that allows those of our nation to rise up and take control of our reality and make it their own. It cannot be stressed enough that this is where my reason for pursuing Teach For America lies. It is important to employ teachers in the many ways that we often characterize a  Teach For America teacher – pushing for better reading a writing, supporting a call for more resources, and working hard for their individual students – but for my specific case, the power of debate, and of giving disadvantaged students the ability to bring the world to their level is what calls me into the classroom. This gives me the charisma, sense of urgency, motivation, and focus to overcome the multiple challenges ahead of me, and give a few more students the weaponry they need to break down any barrier, any time, and at any level through life.

Paulo Freire once wrote, “It is absolutely essential that the oppressed participate in the revolutionary process with an increasingly critical awareness of their role as subjects of the transformation,” and when this revolution occurs, I want to know that I laid some stone in it’s foundation, and that our world will be governed by a society of equality arising from all students being able to challenge their reality and make a distinct difference through debate. This is my reason why I want to Teach For America.

Hopefully I will be given the opportunity to Teach For America and bring this perspective into the classroom. The movement started by Wendy Kopp is amazing, and I want to be a part of something so revolutionary, so special, so timely, and so magical. The long hours and tough days that these teachers often face is the environment in which I find myself to thrive. I look forward to the challenge.

So if Teach For America doesn’t quite agree with my passion, and I find myself looking elsewhere, where to start? I could take up the job with Norfolk Southern, assuming it’s open, and make a nice salary for a few years, but I’d be living in Philly. I don’t want to live in Philly. No offense to the city, but I am a southern boy through-and-through. I’d like to take my show to Atlanta, New Orleans, Charleston, Savannah, if possible. My heart just isn’t in Philly. It would be a nice paycheck though, and assuming the money doesn’t suck me in, I could have a lot of my Law School expenses paid off before-hand if I go back to school. Sounds like a good deal… but Philly? Not so much.

Law School, alas, the bastion of argumentation, debate, writing, and corruption I seek. I kinda bombed my LSATs, so I’m still looking, and probably going to apply, but with a much more critical eye. There are too many schools I’m looking at to list here, but I could end up all over the East Coast. My only concern is that I’d be in massive debt once I got out. We’ll see what happens I guess.

Could you see me working in an embassy in some small corner of the world? I can. I need an excuse to travel the world for a living. I think working an awesome job for the State Department might be it. Teach For America and law school would be a great way to train myself for this work, but assuming both those things fall through, why not take a crack at the FSO exam and see what happens? A moderate salary, world-travel, and great stories to tell really intrigues me. The only major draw-back would be the inability to really start a family or get married without worrying what the hell I’d do. I’d like to support a family, not just send a check home and make a phone-call.

Masters: Thinking about getting it, not very seriously though. Who knows. Florence program is still on the table. Gotta take my GRE’s though, which is no fun I hear. God only knows how well I’d do on them.

School: One quick note – I’m trying to do way too much, and it’s about to come back and bite me in the butt. I’ll keep you updated. But, who knows, maybe I can soldier through! It’s what I’m good at!

-W. Thomas Webb

 

“My idea of education is to unsettle the minds of the young and inflame their intellects.”  -Robert Maynard Hutchins

The Death Penalty

We, humans, seem to have natural, internal, paradoxical feelings on the death penalty. The logic for supporting the death penalty is simple and two-fold. It first deters people from killing (fairly well criticized position) and also appears to appeal to our baser instincts (kill and be killed, it’s a “fair” penalty for horrible murder, etc). The opponents of the death penalty seem to appeal to our more progressive instincts (right to live, sanctity human life, etc). There are cases that I have observed-thanks to a recent documentary on IFC, that even people such as clergy, who form emotional bonds with those being sent to their death, can support this punishment as valid and just. So what does this say about the death penalty to me? I see it as a beautiful looking glass into human moral evolution.

I am a believer of moral empiricism and relativism. There is no universal “right” or “wrong”, as such things are the result of generations of conditioning that certain actions, beliefs, and values have a better effect on the promulgation, progression, and protection of society. An example that comes to mind is “exposing” children in Classical Greece. The unwanted child was simply left in the woods or country. There was no connection to this act and the eventual death that ensued. Exposing was perfectly natural and acceptable. In historical texts and stories, western historians rarely (i have never seen this happen) speak of exposing in a negative light. Commonly, it is justified with something similar to: this was what this culture saw as correct, just, and moral, and it also prevented a population problem (to an extent) while also making sure that the upcoming society was made of viable, mostly male specimens. If we are to believe that such an act in universally wrong, then there is no reason why it is not acceptable for historians to chastise the backwards, crude, and morally corrupt people of Classical Greece. We do not see this, because humans most basic survival instincts understand the necessity of change in the face of morally loquacious situations where “accepted norms” may not give an answer. Also, I find it contradictory for a society so focused on universals to accept this phenomenon of child exposure because “it’s not us, it’s them“. Them are people too, just like us, the era, geographical location, nor religion would have an affect on universal moral norms, right?

