There's a great book titled "What's the Matter with Kansas: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America" and I think everyone should read it. To summarize, it asks the question: why does Kansas (a middle-class state through and through) vote for a party that continuously pushes policies that favor the rich? And the answer, simply enough, is in the subtitle -- because the GOP has won their hearts, and that was enough, those people never consulted their brains.
There are things the democrats do that worry me, but none of it scares me. However, much of what the GOP stands for today sends shivers down my spine when it isn't making me outright angry.
Most of it concerns domestic policy, and the economic and cultural arguments overlap in more places than not. Ever since Reagonomics and the trickle-down theory of economics, while the GOP may have made middle-class Americans believe that they have their best interests in mind, in reality Republicans have aggressively pushed for the interests of the rich. The middle class has shrunk as wealth becomes more and more concentrated in the upper 5%. While unemployment nears 10%, Wall Street executives got bonuses and gold parachutes. The Republican party controlled Congress for most of the Reagan years, and then from 1994 to 2006. That's a fact. Can't argue otherwise.
People say America is full of rugged individualists, of men and women who pulled themselves up with their own bootstraps. I don't disagree. But that's half the story, if even that. America has always been a kind and generous nation. We help those in need because we've, for the most part, had the humility and courage to admit that no matter how hard we may have worked, there was always someone who helped us along the way. There are no true single success stories. Magazine stories and movies may create these characters, but their fiction. Behind every man or woman who chased and caught the American dream is a host of individuals who lent a helping hand, an encouraging word, a little loan to cover next month. We've always looked after each other. We've always been our brother's keeper.
But I don't hear that from Republicans today. I don't hear generosity or compassion. I hear blaming, ultimatums and domesday theories. Mostly, I hear words meant to instill fear and contempt.
Republicans recently blocked the Dream Act. The bill is meant to give young people who are living in the US illegally a path towards citizenship. If they sign up for the military and serve, they'll be granted citizenship and then the opportunity to attend college. These young people not only want to be citizens, they also want to fight for this country. Personally, even though I wholeheartedly agree with this bill, I have a cynical reaction to it. This is the only land these young people have ever known, they speak our language, and yet the only way they can legitimize their existence here is to join the military and put themselves in harms way. It eerily resembles slaves fighting in the Revolutionary War, with citizenship and rights as their guarantee at the end. I think we're all ashamed of that part of our nation's history. And yet, the Dream Act is a credible method of fixing the immigration issue, adding to the tax payer base, but most importantly, doing the common and decent thing for these young people who have grown up in this land, and are no less American than you or I save a piece of paper that says so. The Department of Defense, and Defense Secretary Gates (a Republican), has given this bill it's full endorsement. The Republican party, on the other hand, has espoused a view that these young people are uninvited guests, and worse, criminals.
I'm left with the feeling that the GOP wants us to view these people as undeserving, as inferior. The use catch phrases like "anchor babies" and "drug mules" that are meant to instill fear and distrust. It stirs our emotions and plays our heartstrings. They do it so well, people in Kansas forget to think with their heads.
I think it's time we remember who we really are, what we really are. The Republicans of today love to through out words like socialism, communism, the redistribution of wealth. "Why are you going to help these people? You work hard! They are lazy, and they're stealing your jobs too! Why would you do anything for someone who won't do for themselves? All they want is for you to give give give, so they can take take take!"
Except these young people are willing to enlist, to risk life and limb. That hardly sounds like a selfish tick. I wonder, how many of these Republicans enlisted? I wonder, how many of them have been willing to give so much for a shot at the American dream? I wonder how many of them opened their eyes to stack full of chips, and never really knew what it meant to gamble with money you didn't have today, in hopes you could win enough to make a life for yourself tomorrow.
I think we need to start treating people we don't know like people we do. They're no different, really. You see, they're people too, we just haven't met them yet. America has always been a land of opportunity, of freedom, of understanding, of progress, of compassion. We're the most successful experiment in social relations the world has ever seen. We're a nation of different creeds and color. In no other place on earth in its history has such a diverse people as ourselves been willing to rise up together, to pull one another up.
The Republican party wants to tell you who we are different. I think we'd be better off noticing the ways we're alike. We've been doing that for a long time. I think it would be a bad idea to stop now.
Martin Luther King, Jr. once said that he envisioned a day when his children wouldn't be judged by the color of their skin, but the content of their character. Those holds just a much truth today as they did that day in Washington.
Friday, December 10, 2010
Friday, October 29, 2010
It was almost two years ago that Barrack Obama was elected President of the United States.
My oh my, what a difference two years can make.
That isn't to say that I have buyer's remorse, because I certainly don't. First, a pragmatic approach means if it wasn't Obama, it was McCain. I used to like McCain a lot, was happy to see him start reeling off states during the primaries as he marched towards the nomination. I even, and this may come as a shock, spent a few weeks telling people he would probably get my vote. I thought he should have beaten Bush in 2000, and my belief that we would have been much better off had that happened instilled in me this notion of a second chance, and an opportunity to finally get it right. But then, in the span of a few months, McCain became what he always hated. He became a ride-with-the-wind-of-today politician. He disappointed me in so many ways, and I voted for Obama without any reservations.
Second, I think the passage of time will make clear to us what isn't now. But more on that later.
Do you remember what it felt like, those October weeks of 2008, and that first week in November? Do you remember what it felt like that evening of November 4th, 2008?
I do. I remember that line that he kept repeating, the line that filled me, and I'd like to think, us, with so much hope.
"We are the ones, we've been waiting for."
It was such a powerful feeling, to believe that we were in history as it was being made, that we were the ones making it.
My friends and I often talk about the towering figures of American history, the men and women who stuck their one rudder in the water, and shifted the direction of this enormous ship we call the United States. The Kennedy's, the King's, the Lincoln's.
For those of us who risk having such conversations, who try to think big thoughts, I cannot tell you what it meant to me to entertain the idea that we were like those people. Not that we were leaders like them, but that we were a part of a movement and a time that would chose a leader who reminded us of those we spoke about in coffee shops and on balcony's over late night drinks.
What I'm trying to say is that all we ever did was talk about the people that did something remarkable, about people that didn't just experience change, but helped cause it. We just never thought that we would end up being like them.
