Category Archives: imho is just a polite way to say I know you don’t give a hoot what I think but I’m going to say it anyway

Tis a low ball to insinuate anything via someone’s family name…

Leave a reply

Kathleen Parker of the Washington Post Writers Group commented (criticized, no need for euphemism on my own blog) on Obama’s latest speech to the Muslim world at the Cairo University on June 4.

Granted that most of Ms. Parker’s columns leave me fuming, I have learned to agree to disagree with her and her fans. There is no arguing in politics and religions. That’s why when people get together, they watch sports. (Or so I assume. We don’t watch sports in our house, and therefore we are not popular on our block… Oh, that and the fact I have an Obama sticker on my car…)

I can see her point in “Obama’s Muslim campaign“: that Obama in his speech to the Muslims quoted too many lines from the Qur’an and criticized the errors in the U.S. history just a tad too much to make audience back at home squirm uncomfortably. But here is the sentence that really got my attention, not in a positive way:

“To delegitimize the man whose name rhymes with his, Obama had only to show up and not be George W. Bush.”

1. Yes, I tend to obsess over one tree and ignore the forest. I get to do this in my personal life. So there.

2. I am not about to defend W.

What I have an issue with is this insinuation of a relation between Obama and Osama, “the man whose name rhymes with his.”

Come on! Give me a break!

We are guilty by association of family names now? Great! Remember during World War II when all the Japanese Americans were rounded up and sent to the concentration camps? (Oh, I am sorry, RELOCATION CAMPS they were called), many non-Japanese Asians in the U.S. hastily proclaimed their non-Japanese-sounding surnames for fear of guilt by association of family names. So we are going back to that now?

Here is my advice for all the non-mainstream citizens in this multicultural only in theory society, name your kid Brandon and Emily, and if you can, change your name to something less foreign sounding. For the sake of your children, in case they run for important public office one day.

Although the definition of “Foreign” is arguably faulty here. Basically anything that does not invoke a Western heritage…

“You people!” is symptomatic of something that none of us want to admit…

Leave a reply

(I promise. This is going to be the final rant from me. There is a bit OCD in my personality, and sometimes things just bother me and I cannot let go. Most of the time these are “trivial” by most people’s measure. But are they REALLY trivial? Perhaps they are only trivial because you are not affected by it?)

Here is what I have been thinking…

No matter where you are in the world, the advantage of being one of the majority, the mainstream, the dominant society, is that you have the freedom to just be you. No REPRESENT! No speaking for your race, nationality, gender, etc. No “Tell us something about your culture” as if by the nature of being who you are, you automatically are well-versed in the history/culture/geography of where you are supposed to come from. And nobody will ever ever say to you,

“You people…”

 

Tropic Thunder You People meme gif

“No, Newt, You’re the Racist” Thank goodness someone more elequont wrote this rebuttal…

1 Reply

to the charge by some Republicans against the Supreme Court Nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, as being a racist against the white people, and specifically, white male people.

I first saw this charge when I was waiting to board the plane. (You know the CNN scrolling texts on the bottom that drive everybody crazy but, I have to admit it, was pretty useful when there was NO sound on!) I could NOT believe my eyes. But I was not surprised either.

In my head I was formulating all these rebuttals, clever comebacks, theories, arguments against charges of any type of Reverse Racism. The best I could come up with was: It is like the Royal Families complain about being prejudiced against because people are jealous of the privileges they enjoy.

Seriously? Give me a break!

Thank goodness for Vanity Fair. Here is again another article that I LOVE so much that I want to print it out and eat it whole. I really should be working since I am buried by projects that are all due YESTERDAY. But I need to get this off my chest before I explode into a pile of, YES, non-white, mess…

No, Newt, You’re the Racist by Michael Hogan (May 27, 2009)

Mr. Hogan, I assume who is white and male (NOT that there is anything wrong with that…), managed to deliver a rebuttal against this utter nonsense in an even-handed, non-didactic, non-preachy way.

Digression: I also appreciate much the fact his article does not invoke White Guilt either, for nothing is more annoying to me than condescension and patronization born out of White Guilt. No, thank you very much, we have managed along quite well. We do not need to be rescued by a knight in shiny armor. Give me outright Racism any day ( Disclaimer: obviously, I understand VIOLENCE committed on the basis of racism is no joke. Here I am referring to TALKS. DISCOURSES.) When it is veiled in White Guilt, I am at a loss as to how to react to it.