Back to the death penalty. This is a striking, modern example of what I just described above. If the death penalty contradicts a number of commonly accepted moral norms (often seen, or prescribed as universal), then why do lawmakers who work in this system, get a pass to suddenly make a morally empirical argument that bypasses accepted universals and appeal to the more baser level, our pure drive to survive as a society most efficiently. Heinous crimes undermine the very foundations of society. It throws power, structure, services, safety, and social connections into chaos. Without these things, we cannot advance, have the structure and amenities of a society, nor be provided for. Also, we do not wish to revert back to individual families surviving day to day with no beneficial structure overhead. Because things like murder hack at the very basis of society, we allow ourselves to ignore the idealistic, theoretical, feel-good universals that we pretend govern us, and instead proponents attach themselves to a deeper instinct that simply says “murder threatens my society, this person murders, this person threatens my society, therefore the best (permanent, final, no worries, etc) solution is to kill that person as well.”

This odd, human paradox is found in the constant fight between those fighting to protect a set of ethereal rights, and those who latch onto a basic human fear of those things that pose the greatest threat to the framework of society. Now are any of them right? For multiple reasons either side could come out as superior in the fight. Those wishing to kill murderers may be unjustified in their desire because our society is so complex or has enough safeguards in place, that a murderer living does not pose the threat one wishes to feel they pose. On the same token, those supporting universal moral rights that disagree with the death penalty may be ignoring some basic part of society that rightfully calls murderers an extreme threat, and allowing their continued presence could very well bring us down in the long run. I have no clue what the answer to these questions are.

- W. Thomas Webb

“All say, ‘How hard it is that we have to die’ – a strange complaint to come from the mouths of people who have had to live.” – Mark Twain

My Political Sins

The 2008 Presidential Election primary season is a unique event in our nation’s history. It’s comical how much of a backlash the closely contested Democratic primaries have generated in the face of a recent past in the party that has found solace in systematically attacking past elections. What brings me to these keys today is the fact that I have been called out on my political sins. Sadly this has nothing to do with my wavering from staunch Republican values, increasing cynicism in the face of party politics, or my new discovery of an internal flame for “fighting the power,” as Public Enemy says, and forcing this world to become better. I have been called out for my lack of support from Barack Obama.

The attacker is Charles P. Pierce, a writer for Esquire magazine. The title of the article persecuting my beliefs states, “The Cynic and Senator Obama.” A catchy and lengthy subtitle states, “The cynic wants to believe. But far too much has happened, and inspiration is no longer enough. The cynic will need to be convinced.” I’m sure that any logical reader is wondering where the hell I’m going with my feelings of being burned at the stake for not supporting this rock-star candidate. Let me explain.

Surrounding Obama is a storm of increasingly religious rhetoric, hope for the future, and an appearance that states without shame, “This is what we’ve been waiting for.” I will continue waiting. Thank you. Throughout Pierce’s article, he talks about himself in third person as “the cynic” – an attempt to speak of himself specifically as the author while also connecting with readers in a similar position. I can’t connect. I’m not a “cynic” in a traditional sense (mostly), nor am I a “cynic” in an Obama sense. I reject him on the principle of the aura surrounding him. Pierce accidentally proves a very important point about how this nation views the presumptive Democratic nominee. The article, on face value, makes sense with its rhetoric. He calls non-believers cynics. Fair enough, but why? The Obama campaign, and its followers (remember that term), have turned themselves from political supporters into ideological priests. There are only rare instances of debating actual policy, but instead Obama’s disciples are looking down there noses at me and others in similar positions because for some reason we must not support a brighter future and “hope”. Innocent, your honor. If the presidential campaign that is coming up will be formulated around dogma rather than policy, the Illinois Senator’s campaign deserves a little critical analyzing. First, let’s look at the rhetoric surrounding his campaign. Secondly, the nostalgic comparisons and psychological “feel-good” associated with him. Finally, the politics. Hopefully I will persuade you, the lost internet traveler, that Obama is 1) human, 2) a politician like any other, and 3) is being shielded by his followers to hide his ultimate weakness. Someone grab some kryptonite, quick.