And yet, here we are two years later, in the midst of trying times. I won't get into why you shouldn't despair, at least not into detail. Simply put, the economic damage Obama battles today was, mostly, done before he was sworn in, and it was done almost entirely before his stimulus plan to effect.
More than 70% of job losses occurred before the stimulus was signed into law.
During the Clinton administration, more than 20 million jobs were created.
During the Bush administration, a little more than 2 million jobs were created.
I won't get into any more policy than that, because I think it tells the story about as well as any other stats I could quote.
Despite the fact every respectable economist of any political color told us that the stimulus would help, but that the problems that caused the recession were so systemic that it would take years, YEARS, before we got back to where we were before, so many Americans expected Obama to bring the magic of his campaign and charm away all of our problems.
And maybe some of that is his fault. He set the bar so high, in hindsight, failure by some degree was the only likely outcome.
Here's the harsh truth, decisions were made by a few, greedy, selfish, immoral men and now the rest of us have to live with the aftermath.
And I don't want to hear any crap about bank bailouts. Those were Bush's decision, and virtually all of Congress supported, Obama and McCain included.
For too many years, the American economy lived like the guy in the upscale neighborhood who takes a third mortgage so he can buy the new Mercedes and put in that big pool just so he can keep up appearances, the whole time knowing he can't make the payments.
Our economy lived beyond its means. A day of reckoning was bound to come, and it came when Bear Sterns went from bellwether to bankrupt in two months.
As I said before, though it may be unclear now, the effects of what Obama has done in the past two years will define the United States for the foreseeable future.
Make no mistake, in the past two years his administration has passed legislation on scale that has not been seen in, I would argue, 80 years. Not since the days of the New Deal has more significant, ambitious, and far reaching bills crossed the President's desk. From the stimulus package, to health care reform, to Wall Street reform, to bills for homeowners, small businesses, and the unemployed, you have been in a comma if you have not recognized the immense changes that have been implemented. We are living in a momentous time, and we have an ambitious president. Any arguments otherwise are flawed and self-serving.
So, we're brought back to this question: "Are we the ones we've been waiting for?"
I guess it depends on a choice of three possibilities ...
Maybe we weren't the ones we were waiting for. Maybe those people are still out there somewhere, in the years of tomorrow or the places in our heart we're afraid to go.
Or, maybe we were those people, but we've somehow change now, for a reason now or a reason before. Maybe we looked in the mirror and saw greatness, but didn't look long enough to prepare ourselves for the day when that mirror was shattered. Maybe we didn't take the time to memorize what we looked like, so that when dangerous people like Beck, Palin, Olbermann and Maddow tried to tell us we don't look like we did before, even though somewhere inside us, we remember looking different.
Or maybe, just maybe, we actually were the ones we were looking for. Maybe we really were those people felt that excitement, felt that rush of possibility, and knew we had the juice to back it up, to wake up the next morning the same person we were when we closed our eyes the night before. But then, like the champion boxer who thinks he is invincible, we took a shot to the teeth and when we hit the cold canvas face first it shocked the hell out of us because we'd never laid there. And we're still laying on that canvas now, trying to take stock of what it means, attempting to make sense of it all.
I think we're the third person. We were walking on air, and then someone came up and punched us in the mouth. What we did before is pointless, if we don't figure out a way to spit out some blood, pick ourselves up and say, "I hope that's not all you've got, because if it is, you're in trouble."
I'm not sure of who said it, but I've heard Michael J. Fox say it often.
Tough times come as surely as the sun will rise tomorrow, so instead of wishing for a lighter load, wish for broader shoulders.
My oh my, what a difference two years can make.
That isn't to say that I have buyer's remorse, because I certainly don't. First, a pragmatic approach means if it wasn't Obama, it was McCain. I used to like McCain a lot, was happy to see him start reeling off states during the primaries as he marched towards the nomination. I even, and this may come as a shock, spent a few weeks telling people he would probably get my vote. I thought he should have beaten Bush in 2000, and my belief that we would have been much better off had that happened instilled in me this notion of a second chance, and an opportunity to finally get it right. But then, in the span of a few months, McCain became what he always hated. He became a ride-with-the-wind-of-today politician. He disappointed me in so many ways, and I voted for Obama without any reservations.
Second, I think the passage of time will make clear to us what isn't now. But more on that later.
Do you remember what it felt like, those October weeks of 2008, and that first week in November? Do you remember what it felt like that evening of November 4th, 2008?
I do. I remember that line that he kept repeating, the line that filled me, and I'd like to think, us, with so much hope.
"We are the ones, we've been waiting for."
It was such a powerful feeling, to believe that we were in history as it was being made, that we were the ones making it.
My friends and I often talk about the towering figures of American history, the men and women who stuck their one rudder in the water, and shifted the direction of this enormous ship we call the United States. The Kennedy's, the King's, the Lincoln's.
For those of us who risk having such conversations, who try to think big thoughts, I cannot tell you what it meant to me to entertain the idea that we were like those people. Not that we were leaders like them, but that we were a part of a movement and a time that would chose a leader who reminded us of those we spoke about in coffee shops and on balcony's over late night drinks.
What I'm trying to say is that all we ever did was talk about the people that did something remarkable, about people that didn't just experience change, but helped cause it. We just never thought that we would end up being like them.
And yet, here we are two years later, in the midst of trying times. I won't get into why you shouldn't despair, at least not into detail. Simply put, the economic damage Obama battles today was, mostly, done before he was sworn in, and it was done almost entirely before his stimulus plan to effect.
More than 70% of job losses occurred before the stimulus was signed into law.
During the Clinton administration, more than 20 million jobs were created.
During the Bush administration, a little more than 2 million jobs were created.
I won't get into any more policy than that, because I think it tells the story about as well as any other stats I could quote.
Despite the fact every respectable economist of any political color told us that the stimulus would help, but that the problems that caused the recession were so systemic that it would take years, YEARS, before we got back to where we were before, so many Americans expected Obama to bring the magic of his campaign and charm away all of our problems.
And maybe some of that is his fault. He set the bar so high, in hindsight, failure by some degree was the only likely outcome.
Here's the harsh truth, decisions were made by a few, greedy, selfish, immoral men and now the rest of us have to live with the aftermath.
And I don't want to hear any crap about bank bailouts. Those were Bush's decision, and virtually all of Congress supported, Obama and McCain included.