Anyway, the best quote from the article is as follows, although I do hope you read the entire thing if you have stayed with my rant so far…

The reason so few sensible people take [any charge of reverse racism] seriously is that there is no effective anti-white discrimination in America or, for that matter, the world. Being white is almost universally easier than being any other color, just as being male is almost universally easier than being female. (If you’re white, male, and still angry, the problem is you.)

Nicely done. Thank you.

If you happen to be white (in appearances) and you cannot see the implied privileges that come with your skin color, here is a great article/exercise that may resonate with you:

“White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” by Peggy McIntosh in 1990. Yes, it is decades old. But hey, some things never change… or at least, not much.

p.s. Once again, the comments steal the show and become the proof for the importance of writing the article being commented on in the first place.

Michael Hogan, poor guy, he’s being pummeled and maligned in the comment section. It is rather scary and disturbing what was said in those comments. I wish I hadn’t read them because now I am officially pissed. And scared at the same time. And disturbed. And dispirited.

How Nordstrom honors the Asian Pacific American Heritage Month…

Leave a reply

Anna Sui Asian American girl tee

Anna Sui APAC Heritage month tee

First of all, for all of ya who are uninitiated: May is designated by the U.S. Congress as the Asian Pacific American Heritage Month. Don’t fret if you didn’t know until now. The first week of May is actually Asian Pacific American Heritage WEEK. Between the Swine Flu and the Oprah-KFC debacle (Seriously, folks. How much does it cost to just pay for those grilled chicken? They look extremely unappetizing to me anyway…), I don’t think the mainstream media even remembered. So, you are forgiven.

Secondly, I promise I will not get on my soap box. There are many books/articles/websites out there if you are interested in reading about stereotypes, underrepresentation, Fu Man Chu, Lotus Blossoms vs. Dragon Ladies, blah blah blah. (That would be me preaching to the choir – the conundrum is if you are, you would have known already. If you don’t care, you are not going to check it out anyway…) Yup. Otherwise known to the “mainstream” society as, cough cough, “whining”… I say that because the common comment, from the “mainstream” society, to the critics of stereotypes is, “It’s just a joke. YOU PEOPLE have no sense of humor!”

“You people”. I wince every time I read or hear it. In real life. In the movie, Tropic Thunder, it was hilarious how they played with it.

Anyway, I digress.

So in honor of the Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, Nordstrom is hawking designer t-shirts by, you guessed it! Asian American designers. Anna Sui and Koi Suwannagate. YES! Represent, girls! (I just have to ask: Was the ubiquitous Vera Wang too busy or too expensive?) Don’t get me wrong. These are extremely gorgeous tees, at $60 a pop. And the profits will go to the scholarship fund for OCA, an organization dedicated to advancing the cause for Asian Americans.

I am sure Nordstrom’s efforts are appreciated but I am quite amused by the irony in this shirt. Call me nitpicking if you wish. And I assure you, I have a great sense of humor.

Rising to the Challenge: trying to explain why I don’t watch Lost

1 Reply

Dear Mr. Gleeson,

I know this sounds like a cop out to you, but here is a short, incompletely researched response to your question to which I have not responded to. But I have other duties to tend to, such as packing for our long trip to Asia which commences tomorrow, (Here is a picture as proof), finishing my work (unfortunately, I am one of those women that are “uppity” and need to prove themselves), and taking care of my children (hence the second part in my Twitter ID “Submom”). Anyway, enough with the violin in the background…

Though I am never an avid fan of any TV shows… On second thought, I do recall not being able to sleep when the BBC TV series, “Jane Eyre”, was on many years ago. Kind of silly, I know, since everybody knows the plot already. But Timothy Dalton was quite dreamy as Mr. Rochester. By the way, what happened to the guy? Anyway, I digress…

Where was I? Oh, yes, I can understand your demand for a proof for my accusation that the writers of Lost have been known to change the plot when one of the mysteries was “figured out” and became public consensus through the many fan sites. I swear that I have come across an article talking about this, quite a few years ago, otherwise I would not have formulated such an impression since I do not watch the show. None at all. For those who simply came upon this blog post of mine without knowing the back story of why I am writing this post, please curb your anger. Yes, I know I should not be talking about a show I have not even seen. It’s a long story. Suffice to say that on Twitter, I made such a bold confession: that I Hate Lost. The claim was made partly in jest as one of the random cyber vents I send out via Twitter: “You Know What I Hate?” If you are familiar with Mad TV, you know the bit I modeled this on. The audience is supposed to say, “WHAT?” with much glee and anticipation.

