i really don’t think that anything is going to change. i understand that this is a historical election, but i really don’t think that the system will change, and if this is the case, then i think hillary will be a better president to maneuver through the preexisting bureaucratic structure. however, i understand that only the voters can create change, in which case, obama offers the promise of change. but i question his ability to retain this idealistic stance once faced with the trials of the system. in addition, i think that his distinct negative shift in his pennsylvania campaign under the stress of the election offers evidence to my point.

in addition, he claims to be running a “clean campaign,” which apparently means that he refuses to “go negative” in attacking his opponent. however, when asked about clinton’s bosnia fiasco, he said…

OBAMA: And, you know, I haven’t commented on the issue of Bosnia. You know, I…

STEPHANOPOULOS: Your campaign has.

OBAMA: Of course. But the — because we’re asked about it.

Which begs the question, is the candidate a separate entity from their campaign?

if we have nothing more to debate and you have no real issues on which to separate yourself from each other, then clearly you must separate yourself on character and an appeal to the affective component of the american people. that’s why you campaign. not because you’re looking to share your ideas, but instead to get people to rally and be emotionally drawn. obama should know that more than anyone. furthermore, in florida, where campaigning was prohibited as well as media ads, obama managed to run ads through an “oversight” in national television time purchasing, and he still lost. i think that this is indicative of obama’s need to to reach voters on an emotional level thereby bringing them over to his side (hillary as well, i would simply argue that more people had some affective response to her at baseline). alternatively, some would claim that “clinton” has name recognition whereas obama was less known… really? really? it seems since he announced his bid for presidency,  obama is one of the most popular names in american culture (granted, a manipulation over time):

research question: during this campaign season (january - denver), has barak obama been mentioned more times than hillary clinton; a content analysis of the names “hillary clinton”, “clinton”, “barak obama”, and “obama” across major news media (i suppose the easiest would be major print media). or a primetime section of major cable media from say 7-11pm over sample weeks from now until the primaries. i understand that news networks make a concerted effort to balance their time, but biases exist, and often they manifest on this subtle level

just a thought for everyone with all that free time.

She comes to grips with this racial divide over the course of the article, but her final conclusions leave much lacking. I truly enjoyed her postulation of what Mixed people like (“Having people guess their background… Pulling rank during conversations… Having ‘such good features’… Filling out applications”), especially since she admits, “these are things that mixed people say they hate… but secretly like.”

My qualm comes with the creation of Stuff That Mixed People Like; I think that it denies exactly what makes Multiethnic individuals interesting: the fact that no two multi-ethnics are alike. Not only is the community comprised of mixed ethnicity members, regardless of blend, but also their upbringing creates drastic differences between individuals, making group descriptions even more difficult. For example, how different would Barak Obama (everyone’s current favorite multiethnic) if his parents were switched and he was raised by a single Kenyan mother? How different would his upbringing or chances have been then? There is no single definition of multi-ethnics, or what they like, just the fact that they are multi-ethnic.

PS: Barak Obama is not #1 on my Stuff That Mixed People Like, its Prince.

however, i would also like to post the question: when did “white voters” become a significant demographic? weren’t they always just referred to as “voters”? i love progress.

on each of these 6 cards, catch phrases and major subjects are categorized by candidate. when any of the candidates mention a phrase, you get the square! is a 6×6 design (i apologize for any of you who will miss the center square), which may take a little longer, but they’re pretty long debates [smile]. these cards are specially tilted towards the california debates on cnn, thursday, january 31.

they are all self explanatory, but just a few clarifications…

“green” is in reference to green technology, or green collar jobs. or any use of the term “green” as an adjective implying eco-friendliness
“i met a (wo)man in…” is a nod to any anecdotal story they recite about everyday americans that they meet on the campaign trail whose story “really touches” and “embodies the goals of this campaign.”
“day one” is specifically in references to the first day of the presidency
i think you can figure out the banter that requires a “he/she said” moment.

if there are any confusions, work them out with your fellow viewers, i leave content validation for your discussion.

also, much love to nick saponara for the graphic design. by the way, he recommends that you use pennies to mark your squares. i think i want to get a little donkey stamp.

stay tuned for the republican cards (california debate on cnn, wednesday january 30).

Democratic Debate Bingo Cards
Click to download all 6!

it seems that ‘urban’ should be synonymous with a multiracial community as the most amazing component of city life (as i see it) is people from different backgrounds, cultures, and classes, living in such close proximity. this leads to knowledge, tolerance, and above all, diversity; but i suppose this perspective is inherently NY, while LA stands in direct opposition: people from different backgrounds, cultures, and classes, living distally and without any interaction, leading to ignorance, racism, and even greater disengagement from the larger community.

1. What is the nature of human nature?

Humans are animals and therefore human nature is inherently animalistic. However, humans pride themselves on their ability to distinguish themselves from the animal kingdom thus creating civilization (and clothing), therefore, their legacy is much more than simply genetic. Human nature understands how posterity (i.e. other humans) will judge their actions and temper their behavior accordingly, be it positive or negative) to ensure some level of immortality. The concept of the Selfish Gene (Dawkins) extends to the selfish meme; we will kill for our ideology, be it an economic system or religion. The nature of human nature is to perpetuate oneself both genetically and ideologically.
NOTE: Strangely, we feel no need to leave our mark on the world outside of our species, a task that requires much more than simply ideas as the written word is exclusive to humans.

2. What is the proper social order?

Social order is an essential part of a community, regardless of species. We are social animals and demand some level of sociality to survive and flourish. However, I am uncertain as to what the proper order is. One might argue that the strongest and most capable should be at the top, making general decisions for the betterment of the group. However, this becomes difficult and cumbersome when groups expand to countries. Therefore, I assume that the proper social order occurs within small communities with common goals and aspirations, at which point, the hierarchy becomes tangible and each individual does not feel like simply a cog in the machine, but rather and active part of the community.