For too many years, the American economy lived like the guy in the upscale neighborhood who takes a third mortgage so he can buy the new Mercedes and put in that big pool just so he can keep up appearances, the whole time knowing he can't make the payments.
Our economy lived beyond its means. A day of reckoning was bound to come, and it came when Bear Sterns went from bellwether to bankrupt in two months.
As I said before, though it may be unclear now, the effects of what Obama has done in the past two years will define the United States for the foreseeable future.
Make no mistake, in the past two years his administration has passed legislation on scale that has not been seen in, I would argue, 80 years. Not since the days of the New Deal has more significant, ambitious, and far reaching bills crossed the President's desk. From the stimulus package, to health care reform, to Wall Street reform, to bills for homeowners, small businesses, and the unemployed, you have been in a comma if you have not recognized the immense changes that have been implemented. We are living in a momentous time, and we have an ambitious president. Any arguments otherwise are flawed and self-serving.
So, we're brought back to this question: "Are we the ones we've been waiting for?"
I guess it depends on a choice of three possibilities ...
Maybe we weren't the ones we were waiting for. Maybe those people are still out there somewhere, in the years of tomorrow or the places in our heart we're afraid to go.
Or, maybe we were those people, but we've somehow change now, for a reason now or a reason before. Maybe we looked in the mirror and saw greatness, but didn't look long enough to prepare ourselves for the day when that mirror was shattered. Maybe we didn't take the time to memorize what we looked like, so that when dangerous people like Beck, Palin, Olbermann and Maddow tried to tell us we don't look like we did before, even though somewhere inside us, we remember looking different.
Or maybe, just maybe, we actually were the ones we were looking for. Maybe we really were those people felt that excitement, felt that rush of possibility, and knew we had the juice to back it up, to wake up the next morning the same person we were when we closed our eyes the night before. But then, like the champion boxer who thinks he is invincible, we took a shot to the teeth and when we hit the cold canvas face first it shocked the hell out of us because we'd never laid there. And we're still laying on that canvas now, trying to take stock of what it means, attempting to make sense of it all.
I think we're the third person. We were walking on air, and then someone came up and punched us in the mouth. What we did before is pointless, if we don't figure out a way to spit out some blood, pick ourselves up and say, "I hope that's not all you've got, because if it is, you're in trouble."
I'm not sure of who said it, but I've heard Michael J. Fox say it often.
Tough times come as surely as the sun will rise tomorrow, so instead of wishing for a lighter load, wish for broader shoulders.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
State of Georgia Football
A FALL FROM GRACE
Glory, Glory to Ole Georgia.
It is the verse of the timeless fight song, and the immortal words of Larry Munson that boom forth at the start of every game, enlivening the crowd and echoing in the cement and scene of Sanford Stadium like so many of the great plays, fabulous teams and legendary players that called the grass between the hedges their stage.
But now, though the setting hasn't changed, the show has. Georgia is 2-7 over it's last 9 SEC games, and 9-11 over its last 20 games overall. Why? Was Munson more than just a broadcaster? Is Russ bad luck, a spotted imposter annoying the football gods until a true Uga guards the sidelines once again?
It may sound facetious, but Georgia fans are getting desperate and desperate times call forth all manner of remedies.
What is wrong with Georgia? Was the Sugar Bowl really that long ago?
If the blackout game against Alabama was Richt's Waterloo, the 49-10 loss to Florida four weeks later was his exile. Georgia, the preseason #1, lost by a combined 90-40 in those two games. And believe me, the scores could have been much worse. For me, the '08 season was a greater failure than the '09 season in a myriad of ways. Granted, Georgia was not the first slightly overrated preseason #1 team in history, and they certainly won't be the last. But that team was essentially the same as the year before, and whatever losses suffered to the NFL or by graduation were supposed to more than made up for by the continued maturation of the younger, better players.
When you think about the talent on the '08 team that went 9-3, and the major drop off of talent on the '09 team that went 7-5, the difference of two games isn't so great, and I would argue that the '09 team did more with what it had than the '08 team did.
What is wrong with the team this year? If you'll humor me, I think it's more simple than not.
In short: the schemes and the personnel don't match up.
Grantham is installing a 3-4 defense, and he simply doesn't have the type of players he needs to make that work. We don't have a big nose tackle, and we don't have enough linebackers that are big enough to take on a lineman, but quick enough to drop into coverage. Grantham deserves more time. I'll give it to him.
The offense is a disaster. The linemen are undersized but athletic, and are much better in pass protection than run blocking. It follows that we'd be much more successful if we ran a quick strike, spread'em out offense that didn't require the line to move people five yards down the field, but instead just hold their blocks long enough for Murray to throw the ball.
Unfortunately, we run a pro-style, run first offense in which the linemen are required to block like it is a run every play in order to sell the play-action fake. We can't run block, so there's no reason to think we can fake-run block either.
In addition, most of the passing plays have slow developing routes whose success is predicated on a legitimate run game. The problem, previously stated, is that we can't run the ball effectively enough to make defenses keep eight players in the box, and Murray ends up throwing to covered receivers, and often into double coverage.
On a less schematic note, the general attitude and personality of the team the past two years has and is a major concern. The Dawgs looked uninterested against Miss St, which should have been billed as a must-win game all week during practice. During the first 18 minutes of the Colorado game, the team looked rejuvenated by AJ Green's return. Then he misses a few series with a minor injury, and the team deflated to Miss St level. Disappointing. It's clear there is a substantial lack of on-field leadership.
Here is a scary thought, the biggest three wins of the past two and a half years were as follows: '07 Florida, '08 Auburn, '08 Hawaii (actually in 2009, I know).
What is the common theme of those three wins?
In each, Georgia used some hokey motivational tool to get themselves amped up. "The Celebration" against Florida, and the black jerseys against Auburn and Hawaii.
Make no mistake, this should give Dawgs fans a collective pause. Is this what we've become? An under coached, under achieving team more concerned with vanity and "cool jerseys" than out-preparing, out-hustling, and out-playing the opponent?
I hate to say it, but I think Georgia is lost in the forest. I just hope we won't wander around for forty years.
Glory, Glory to Ole Georgia.