And it all went downhill from there.

I didn’t mean to do this to garner attention, you know, the way how some people yell out obscenity for attention. Some other Twitterers responded and asked me Why? I then responded, because I was brought up with good manners. All in the name of trying to explain why me, personally, do not, and will not, spend my time watching Lost.

Yes, I get the irony of me spending time Twittering and writing this blog. But you have your guilty pleasure, and I have mine. Live and let live, they say.

Perhaps I was flattered that someone even cared about why I do not like Lost, won’t even give it a try, No Sirree. I now feel compelled to give them a good reason. I am by no means a good writer. Please bear with me here.

So I cannot present you with the article tonight because Google failed me. When I typed in the keywords, “Lost Writers Changed Plot Fans Speculation”, BOOM! the search engine came back with articles after articles, blogs after blogs, posts after posts, analyses, interviews, on Lost and its writers. It was like I opened Pandora’s Box! And I promise you that I will continue trying. I am a researcher at heart, and I am as of now obsessed with finding it.

What’s really interesting is that I came across quite a few articles that talked about how the Lost writers made up the plot(s) and mysteries as they went along, twist after twist (i.e. what I call “upper hand” over the audience which got your goat) especially in the previous seasons. So that pointed to the same direction as my said “grievance”, to a certain degree. What I also found interesting is that even the writers themselves are finally realizing the entire alternative universe that they have created has taken on a life of its own. A new ecosystem separate from its creators. The collective force of the fans is larger than the writers themselves: through the Interweb, the fans have conjured up ,multiple universes more immense than what the writers have envisioned in the writers’ room. I am especially fascinated by these two articles: one about continuity of the “mythology” and the other one about “time-space continuum“.

(For Mr. Nation’s dilemma for keeping all threads accounted for and untangled, I would like to suggest a relational database. Not a joke. In fact, the George Lucas empire does just that for the Star Wars ecosystem: with its own “Continuity department“)

All brainy stuff. Great for debates and discussions, preferably after a pint or two.

In fact, if I were still in school, the analysis of the universe within Lost the Show and the meta-universe of Lost the Fandom as a way to understand how the Internet has changed how popular culture is shaped would be the subject of my dissertation.

Seeing how I have left school a long time ago, I will not spend my time on the show. Sorry. It requires too much investment on the part of the audience, perhaps that is where you and I differ fundamentally as TV watchers. I am the “brain-dead” type. I do not want to get sucked into a fictional world that is striving to be as complicated as the real world (albeit in very different ways) that I have to constantly worry about what is going to happen now and agonize over the fact that I cannot figure the mysteries out.

I worry too much as is. As for puzzles, I have my Sudoku and Crossword puzzles. Or my pre-teen boy.

And I stand by the point that it is hypocritical that men (yes, mostly men) laugh at women for treating soap opera characters as if they were real live people, while they discuss incessantly about what is going to happen to which group on the show Lost. I just have to laugh. Not passing judgement here. Just sayin’ that if you think one scenario is ridiculous, then you have to take a good look at the other scenario.

Sincerely,

Not a Lost Fan

Will “Irresponsible Homeowners” step out of the room so we can all move on?

Leave a reply

via youtube.com

So the Treasury Department today released the details for HARP “Home Affordable Refinance Program” & HAMP “Home Affordable Modification Program”. The title of this press release is “Relief for Responsible Homeowners”.

Drum roll please… Apparently, the plan is NOT going to be able to save EVERYBODY. (Actually, the number given today is 7 to 9 million homeowners). To emphasize, the White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs gave this simple message:

“This is not going to save every person’s home.”

OMG! We didn’t expect that!

Sarcasm aside, there have been understandably a lot of cries of “What about me?” all over the country.

In order to make folks feel better, Mr. Gibbs said, according to Kai Ryssdal on Marketplace, “people who bought homes they clearly could never afford won’t get help.”

So my question once again is: how are you going to prove and enforce that?

Being a visual person, this is how I envision the scene inside my head:

(In contrast to the Nextel commercial shown here)

Chairperson: Will the Irresponsible Homeowners please stand up and get out of the room so we can all move on?

Cricket chirping.

Chairperson: Anybody? Bueller?

Homeowners look at each other angrily.

Chairperson: Nobody?

Now, this is a commercial that Nextel will not be making. Ever.

Posted via web from The Absence of Alternatives

Utah Senator Butt-Arse calls Gays immoral. And polygamy is? Where is the Big Love?