The words. In a well spoken stump speech a number of years ago, Obama repeatedly announced “Don’t tell me words don’t matter!” I’ll concede the point, sir; continue. Words matter, and so the words around Obama matter. According to his people, I’m not just the opposition, I’m not a voter or a number. I am the “other”. I am a person who has not decided against a candidate, but has rejected a principle, a philosophy, a religion. This pseudo-religion status could be for a multitude of reasons. I find myself agreeing with the majority of pundits when they, in a very P.C. way, Obama is the epitome of an iconoclast. He has not broken the mold in the way one being created within that mold outgrows it. He broke it from the outside, essentially an act of political ideological warfare. I fear that this has given the people of this nation the false notion that such a person is praise-worthy on face value, without actual analysis. Just because a person is a change from the status-quo, does not make him a god. Granted, he has great speeches, and seems wonderful, but I would only accept this if there was something under this religious front.

I will get into the politics later, but I am scared of the Obama-ites. Soon I will no longer be just a cynic, rejecting fluffy rhetoric for a realistic world view, but I will be an atheist. Those, or “them”, will see me as a rejectionist, fighting back against the book of truth. Their candidates speeches of hope and charity will become accepted truth, no matter the logical rejections that can be made. My objections on the basis of what is better for this nation will have no place in rational discourse to these disciples, but instead I am a heretic, doomed and lumped into a group consisting of realist politicos, falsely clinging to war and fearmongering (because if I’m not with Obama, I MUST be a Bushy, right?). In articles down the road, the cynics may change over, persuaded by finally giving on the harshness of reality, and falling victim to the softness of lofty rhetoric. Only the realist faithful will be left, guided not by hope, but the situation.

I do not claim that Obama is not a good person, nor do I contend that he is qualified for our highest office, as the qualifications are U.S. Citizenship and 35 years of age. What I reject is a pseudo-religious devotion surrounded by rhetoric that does not allow the American public to debate the policy, but instead this will become “us” vs. “them”.

Patrick Henry, in his famous “give me liberty or give me death” speech, he made three wonderful quotes that sum my overall feelings very well.

“Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts.

…

“There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free, if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending, if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight!”

Obama is living on a framework of hope, and as we will see, there is little under it. We cannot allow comfort to outweigh our need to ACTUALLY keep our nation in the role it is, the single greatest nation on Earth.

The analogies I see surrounding Obama are scary, to say the least. Many people call him the new JFK, but they only want to imagine those high poll numbers and feel good mentality. They forget the Bay of Pigs fiasco, they forget that Kennedy wanted to go to war with the USSR, and brought us to within 500 yards of nuclear war in the Cuban Missile Crisis through obscene mismanagement.  This is the same President who lied to the nation about major medical conditions and had nearly open affairs outside of wedlock. JFK was assassinated before he could screw too much up. He was a rock star, and three years was good and fun, but America would probably have not literally lived through much more. George Bush has amazingly high poll numbers in the third year of his presidency, and if he was assassinated at the same period as JFK, would have a comparable legacy. Imagine that!

Obama is a siren, he is a feel good band-aid for eight years of fear, war, and harsh realities. What we must realize is that we can feel comfortable in his speeches, but it is our duty to continue to give weight to the what the real world demands, and always defer to those necessities first.

Now onto the politics. This will be short. Obama has nothing to say. Name a policy. What’s his Iraq war policy? Get out? Stay in? Both are wrong. He has made a living of vague conclusions and wiggle room. I must say that I believe this to always be the best way to solve a problem, because by principle it allows you to keep yourself open to all possibilities. The problem is that Obama does not state this as his policy, he instead states he has concrete policies while actually having none. Without his followers, and his control of the debate that we need “hope” and feel good politics over real decisions that actually do things, there is nothing. It’s like a donut; It feels SO GOOD when you take that bite, but you end up with nothing but empty calories that require you to exercise and do things that take discipline and hard decisions later on.

P.S.: Michelle Obama always looks like she’s pissed in pictures, I think she secretly wears the pants in the relationship; and will become the next Hillary Clinton.

P.P.S.: I have not slept all night, and so this is mostly a rant.

-W. Thomas Webb

“We turned in early. I was feeling a wine buzz, and I told Ix-Nay that I was going to have a look at the stars before coming to bed. Wrapped up in my blanket like a human taco, I fell under the spell of the night sky.”

- A Salty Piece of Land

Contradiction, Vampires, and Tea

So here it is. I finally did it! I started a blog. For years I have sworn off this extreme form of information democratization, as I subscribed (and still do) to the argument that information should be disseminated by professional outlets such as newspapers, news broadcasts, etc. Blogging, YouTube news programs, and other such forms of “democratic media” are actually hurting us.

I digress. What I’m going to explain is not why I hate blogs in general, it’s why I started this one. Back in the day, a little over a year ago, I wrote this entry in a now defunct LiveJournal.