It is the verse of the timeless fight song, and the immortal words of Larry Munson that boom forth at the start of every game, enlivening the crowd and echoing in the cement and scene of Sanford Stadium like so many of the great plays, fabulous teams and legendary players that called the grass between the hedges their stage.
But now, though the setting hasn't changed, the show has. Georgia is 2-7 over it's last 9 SEC games, and 9-11 over its last 20 games overall. Why? Was Munson more than just a broadcaster? Is Russ bad luck, a spotted imposter annoying the football gods until a true Uga guards the sidelines once again?
It may sound facetious, but Georgia fans are getting desperate and desperate times call forth all manner of remedies.
What is wrong with Georgia? Was the Sugar Bowl really that long ago?
If the blackout game against Alabama was Richt's Waterloo, the 49-10 loss to Florida four weeks later was his exile. Georgia, the preseason #1, lost by a combined 90-40 in those two games. And believe me, the scores could have been much worse. For me, the '08 season was a greater failure than the '09 season in a myriad of ways. Granted, Georgia was not the first slightly overrated preseason #1 team in history, and they certainly won't be the last. But that team was essentially the same as the year before, and whatever losses suffered to the NFL or by graduation were supposed to more than made up for by the continued maturation of the younger, better players.
When you think about the talent on the '08 team that went 9-3, and the major drop off of talent on the '09 team that went 7-5, the difference of two games isn't so great, and I would argue that the '09 team did more with what it had than the '08 team did.
What is wrong with the team this year? If you'll humor me, I think it's more simple than not.
In short: the schemes and the personnel don't match up.
Grantham is installing a 3-4 defense, and he simply doesn't have the type of players he needs to make that work. We don't have a big nose tackle, and we don't have enough linebackers that are big enough to take on a lineman, but quick enough to drop into coverage. Grantham deserves more time. I'll give it to him.
The offense is a disaster. The linemen are undersized but athletic, and are much better in pass protection than run blocking. It follows that we'd be much more successful if we ran a quick strike, spread'em out offense that didn't require the line to move people five yards down the field, but instead just hold their blocks long enough for Murray to throw the ball.
Unfortunately, we run a pro-style, run first offense in which the linemen are required to block like it is a run every play in order to sell the play-action fake. We can't run block, so there's no reason to think we can fake-run block either.
In addition, most of the passing plays have slow developing routes whose success is predicated on a legitimate run game. The problem, previously stated, is that we can't run the ball effectively enough to make defenses keep eight players in the box, and Murray ends up throwing to covered receivers, and often into double coverage.
On a less schematic note, the general attitude and personality of the team the past two years has and is a major concern. The Dawgs looked uninterested against Miss St, which should have been billed as a must-win game all week during practice. During the first 18 minutes of the Colorado game, the team looked rejuvenated by AJ Green's return. Then he misses a few series with a minor injury, and the team deflated to Miss St level. Disappointing. It's clear there is a substantial lack of on-field leadership.
Here is a scary thought, the biggest three wins of the past two and a half years were as follows: '07 Florida, '08 Auburn, '08 Hawaii (actually in 2009, I know).
What is the common theme of those three wins?
In each, Georgia used some hokey motivational tool to get themselves amped up. "The Celebration" against Florida, and the black jerseys against Auburn and Hawaii.
Make no mistake, this should give Dawgs fans a collective pause. Is this what we've become? An under coached, under achieving team more concerned with vanity and "cool jerseys" than out-preparing, out-hustling, and out-playing the opponent?
I hate to say it, but I think Georgia is lost in the forest. I just hope we won't wander around for forty years.
Monday, August 23, 2010
What the NYC Mosque Tells Us About America's Mood
"The past is never dead. It's not even past." - William Faulkner
What was Faulkner talking about? Few quotes can inspire better parlor room debates. Faulkner wrote about the underbelly of reality, and it is debatable whether he used the setting of the South for his gothic stories, or whether the South was a character all unto itself. I think that few places had more trouble dealing with the past than the post-antebellum South. And so the quote makes more sense, takes on more meaning. People love to recite the cliche, "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it." But that doesn't apply to some places, and it has no bearing on some people. For Faulkner's South, people didn't have to worry about forgetting the past, and they didn't have to worry about it repeating itself. You see, it's hard to forget something when it never left in the first place.
The point of the preceding paragraph isn't vanity, at least most of it isn't. I want to try an exercise. It is a bit abstract, but, interesting nonetheless. What if we tried not to think of history in such a linear way? Meaning, instead of event A leading into event B and then into event C, what if we took A, B and C, and talked about them at the same time and in the same way? It's not that I think "cause and effect" isn't useful, I think few things are more useful. It's just that most people think "effect" always starts where "cause" ends, and I think that there is more overlap than we realize.
I don't think anyone will argue with the suggestion that, today as we know it, America is divided. The Tea Party's existence, if anything, is proof of that. United States politics is a predominantly a two party system, any time an extra party or "movement" sprouts up, it is a surefire sign that times are tumultuous. But I am rambling, so let's get to the point:
Historically, nations who are suffering major domestic discontent and unrest often, ultimately, find a way to project that discontent OUTWARD towards a real, or imagined, foreign threat. The idea is this: you and I may not have a lot to agree about, but what we can agree about is that THEY (the foreigners) aren't US (us us, not the USA). Restated, you and I don't have much in common, but what we do have in common is that fact that WE aren't like THEM. Do you see where I'm going with this? I think you do.
The "mosque", "community center", "worship house" that is being proposed to be built near Ground Zero has touched off a nerve in this country. The story has been in the news for weeks and, as the anniversary of 9-11 nears, it is in no danger of going away any time soon. The proliferation of this story/controversy in the past weeks, and recent polls reporting that a growing number of Americans suspect that President Barack Obama is secretly a Muslim are, without a doubt, closely related. I find the idea that Obama has professed his faith in Jesus Christ and attended a Christian church for decades, all the while secretly hiding his Muslim faith and supposed deep-seeded plan to get elected to this nation's highest office in order to turn the US into a Muslim nation, to be about as ludicrous as any idea I could come up with on my own. People who give this conspiracy theory any more than a moments thought have, in my opinion, truly gone off to live in left field. But I also acknowledge that most people are not like me, at least in this one regard. But the facts are facts, and they're worth facing - 21% of Americans now believe President Obama is secretly a Muslim, and an overwhelming majority of Americans believe the mosque in NYC should not be built.