Leave a reply

No flaming please.  I didn’t mean to compare Gays to Polygamists.  But if Utah Senator Chris Butt-Ars (A-ha!) has his right to speak what is on his mind, to spout garbage based on stereotypes and gross generalization and nothing else, despite being an elected public official, then I have the right to generalize the State of Utah as still the hotbed of polygamy, and then to generalize polygamy as the Pantheon of immorality.

Hey, it is a free country, right?  Butt-Ars’s Republican colleagues in the Senate seem to believe so.

Here is the gist:

In an interview for a documentary film, “Butt-Ars called gays ‘the greatest threat to America’ and likened them to Muslim radicals. He said homosexuals lack any morals and want special rights.  ‘It’s the beginning of the end,’ Buttars said. ‘Oh, it’s worse than that. Sure. Sodom and Gomorrah was localized. This is worldwide.'”

Butt-ars has been stripped of his chairmanships by Senate Republicans after a closed-door meeting brought about by the outcry, and his Republican colleagues were outraged and they are standing behind him.  (I wish I had loyal friends like these…)  Butt-ars likewise refused to apologize, but rather relished the pride of taking a stand for his own beliefs.  (Imagine: what if we all had showed respect for the slave owners who took the stand for their own beliefs?  Hmmm…)

Below is the lengthy quote from The Salt Lake Tribune because you simply cannot make this stuff up!

“I want the citizens of Utah to know that the Utah Senate stands behind Senator Buttars right to speak, we stand behind him as one of our colleagues and his right to serve this state,” said Senate President Michael Waddoups, R-Taylorsville. “He is a senator who represents the point of view of many of his constituents and many of ours. We agree with many of the things he said. . . . We stand four square behind his right [to say what he wants].”

Buttars, R-West Jordan, said he “totally” disagrees with his removal from the panel. In a statement he plans to post on the Senate’s Web page, he said the action was an attempt to “shy away from controversy.” And, he said, he would not apologize for his comments.

“I don’t have anything to apologize for,” he said.

Wow.  Are you kidding me?  Is this for real?  In this day and age?  I must be incredibly naive to be astounded by these news lately so easily.

This and the Cartoon from the New York Post yesterday are reminders that we should not be complacent about “How far we have come along” despite the victory of having elected the first African American POTUS.  Baby, we’ve still got a long way to go…

“When it comes right down to it,” Buttars said in his statement, “I would rather be censured for doing what I think is right, than be honored by my colleagues for bowing to the pressure of a special-interest group that has been allowed to act with impunity.”

The New York Post chimp cartoon – Not at all funny no matter how you look at it…

Leave a reply

New controversy alert! February is not over yet, and as many of us have held our breath fearfully awaited, the FIRST racist cartoon about our FIRST Black Prez is out! My fellow Americans, once again, you do not disappoint…

So the unfortunate New York Post published this cartoon today and also on its website.

Take a deep breath, and be honest with yourself: what is your first reaction?

Perhaps only a kid who is not yet aware of racial stereotypes, historical racial relationships, and cultural symbols embedded in the American Psyche would not see it, but most of us do:

OMG! Are they kidding me? Is it what I think it is? Is the cartoonist referring to President Obama as a chimp shot dead? In this day and age? Is there irony in this? A sarcasm attacking racism or something but I simply cannot decipher it somehow?

Because:

1. Our Prez is Black. There is no any other way of saying it. He is.

2. The stimulus bill is his first legislative effort (and I thank him for it!!) and there are a lot of rumblings and grumblings about it

3. The cops as pictured are White. There is no any other way of saying it. They are.

Please tell me there is more to this cartoon. It has got to be. It is the 21st century, people, and we just elected our first Black President. Many are even thinking of abolishing the African American History Month because it does not seem like we need it any more.

Ha ha. Not funny. I want to cry.

The trusted Rev. Al Sharpton came out immediately and protested loudly:

“The cartoon in today’s New York Post is troubling at best given the historic racist attacks of African-Americans as being synonymous with monkeys. One has to question whether the cartoonist is making a less than casual reference to this when in the cartoon they have police saying after shooting a chimpanzee that “Now they will have to find someone else to write the stimulus bill.”

“Being that the stimulus bill has been the first legislative victory of President Barack Obama (the first African American president) and has become synonymous with him it is not a reach to wonder are they inferring that a monkey wrote the last bill?”