“These little LJs are amazing. We feel as if we have our own world, that somehow the dark pixcels making up our words actually release what’s in our chests and minds and places it neatly into this little micro-cosmos that is all our. We like to look at our lives, problems, loves, failures, achievements, and write them down so we believe the world will one day stumble upon our genius that dwells within our mind, and the best-selling novel that these words make because of our heart. But what if, beyond the therapy and false hope that anyone cares about writing these things, we’re simply arrogant little people who think not that we should share our lives and problems theraputically, but that the world DESERVES to hear our shit so that everyone else can learn from our mistakes, and that somehow our one life matters enough that our friends and others can solve our dire problems with a well wishing comment or inquisitive “omg what happened? call me!”. This is not therapy, this is a self-created lie and falsely comforting world in which we are healed by the wisdom of the collective world, yet we are never healed, it gives us an excuse to not face our problems for that… much… longer. [sic]“

Now why did I start a blog? Because I want a record of the things I think. I’m not doing it for you. I’m doing this for myself. I’ve tried carrying a little notebook around with me, writing down my whimsical thoughts on the day, theories, and observances. Failed. I figure that if the internet doesn’t fall apart, I can go back through this and glean some small diamonds from what is sure to be a sea of dirt. It may be true, in time, that contrary to what I believe, I do want you to read this and think, “damn, he’s good”, or something along such parallel lines. I’m not trying to put off any problems. I’m here to talk to myself, not to you. If you choose to read, so be it. I say, “Welcome! Have a seat! If you want something to drink we only have water, tea, and bourbon on the rocks. The band’s not great, but hell, nobody views this place as the end of the road. They’re playing for their future!” Stop reading now if you’re looking for guidance, the best you can hope for is a good idea or an thesis for a research paper.

Also, I would like to thank a Mr. Darius Nabors for proving, with his blog, that one can simply record, and ask for nothing in return. Whether or not you ever get this Darius, thank you.

On to vampires! The last great vampire movie came out in 1987, entitled The Lost Boys that focused around a group of vampires lead by Daniel (Keifer Southerland), a new family in town, and a Vampire Fighter played by Corey Feldman. Great movie. The best thing to happen to vampires since that movie is the wonderful band Vampire Weekend. They are a four-piece band of Ivy-League (Columbia) prepsters who frequent their concerts in Sperry’s, patterned oxford shirts, and chinos. Lovely. The music is difficult to describe. I will go so far (gasp) as to say that there no “blender comparison” to them (Example: The Raconteurs sound like The White Stripes mixed with Jet). The melodies are minimalist. The song “M79″ features drums in a simple, one measure repeating, beat, a guitar breaks intermittently with three chords over a measure, and a violin plays gently in the background, adding the right amount of classic herb to the “noodles and sauce” (simple makeup) of the band. I find their genius in their lyricism. I have never heard such poetry to a beat. Their academic background is evident, and without repent. How dare they be so brave! (Bravo!).

For weeks I have watched their video “A-Punk” on Fuse, along with another great (in a guilty pleasure kind of way) band, Paramore. It was sublime. The soft melody stuck with me, and was just the musical comfort needed for the day. I finally got a hold of their album. My ears have been in sweet bliss ever since. In fact, I had been contemplating this blog for a while, and I have an obsession over the names of things. I needed one, and I refused to start until I had one. The name came from a song off of Vampire Weekend’s self-titled album. For your pleasure:

Who gives a fuck about an oxford comma?
I’ve seen those english dramas too
They’re cruel
So if there’s any other way
To spell the word
It’s fine with me, with me

Why would you speak to me that way
Especially when I always said that I
Haven’t got the words for you
All your diction dripping with disdain
Through the pain
I always tell the truth

- Vampire Weekend

An oxford comma is a not-so-obscure, but highly debated grammatical phenomenon. It is a “serial comma” that comes just before a conjunction (such as: “and”, “or”). Its use is often to continue the rythym of a list, and often guard against misunderstanding arising from ambiguity. Take the following example (not mine): “To my parents, Ayn Rand and God.” The same sentence with an Oxford Comma: “To my parents, Ayn Rand, and God.” Much better! See there? With that simple addition, things make so much more sense. Thank you Britain (God Save the Queen!), thank you Vampire Weekend, and thank you to the small adjustments and thoughts that make up my life’s Oxford Comma!

(Random note: “Oxford Comma” has a lyric that says, “Lil’ John always tells the truth”. Classic.)

All this bloody english is making me thirst for tea. All I wanted to say about tea is that I love it (especially Earle Grey), but I never allow myself the five minutes to make and consume it. Poor me. Life can be so cold and difficult.

Cheers,

W. Thomas Webb

Daniel: They have an afterworld of their own.
Father Laforgue: They have no concept of one.
Daniel: Annuka told me they believe that in the forest at night the dead can see. The souls of men hunt the souls of animals.
Father Laforgue: Is that what she told you? It is childish, Daniel.
Daniel: Is it harder to believe in than Paradise where we all sit on clouds and look at God?