And so, here we are. The country has 10% unemployment, housing is in the dumps, a historically partisan government has been unable to supply economic relief (at least relief acceptable to public America), and some cable news stations (ahem, Fox News) fuel paranoia and confusion on a daily basis. Return to the main premise: when there is chaos within, project that chaos onto some outside force, real or imaginary, and national unity will follow . . .
A month ago, there wasn't much the American public could agree on. Today, most Americans agree that a community center being built in an old Burlington Coat Factory nearly two miles from Ground Zero represents nothing less than an act of war and a triumph of desecration (fyi, there is already a mosque much closer to where the Twin Towers fell).
In the early 1900s, Germany had emerged as an industrial behemoth. It was also a political mess. The country grew too fast, and before long wealth had become localized in a choice few, aristocratic landowners and businessmen (sound familiar?).
With Wilhelm I and his monarchy acting as a puppet for the dysfunctional democratic republic, Germany faced a crossroads. It could either sit back and succumb to the revolution that would inevitably come or, instead, it could create an imaginary foreign threat in order to create unity at home. Germany chose the second path. Most of us were taught that the cause of WWI was an intricate alliance created by treaties that knocked over the first domino, starting war, when the Archduke Franz Ferdinand was assassinated. Honestly, this is not true. The truth is that Germany had been expanding its military months before the Black Hand shot the Archduke and his wife. The truth is that, as soon as Austria-Hungary's prince had been shot, Germany wrote Austria-Hungry a "blank check", with one simple understanding: despite your inclination to do otherwise, if you declare war on Serbia, causing all-out war, when the dust settles, you will enjoy a wonderful place in the new world created by Germany and her friends.
That is a lot of history, I know. The point is that treaties and alliances didn't start WWI, Germany did. And Germany did so because it was about to tear itself apart on the inside, and it decided that a foreign threat was the best way to stop internal struggles dead in its tracks.
You and I may not have much in common, but what we do have in common is that WE aren't THEM.
Am I saying that the USA today is like Germany then? No. But the analogy isn't that far off, not quite apples and apples, but not quite apples and oranges either. Mostly, it is worth it to remember that some cliches make more sense than others, and that repeating them aloud won't make them mean anything more than they already do. You see, we don't walk in straight lines and we don't walk in perfect circles either. No, we walk over our old footsteps in different ways and for different reasons than we did before. But our old footsteps are still there, whether we take the time to stop and notice them or not.
"The past is never dead. It's not even past."
What was Faulkner talking about? Few quotes can inspire better parlor room debates. Faulkner wrote about the underbelly of reality, and it is debatable whether he used the setting of the South for his gothic stories, or whether the South was a character all unto itself. I think that few places had more trouble dealing with the past than the post-antebellum South. And so the quote makes more sense, takes on more meaning. People love to recite the cliche, "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it." But that doesn't apply to some places, and it has no bearing on some people. For Faulkner's South, people didn't have to worry about forgetting the past, and they didn't have to worry about it repeating itself. You see, it's hard to forget something when it never left in the first place.
The point of the preceding paragraph isn't vanity, at least most of it isn't. I want to try an exercise. It is a bit abstract, but, interesting nonetheless. What if we tried not to think of history in such a linear way? Meaning, instead of event A leading into event B and then into event C, what if we took A, B and C, and talked about them at the same time and in the same way? It's not that I think "cause and effect" isn't useful, I think few things are more useful. It's just that most people think "effect" always starts where "cause" ends, and I think that there is more overlap than we realize.
I don't think anyone will argue with the suggestion that, today as we know it, America is divided. The Tea Party's existence, if anything, is proof of that. United States politics is a predominantly a two party system, any time an extra party or "movement" sprouts up, it is a surefire sign that times are tumultuous. But I am rambling, so let's get to the point:
Historically, nations who are suffering major domestic discontent and unrest often, ultimately, find a way to project that discontent OUTWARD towards a real, or imagined, foreign threat. The idea is this: you and I may not have a lot to agree about, but what we can agree about is that THEY (the foreigners) aren't US (us us, not the USA). Restated, you and I don't have much in common, but what we do have in common is that fact that WE aren't like THEM. Do you see where I'm going with this? I think you do.
The "mosque", "community center", "worship house" that is being proposed to be built near Ground Zero has touched off a nerve in this country. The story has been in the news for weeks and, as the anniversary of 9-11 nears, it is in no danger of going away any time soon. The proliferation of this story/controversy in the past weeks, and recent polls reporting that a growing number of Americans suspect that President Barack Obama is secretly a Muslim are, without a doubt, closely related. I find the idea that Obama has professed his faith in Jesus Christ and attended a Christian church for decades, all the while secretly hiding his Muslim faith and supposed deep-seeded plan to get elected to this nation's highest office in order to turn the US into a Muslim nation, to be about as ludicrous as any idea I could come up with on my own. People who give this conspiracy theory any more than a moments thought have, in my opinion, truly gone off to live in left field. But I also acknowledge that most people are not like me, at least in this one regard. But the facts are facts, and they're worth facing - 21% of Americans now believe President Obama is secretly a Muslim, and an overwhelming majority of Americans believe the mosque in NYC should not be built.
And so, here we are. The country has 10% unemployment, housing is in the dumps, a historically partisan government has been unable to supply economic relief (at least relief acceptable to public America), and some cable news stations (ahem, Fox News) fuel paranoia and confusion on a daily basis. Return to the main premise: when there is chaos within, project that chaos onto some outside force, real or imaginary, and national unity will follow . . .
A month ago, there wasn't much the American public could agree on. Today, most Americans agree that a community center being built in an old Burlington Coat Factory nearly two miles from Ground Zero represents nothing less than an act of war and a triumph of desecration (fyi, there is already a mosque much closer to where the Twin Towers fell).
In the early 1900s, Germany had emerged as an industrial behemoth. It was also a political mess. The country grew too fast, and before long wealth had become localized in a choice few, aristocratic landowners and businessmen (sound familiar?).