One can argue that you are being a racist yourself if any time a monkey is depicted, you immediately think of the signal = signified : monkey = African Americans

Isn’t that a racist way of perceiving the world? Aren’t you walking around with some colored glasses?

Well, let’s be honest with ourselves. We all are aware of each other’s external appearances. There is no escaping it. And we are all aware of the deep-seated stereotypes about each other permeated throughout our collective cultural references. There is no escaping that either. (I was not born in this country, and I have been taught to be aware of these in the years I have been in the U.S. mostly just by watching TV shows and movies, and trying to understand what the significance is in a lot of the cultural and social references…)

Because of this, the statement by New York Post’s Editor-in-Chief defending the cartoon seems rather weak:

“The cartoon is a clear parody of a current news event, to wit the shooting of a violent chimpanzee in Connecticut. It broadly mocks Washington’s efforts to revive the economy. Again, Al Sharpton reveals himself as nothing more than a publicity opportunist.”

Is Col Allan from Mars? Born two centuries ago? There is simply no excuse.

Yes, I get his argument: the cartoon allegedly refers to the “breaking story” about the Chimp shot dead in Stamford, CT, which happens to be the headline story in NY Post.

(Is there any wonder nobody really reads it? Asking a question such as “Why did the chimp go berzerk?” is just plain stupid. Why? I’ll tell you why: he was a chimp. If you are going to keep a chimp as a pet in the city and take him on walks in busy streets, yeah, you bet your ass he’s going to go berzerk. If not today, some day!)

But this requires the readers to:

1. Know about the chimp story (which I had no inkling of since it has not been twittered about…)

2. Immediately infers the caption “They’ll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill” as a comment on the stimulus being so dumb that “even a monkey can write it.”

IF I have to jump two steps ahead in order to laugh at a cartoon, then the cartoon is NOT funny to begin with. Rule of thumb for telling a joke: If you have to explain it, it is NOT good. So DON’T TELL IT!

I cannot help but have this gnawing feeling that perhaps this is exactly what they wanted: getting us pissed. Perhaps, New York Post has won since I am sure their website is getting the record high number of hits, ever.

Gawker.com collected 10 cartoons by Sean Delonas. Make your own judgement.

Americans pay $650 billion more for health care than comparable countries…

1 Reply

It is technically $643 billion, the additional amount Americans paid for health care in 2006 compared to the other countries with comparable wealth and health, according to the research article “Why Americans Pay More for Health Care?” in the December 2008 issue of the venerable McKinsey Quarterly. (Ok, probably not as venerable as The Harvard Business Review, but still a good thing to be inserted into your conversation with your interviewers…)
Please don’t freak out: this article is actually quite easy to follow and it is written in plain English, so there is no “Huh? WTF are they talking about?” or “Do they know what they themselves are saying?” moment. I promise. In addition, there are a lot of charts. We love charts! And these charts actually say something and make sense. Bonus.

Some quick takeaways:

Countries spend more on health care as they become wealthier.

The main source of this gap of $650 billion? Outpatient care. “Outpatient care is by far the largest and fastest-growing part of it, accounting for $436 billion, or two-thirds of the $650 billion figure. The cost of drugs and the cost of health care administration and insurance (all nonmedical costs incurred by health care payers) account for an additional $98 billion and $91 billion, respectively, in extra spending.”

“Today, the US system delivers 65 percent of all care in outpatient contexts, up from 43 percent in 1980.”

Although in theory this shift should have cut the cost down, in reality the overall cost went up because of the high utilization rate of outpatient care. However, it is not because we go to see the doctors a lot more often, rather, the average costs per visit has gone up and the number of expensive tests, such as MRIs and CT scans, are performed more frequently.

The root cause of this? Insurance and low out-of-pocket expense.

There is no check in place to guard the price increase. On the contrary, seeing a doctor may be like buying a high-end purse — if it is expensive, it must be good. And vice versa.

The article concludes thus, “In the United States, the ‘average’ consumer of health care pays for only 12 percent of its total cost directly out of pocket (down from 47 percent in 1960), as well as for 25 percent of health care insurance premiums, a share that has stayed relatively constant for the last decade.  Well-insured patients who bear little, if any, of the cost of their treatment have no incentive to be value-conscious health care consumers.”

This sounds familiar but now we have the numbers to back up our suspicions: in order for any health care reform to work and stick, it is important that we carry out the education and cultivation of a new generation of patients that are “value conscious” and treat the burden of health care, even when they do not have to pay for it DIRECTLY, as ultimately their own INDIRECT cross to bear.