« April 2009 | Main | July 2009 »
May 20, 2009
Socialism!
Nick sent me this YouTube commercial. It is so, so true.
Of course, as a liberal whose political views have been described as "just to the left of Marx"* I remain focused on planning my trip to socialist wonderland, Newfoundland and Labrador**!
* - I have indeed been described that way, but it isn't, in fact, true.
** - Totally true. I have been planning my trip to Atlantic Canada ever since I read The Shipping News.
Posted by Drew at 06:02 PM
May 19, 2009
Civil Debate
Tonight I was able to go to the Ward 6 Democrats meeting where a resolution to endorse marriage equality legislation was overwhelmingly endorsed, by a vote of 73-3.
I was pleased to see that Bishop Harry Jackson (the scowlingest man in right wing politics) was able to show up to witness such an ignominious defeat—I might add, arriving only after the presentation on green jobs that took up most of the meeting.
I doff my cap, however, to the woman who spoke out against the resolution.
The meeting went something like this. After the resolution was introduced: massive applause. After a representative spoke in favor: massive applause. After to floor was opened for someone to speak against the resolution: silence.
Eventually, one of the pro-gay activists supporting the resolution said quietly, but loud enough for everyone to hear: sweeeeet.
But one woman decided that she had to speak out against the resolution. Sure, she was crazy. Sure, she derided the religious integrity of everyone in the room. Sure, she said that all our ancestors would “roll over in their graves” because of the decision to end civil discrimination against gay couples. But she spoke out. Good for her.
Judging by today’s meeting, marriage equality in the District is a foregone conclusion. This is unquestionably a good thing. And it’s hard to do anything but laugh at the cynicism of people like Harry Jackson. But it’s good and healthy to people speak out on both sides of the issue. It’s not easy sometimes. Good for them.
Posted by Drew at 10:59 PM
May 16, 2009
O Superman
Yesterday I ran across David Schmader’s essay on “O Superman” at the Stranger. I’d never heard the song, but since then I’ve listened to it four or five times. It’s kind of amazing, and the video is strangely beautiful as well.
For a song that was written in 1981, it probably says more about 9/11 than anything that’s been written since, and I wonder if that’s more than coincidence. If the same song came out in 2002, I'm not sure it would have been the same song.
In some ways, what it’s saying isn’t unique. Jonathan Safran Foer tried to talk about the day though a series of phone messages. And, well, everyone has tried to talk about it in terms of guilt. But those frames always come up short. There’s a touch of barbarism in even approaching the subject, and even if that weren’t the case, it’s too easy to fall short of what needs to be said; the thing itself is the appropriate metaphor.
But writing from the past is, in a way, writing from a place of innocence—maybe the only place left—and that makes all the difference. There’s no hint of inappropriate detachment or superficial catharsis. How could there be? But, despite the twenty year interval between the song and what it's about (or what it's about now), the song maintains a really uncanny sense of engagement.
Perhaps everything that will ever be said about September 2001 was already written before we got there.
Of course, the song wasn’t really written in 1981 about the future. It was written about the present. I’m not sure it’s possible to hear the song the way it sounded then—it must have been abstract and paranoid. Just another reminder that the past is far away.
Posted by Drew at 09:19 PM
May 13, 2009
I Am A Financial Genius or: Why I Must Never Buy Another Stock
For years, I have subscribed to a simple investing philosophy: no matter how good my idea is, there are a million people who have already thought of it.
It seemed to me that the price of any particular stock is basically the accumulated judgment of hundreds of thousands of professionals as to how much those assets are worth, what the future dividends will be, and what price the stock is headed towards. Since I didn’t flatter myself to be as smart as a single financial expert (let alone thousands) and I don’t have any inside information (but I will gladly accept some!) trying to outsmarting the market is a crapshoot. So I just throw my money in a boring mutual fund run by experts and hope for the best.
For a while this was a workable philosophy until the market crashed. The crash caused me to have two deep thoughts. First: damn. And second: these people are idiots.
I’m just as well off, I thought, following my own shortsighted, harebrained notion of how the market works as following their shortsighted, harebrained notion of how the market works.
So I tried it. I purchased a small number of shares in two companies whose market value had gone way, way down. My belief was that once the bailout money came, they’d either go way, way up or go out of business. If they went out of business, I’d be out a few hundred bucks. If they went way, way up, I’d keep them for a few decades, then buy myself a private island.
And what happened? They went up! A little!
Has this encouraged me to buy more stocks? Oh, dear God, no.