With Wilhelm I and his monarchy acting as a puppet for the dysfunctional democratic republic, Germany faced a crossroads. It could either sit back and succumb to the revolution that would inevitably come or, instead, it could create an imaginary foreign threat in order to create unity at home. Germany chose the second path. Most of us were taught that the cause of WWI was an intricate alliance created by treaties that knocked over the first domino, starting war, when the Archduke Franz Ferdinand was assassinated. Honestly, this is not true. The truth is that Germany had been expanding its military months before the Black Hand shot the Archduke and his wife. The truth is that, as soon as Austria-Hungary's prince had been shot, Germany wrote Austria-Hungry a "blank check", with one simple understanding: despite your inclination to do otherwise, if you declare war on Serbia, causing all-out war, when the dust settles, you will enjoy a wonderful place in the new world created by Germany and her friends.
That is a lot of history, I know. The point is that treaties and alliances didn't start WWI, Germany did. And Germany did so because it was about to tear itself apart on the inside, and it decided that a foreign threat was the best way to stop internal struggles dead in its tracks.
You and I may not have much in common, but what we do have in common is that WE aren't THEM.
Am I saying that the USA today is like Germany then? No. But the analogy isn't that far off, not quite apples and apples, but not quite apples and oranges either. Mostly, it is worth it to remember that some cliches make more sense than others, and that repeating them aloud won't make them mean anything more than they already do. You see, we don't walk in straight lines and we don't walk in perfect circles either. No, we walk over our old footsteps in different ways and for different reasons than we did before. But our old footsteps are still there, whether we take the time to stop and notice them or not.
"The past is never dead. It's not even past."
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Why America Needs to Rethink How It Wages War
This is the topic of my article: Why American Military Strategy is Outdated
The war in Afghanistan is, put nicely, not going so well. Recent reports bring news of a revitalized and growing Al Qaeda. Liberals and even some conservatives have pointed to the Bush administration's negligent treatment of the war in Afghanistan while focusing more energy and resources on the war in Iraq, a boondoggle meant to further a neoconservative viewpoint of the world. This may be arguable (probably true), but to blame the struggles in Afghanistan on such a simplistic reason is, in my opinion, to allow Americans to continue suffering under the delusion that the solution to any military threat against America is simply an issue of how many guns and tanks are needed.
The reason we need to rethink how we wage war is, I think, not necessarily obvious, but easy to understand once laid out.
The US is at war against those behind the 9-11 attacks. Who and what is Al Qaeda? Simply answered, they are a terrorist network. It would be easy to stop there, but to do that is to make a big mistake. And, I think this is my biggest point. The "War Against Terror" is not, as most politicians would have us believe, a war of, or, against people. No, it is a war of IDEAS.
OLD DOG WITH OLD TRICKS
The US is trying to fight against 21st century enemies using 20th century strategies. Another false logic we need to get past is the idea that because we have the biggest, most advanced military in the world, we can win ANY war. Yes, we are the best. But to use a sports analogy, the best team on paper isn't always the team that wins. Why? Because they don't play games on paper. In Super Bowl XLII, the 18-0 New England Patriots faced the 13-6 New York Giants. By all calculations, the Patriots were the superior team. Then the Giants went out and beat the undefeated Patriots 17-14. And here is a fact that makes this analogy even better: The Patriots had previously beaten the Giants in the last game of the regular season. But when they met in the Super Bowl more than a month later, it was obvious that the Giants were not the same team as before. The Giants had retooled, adapted, evolved. The Patriots were relying on what worked last time, and on that night in February, it was no longer good enough.
The US's current military strategy is equivalent to the Patriots. From 1917 to mid-2001, the US military existed as the most dominant force in the world, and, in my opinion, one has to go back to the Roman Empire to find a worthy contemporary. But during the past 8+ years, our military strategy has been stalemated at best, and ineffective at worst.
Why is this so? Stated simply, Al Qaeda is unlike any enemy the US has ever fought. Furthermore, Al Qaeda is unlike any aggressor in the history of the modern world. They are an amorphous group of individuals without a defined command structure. They operate in sleeper cells under the most general of orders: plan and execute attacks against America and her allies. They are nationless and they have no elected leaders which means they have no official government that can be defeated and removed.
In WWII, Germany invaded France on June 5, 1940. On June 14, German forces took Paris. While it is astounding that it took Germany only 9 days to knock France out of the war (wow!), that is not pertinent to this discussion. What is pertinent is the fact that, once Paris fell, France was out of the game, for good. US forces took Kabul with greater ease during the Afghanistan war, but the end result was the opposite. Yes, the Taliban was the ruling group in Afghanistan at the time, and yes, they were a potential threat. For the third time, yes, they were who we removed from power once we took Kabul.
But the Taliban was not the objective nor the true threat. The Taliban did not attack the US, Al Qaeda did. Afghanistan is where they trained and, supposedly, were strongest. So we sent brigades to Afghanistan.
But, Al Qaeda was not and has not been knocked out of the war on terror. They are not like our past foes.
WWI and WWII were wars over territory. Thousands of lives were lost gaining a handful of yards, only to lose those yards in the next days or weeks. The Cold War is difficult to compare, but loosely stated, it was a war over influence. Still, that influence was defined by territory, by soil.
"If the USSR and communism takes Vietnam, the WHOLE country of Vietnam, we're in big trouble."
A common theme is that the solution for all three were relatively the same: pure military might. Another common thread is that in each of these wars, America's enemies were nations with governments and defined borders.
Yes, Al Qaeda finds its strongest support in the Middle East. But, Al Qaeda is not a nation state. There is no border to invade, no capital to take, no government to overthrow and replace with leaders selected by us.
The focal point of our war on terror has been the poor, undeveloped, rock-worn country of Afghanistan. We're led to believe that this is a war over territory. It isn't. And that is where we went wrong. That is where our failure lies, in our inability to understand and say aloud that the war on terror will not be won by taking over THIS country or occupying THIS region, fixing THIS government or rebuilding THIS nation.
Easily forgotten is the fact that the 9-11 terrorists did most of their planning in Germany and in the US. That's right, IN THE UNITED STATES.
HISTORY DOESN'T REPEAT ITSELF
Current US military strategy is largely created by men old enough to remember firsthand how we did things following WWII and in the Cold War. That is the problem. They are outdated and so is their thinking. In the future, we will not fight enemies like those we fought in the 20th century. China is not a military threat, they don't want to fight. Russia doesn't want to either. There is a reason why they don't want to fight - our defense budget is more than double the size of the industrialized nations COMBINED. We live in a post-modern, ever globalizing world. The spread of information is too prevalent.