3. Is equality possible?

Equality on paper (and even in practice) is very possible, however to achieve equality in the mind is a futile task. Each individual and community of individuals must isolate themselves from the group in order to develop a sense of self. And this separation breeds feelings of superiority (ego enhancement). I think that an excellent example is the transition of racist ideology in America. In reality, there has been very little change within the minds of individuals around the country, but their actions are tempered based on the expectation of equality, thus giving the illusion of equality. This does not equal actual equality. For me, this was the most shocking part of reading Invisible Man (1952) by Ralph Ellison; so many of his statements are still so pertinent to today’s race relations, 55 years later.

New Rule: No more gift registries. You know, it used to be just for weddings. Now it’s for babies and new homes and graduations from rehab. Picking out the stuff you want and having other people buy it for you isn’t gift giving, it’s the white people version of looting.

New Rule: Stop giving me that pop-up ad for classmates.com! There’s a reason you don’t talk to people for 25 years. Because you don’t particularly like them! Besides, I already know what the captain of the football team is doing these days — mowing my lawn.

New Rule: Don’t eat anything that’s served to you out a window unless you’re a seagull. People are acting all shocked that a human finger was found in a bowl of Wendy’s chili. Hey, it cost less than a dollar. What did you expect it to contain? Lobster?

New Rule: Stop saying that teenage boys who have sex with their hot, blonde teachers are permanently damaged . I have a better description for these kids: ‘Lucky bastards.’

New Rule: If you need to shave and you still collect baseball cards, you’re a dope. If you’re a kid, the cards are keep sakes of your idols. If you’re a grown man, they’re pictures of men.

New Rule: Ladies, leave your eyebrows alone. Here’s how much men care about your eyebrows: Do you have two of them? Good, we’re done.

New Rule:There’s no such thing as flavored water. There’s a whole aisle of this crap at the supermarket, water, but, without that watery taste. Sorry, but flavored water is called a soft drink. You want flavored water? Pour some scotch over ice and let it melt. That’s your flavored water.

New Rule: Stop screwing with old people. Target is introducing a redesigned pill bottle that’s square, with a bigger label. And the top is now the bottom. And by the time grandpa figures out how to open it, his ass will be in the morgue. Congratulations, Target, you just solved the Social Security crisis.

New Rule: The more complicated the Starbucks order, the bigger the asshole. If you walk into a Starbucks and order a ‘decaf grandee, half-soy, half-low fat, iced vanilla, double-shot, gingerbread cappuccino, extra dry, light ice, with one Sweet-n’-Low, and One NutraSweet,’ ooooh, you’re a huge asshole.

New Rule: I’m not the cashier! By the time I look up from sliding my card, entering My PIN number, pressing ‘Enter,’ verifying the amount, deciding, no, I don’t want Cash back, and pressing ‘Enter’ again, the kid who is supposed to be ringing me up is standing there eating my Almond Joy.

New Rule: Just because your tattoo has Chinese characters in it doesn’t make you Spiritual. It’s right above the crack of your ass. And it translates to ‘beef with broccoli.’ The last time you did anything spiritual, you were praying to God you weren’t pregnant. You’re not spiritual. You’re just high.

New Rule: Competitive eating isn’t a sport. It’s one of the seven deadly sins. ESPN Recently televised the U.S. Open of Competitive Eating, because watching those athletes at the poker table was just too damned exciting. What’s next, competitive farting? Oh wait, they’re already doing that. It’s called ‘The Howard Stern Show.’

New Rule: I don’t need a bigger mega M&Ms. If I’m extra hungry for M&Ms, I’ll go nuts and eat two.

New Rule: If you’re going to insist on making movies based on crappy old television shows, then you have to give everyone in the Cineplex a remote so we can see what’s playing on the other screens. Let’s remember the reason something was a television show in the first place is that the idea wasn’t good enough to be a movie.

New Rule: And this one is long overdue: No more bathroom attendants. After I zip up, some guy is offering me a towel and a mint like I just had sex with George Michael. I can’t even tell If he’s supposed to be there, or just some freak with a fetish. I don’t want to be on your webcam, Dude. I just want to wash my hands

New Rule: When I ask how old your toddler is, I don’t need to hear ‘27 months.’ ‘He’s two’ will do just fine. He’s not a cheese. And I didn’t really care in the first place.

New Rule: If you ever hope to be a credible adult and want a job that pays better than Minimum wage, then for God’s sake don’t pierce or tattoo every available piece of flesh. If so, then plan your future around saying, ‘Do you want fries with that?’

NOTE: before the show, we were watching meerkat manor, an anthropomorphized soap opera featuring meerkats in the kalahari on animal planet. the main troop (whiskers) encountered a rival troop known as the zappa, whose dominant male is named frank. it was delightfully perfect!

Dog Breath
City of Tiny Lites
Advance Romance
Dumb All Over
What’s New in Baltimore
Carolina Hard-Core Ecstasy
Son of Suzy Creamcheese
Brown Shoes Don’t Make It
America Drinks and Goes Home
Pygmy Twylyte
Dupree’s Paradise
Heavy Duty Judy
[raccoon improv]
Dupree’s Paradise
Uncle Remus
Willie The Pimp
Joe’s Garage
Wind Up Workin’ In A Gas Station
San Ber’dino
The Illinois Enema Bandit
Wild Love
Yo Mama
encore:
Cosmik Debris
G-Spot Tornado
Muffin Man

http://www.zappaplayszappa.com/