The reason, it turned out, that I buy lame-o mutual funds isn’t because they’re safe. It’s because they are boring. If they were actually to go up and down, like, say, individual stocks, I would check them on Google Finance until my eyeballs bled. Which is exactly what I do with my individual stocks.
To be clear, this is not enough money to buy a house. This is not enough money to buy a car. This is money that could buy a really nice dinner and a pair of shoes. And yet I now check my stocks before I check my e-mail. Or the weather. Or whether or not I have gotten out of bed. Never mind that my actual savings are invested in what seems to be a giant dollar bill bonfire corporation. I need to know if my stocks rose or declined a single penny and I need to know now.
It is, I’m pretty sure, a sickness.
I’ve thought about selling my shares, but that seems to violate my original buy-and-hold strategy, which I still think isn’t any dumber than giving a AAA bond rating to CDOs backed exclusively by sub-prime mortgages. So I’m naively hoping that I’ll eventually lose interest in the ups and downs of my shares, just as I do in video games, exercise, and higher education. And maybe, if I’m lucky, my plan will actually work and my little investment will be worth some real money by the time I retire.
I really hope so.
I’m counting on that private island.
Posted by Drew at 10:19 PM
May 12, 2009
Goodbye Screen on the Green
Today We Love DC reported that HBO has backed out of its sponsorship of Screen on the Green and it won’t be taking place on the mall this summer. This is very, very sad.
It’s not much of an exaggeration to say that Screen on the Green is the reason I moved back to Washington in 2005. I came to DC for a job interview and realized that I really wanted to stay. When I got home to Buffalo, I had an invitation from Christina to see “The Way We Were” on the mall. I (optimistically) replied “maybe,” but didn’t manage to move down until a week later—in time to see “The Treasure of the Sierra Madre.” It was wonderful. After two years in Arkansas, I loved the fact that thousands of strangers would voluntarily sit together to watch a movie they could just as easily watch at home.
Since then I’ve gone every year to at least a couple of movies. I’ve celebrated my birthday there (Rebecca brought me cake from Cake Love.) I’ve consumed a not insignificant amount of wine. I bought a camping chair for back support. I like to think that I’ve perfected the HBO dance.
Screen on the Green was really a symbol of everything I love about Washington: crowds of strangers, a beautiful place to sit, and a healthy dose of good friends.
I’m still optimistic that the folks at HBO will reverse their decision. If only they knew how much people loved it, they’d come to their senses and put the show back on.
Alas, they probably won’t. I guess I’ll have to find something else to do with my August.
Posted by Drew at 10:07 PM
May 10, 2009
Since You Asked
Posted by Drew at 10:49 PM
May 06, 2009
Go, Purple, Go!
Of all the wonderful aspects about new states adopting marriage equality for same sex couples, my favorite is the opportunity to see the map on the Wikipedia entry for "Same-sex marriage in the United States" change colors.
Posted by Drew at 08:00 PM
May 04, 2009
David Hackett Souter
In part due to the nature of my current job, I’ve come to be fascinated by the Supreme Court. I enjoyed Jeffrey Toobin’s The Nine, and I tend to like reading profiles of Supreme Court Judges, especially the liberal (or, more accurately, not-super-conservative) ones. The Court is so strange, so undemocratic, so perversely fixated on the wisdom of just a few people that its analysis really seems to benefits from an intense contemplation of character.
These last couple days have provided plenty of fodder, and I’ve read perhaps too much of it.
I was alternately fascinated and ashamed by the quasi-stalkerish piece in the Times today with pictures of Justice Souter’s home and copius interviews with his neighbors to establish that he values his privacy. I liked the twin pieces in Slate, especially Dahlia Lithwick’s which managed to paint an image of who Souter is without resorting to the same old David-Souter-hates-Washington storyline.
But I think the best analysis was in a very short post by Andrew Sullivan this morning, writing about Souter’s commitment to New Hampshire:
I think it was Larkin who said that travel narrows the mind. It was a mischievously provocative statement, but at its core is something true. The world is a mystery; one place is amazement enough. To live well and deeply in one place, to commit to it, to protect and cherish and understand it: this is a great and difficult and rewarding thing. And David Souter is a good man.
Whether or not Souter would agree is unclear—it seems to be too florid for the kind of person who would write this—but I think it does accurately describe a value that Souter illustrates, and one that I’ve found myself trying to articulate without much success. I’m very pleased to see someone else get it down in writing.
Posted by Drew at 09:08 PM