In the middle of WWI, German and French troops realized they had more in common than their governments. On Christmas Eve in 1914, German and French troops laid down their guns, crawled out of their trenches and joined together to sing hymns. They realized they were farmers fighting farmers.
WWI was supposed to be the last world war, but Hitler forced the second. Since then, no industrialized nation has waged war against another. I think a strong argument can be made that modern, industrialized, educated nations will never go to war again. I think a stronger argument can be made that whatever fighting does occur in the future, it will be fought between modern nations against terrorist groups like Al Qaeda. If you accept this argument, then you must accept the conclusion that the way we fought in the 20th century is not the way to fight now or at any point going forward.
TOMORROW IS A NEW DAY
So, if America needs to rethink how it wages war, what is the "how"? As stated earlier, this is a war of ideas. Does that mean the US should drastically reduce it's militaristic capabilities? No. Wartime expenditures? Yes. But its capabilities? No. I'm not near the dove this article may imply. The world is full of wonderful, genuinely kind people who only want to go about their day, raise a family, and enjoy life. However, the world is also filled with evil people who want to harm others. And somewhere in the middle are those that could do the former, but are impressionable enough to be recruited by those evil to do the latter. Therefore, the US should fully adopt a two-prong strategy.
THE STICK AND THE CARROT: REDUX
America's military strategy should focus on two kinds of people: the bad guys, and those that the bad guys wish to indoctrinate.
The bad guys --- These are the individuals that are trying to kill Americans, abroad and at home. These people get the big stick. The US should employ small, special ops type forces against these enemies. These true enemies of the US should be eliminated by force. Left alive, they will continue to try to take American (and western) lives. Counterintuitively, I believe this group is not the true threat to America's future. Like everything else, time is not on their side. They will grow old, and the plans they lay will depend on others, younger, to put into action.
Due to this they will also try to grow their ranks by convincing young, confused, impressionable individuals to take up the fight against America. This leads us to the second group . . .
Those still choosing a side --- These are the individuals that will determine the kind of future to become present. Every day that Al Qaeda recruits a single member is a failure of US military strategy and foreign policy. As Al Qaeda grows, the war on terror extends into unknown lengths. If the US is able, through a change in strategy, to drastically reduce Al Qaeda's ability to convince youth that jihad against America is the path towards a better future, then in less than 10 year's time the terrorist network will be starved of resources and it's ability to fight will whither away. The rank and file will, by attrition, shrink until the point in which Al Qaeda and terrorist organizations like it will no longer be able to persist.
Every youth that refuses to join a terrorist group will not only exercise a force against evil, but will also grow the power of good.
This is a zero-sum scenario. The world is a big pie, and every time Evil's slice gets a little bit smaller, Good's slice gets a little bit bigger.
Admittedly, this part of the strategy is harder, simply because America is not as proficient in it as it is the first. We should double-down on our diplomatic measures by drastically increasing the number of reasonable, level-headed, experienced American diplomats who should canvas the world offering assistance when needed, and advice when it is asked for. We should stop this whole "nation building" enterprise, at least in the sense of how we mean it now. The US is more rare than it realizes, perhaps the rarest of its kind in human history. We got to where we are by smarts, hard work, but also a lot of luck. We cannot forget that our existence is the exception, not the rule, and we should not allow the hubris of assuming we have the ability to create other nations like us. Culture has deep roots, and any attempt by the US to simply ignore cultural history and cultural norms in other places in the world as we try to shape them in our image will only led to more conflict and failures.
Remember, the world is full of good people. We can point the way, but let us have the wisdom and the restraint to stop there.
For the past eighty or so years, the US has been the main protector of freedom and liberty. We have strived to fight against oppression both at home and abroad.
Thomas Jefferson once wrote, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
That is what our nation was founded on -- an idea.
We are in a war of ideas. Whoever wins this war, wins the future.
The war in Afghanistan is, put nicely, not going so well. Recent reports bring news of a revitalized and growing Al Qaeda. Liberals and even some conservatives have pointed to the Bush administration's negligent treatment of the war in Afghanistan while focusing more energy and resources on the war in Iraq, a boondoggle meant to further a neoconservative viewpoint of the world. This may be arguable (probably true), but to blame the struggles in Afghanistan on such a simplistic reason is, in my opinion, to allow Americans to continue suffering under the delusion that the solution to any military threat against America is simply an issue of how many guns and tanks are needed.
The reason we need to rethink how we wage war is, I think, not necessarily obvious, but easy to understand once laid out.
The US is at war against those behind the 9-11 attacks. Who and what is Al Qaeda? Simply answered, they are a terrorist network. It would be easy to stop there, but to do that is to make a big mistake. And, I think this is my biggest point. The "War Against Terror" is not, as most politicians would have us believe, a war of, or, against people. No, it is a war of IDEAS.
OLD DOG WITH OLD TRICKS
The US is trying to fight against 21st century enemies using 20th century strategies. Another false logic we need to get past is the idea that because we have the biggest, most advanced military in the world, we can win ANY war. Yes, we are the best. But to use a sports analogy, the best team on paper isn't always the team that wins. Why? Because they don't play games on paper. In Super Bowl XLII, the 18-0 New England Patriots faced the 13-6 New York Giants. By all calculations, the Patriots were the superior team. Then the Giants went out and beat the undefeated Patriots 17-14. And here is a fact that makes this analogy even better: The Patriots had previously beaten the Giants in the last game of the regular season. But when they met in the Super Bowl more than a month later, it was obvious that the Giants were not the same team as before. The Giants had retooled, adapted, evolved. The Patriots were relying on what worked last time, and on that night in February, it was no longer good enough.
The US's current military strategy is equivalent to the Patriots. From 1917 to mid-2001, the US military existed as the most dominant force in the world, and, in my opinion, one has to go back to the Roman Empire to find a worthy contemporary. But during the past 8+ years, our military strategy has been stalemated at best, and ineffective at worst.
Why is this so? Stated simply, Al Qaeda is unlike any enemy the US has ever fought. Furthermore, Al Qaeda is unlike any aggressor in the history of the modern world. They are an amorphous group of individuals without a defined command structure. They operate in sleeper cells under the most general of orders: plan and execute attacks against America and her allies. They are nationless and they have no elected leaders which means they have no official government that can be defeated and removed.
In WWII, Germany invaded France on June 5, 1940. On June 14, German forces took Paris. While it is astounding that it took Germany only 9 days to knock France out of the war (wow!), that is not pertinent to this discussion. What is pertinent is the fact that, once Paris fell, France was out of the game, for good. US forces took Kabul with greater ease during the Afghanistan war, but the end result was the opposite. Yes, the Taliban was the ruling group in Afghanistan at the time, and yes, they were a potential threat. For the third time, yes, they were who we removed from power once we took Kabul.
But the Taliban was not the objective nor the true threat. The Taliban did not attack the US, Al Qaeda did. Afghanistan is where they trained and, supposedly, were strongest. So we sent brigades to Afghanistan.
But, Al Qaeda was not and has not been knocked out of the war on terror. They are not like our past foes.
WWI and WWII were wars over territory. Thousands of lives were lost gaining a handful of yards, only to lose those yards in the next days or weeks. The Cold War is difficult to compare, but loosely stated, it was a war over influence. Still, that influence was defined by territory, by soil.
"If the USSR and communism takes Vietnam, the WHOLE country of Vietnam, we're in big trouble."
A common theme is that the solution for all three were relatively the same: pure military might. Another common thread is that in each of these wars, America's enemies were nations with governments and defined borders.
Yes, Al Qaeda finds its strongest support in the Middle East. But, Al Qaeda is not a nation state. There is no border to invade, no capital to take, no government to overthrow and replace with leaders selected by us.
The focal point of our war on terror has been the poor, undeveloped, rock-worn country of Afghanistan. We're led to believe that this is a war over territory. It isn't. And that is where we went wrong. That is where our failure lies, in our inability to understand and say aloud that the war on terror will not be won by taking over THIS country or occupying THIS region, fixing THIS government or rebuilding THIS nation.
Easily forgotten is the fact that the 9-11 terrorists did most of their planning in Germany and in the US. That's right, IN THE UNITED STATES.
HISTORY DOESN'T REPEAT ITSELF
Current US military strategy is largely created by men old enough to remember firsthand how we did things following WWII and in the Cold War. That is the problem. They are outdated and so is their thinking. In the future, we will not fight enemies like those we fought in the 20th century. China is not a military threat, they don't want to fight. Russia doesn't want to either. There is a reason why they don't want to fight - our defense budget is more than double the size of the industrialized nations COMBINED. We live in a post-modern, ever globalizing world. The spread of information is too prevalent.
In the middle of WWI, German and French troops realized they had more in common than their governments. On Christmas Eve in 1914, German and French troops laid down their guns, crawled out of their trenches and joined together to sing hymns. They realized they were farmers fighting farmers.
WWI was supposed to be the last world war, but Hitler forced the second. Since then, no industrialized nation has waged war against another. I think a strong argument can be made that modern, industrialized, educated nations will never go to war again. I think a stronger argument can be made that whatever fighting does occur in the future, it will be fought between modern nations against terrorist groups like Al Qaeda. If you accept this argument, then you must accept the conclusion that the way we fought in the 20th century is not the way to fight now or at any point going forward.
TOMORROW IS A NEW DAY
So, if America needs to rethink how it wages war, what is the "how"? As stated earlier, this is a war of ideas. Does that mean the US should drastically reduce it's militaristic capabilities? No. Wartime expenditures? Yes. But its capabilities? No. I'm not near the dove this article may imply. The world is full of wonderful, genuinely kind people who only want to go about their day, raise a family, and enjoy life. However, the world is also filled with evil people who want to harm others. And somewhere in the middle are those that could do the former, but are impressionable enough to be recruited by those evil to do the latter. Therefore, the US should fully adopt a two-prong strategy.
THE STICK AND THE CARROT: REDUX
America's military strategy should focus on two kinds of people: the bad guys, and those that the bad guys wish to indoctrinate.
The bad guys --- These are the individuals that are trying to kill Americans, abroad and at home. These people get the big stick. The US should employ small, special ops type forces against these enemies. These true enemies of the US should be eliminated by force. Left alive, they will continue to try to take American (and western) lives. Counterintuitively, I believe this group is not the true threat to America's future. Like everything else, time is not on their side. They will grow old, and the plans they lay will depend on others, younger, to put into action.
Due to this they will also try to grow their ranks by convincing young, confused, impressionable individuals to take up the fight against America. This leads us to the second group . . .
Those still choosing a side --- These are the individuals that will determine the kind of future to become present. Every day that Al Qaeda recruits a single member is a failure of US military strategy and foreign policy. As Al Qaeda grows, the war on terror extends into unknown lengths. If the US is able, through a change in strategy, to drastically reduce Al Qaeda's ability to convince youth that jihad against America is the path towards a better future, then in less than 10 year's time the terrorist network will be starved of resources and it's ability to fight will whither away. The rank and file will, by attrition, shrink until the point in which Al Qaeda and terrorist organizations like it will no longer be able to persist.
Every youth that refuses to join a terrorist group will not only exercise a force against evil, but will also grow the power of good.
This is a zero-sum scenario. The world is a big pie, and every time Evil's slice gets a little bit smaller, Good's slice gets a little bit bigger.
Admittedly, this part of the strategy is harder, simply because America is not as proficient in it as it is the first. We should double-down on our diplomatic measures by drastically increasing the number of reasonable, level-headed, experienced American diplomats who should canvas the world offering assistance when needed, and advice when it is asked for. We should stop this whole "nation building" enterprise, at least in the sense of how we mean it now. The US is more rare than it realizes, perhaps the rarest of its kind in human history. We got to where we are by smarts, hard work, but also a lot of luck. We cannot forget that our existence is the exception, not the rule, and we should not allow the hubris of assuming we have the ability to create other nations like us. Culture has deep roots, and any attempt by the US to simply ignore cultural history and cultural norms in other places in the world as we try to shape them in our image will only led to more conflict and failures.
Remember, the world is full of good people. We can point the way, but let us have the wisdom and the restraint to stop there.
For the past eighty or so years, the US has been the main protector of freedom and liberty. We have strived to fight against oppression both at home and abroad.
Thomas Jefferson once wrote, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
That is what our nation was founded on -- an idea.
We are in a war of ideas. Whoever wins this war, wins the future.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Day 13 - Saturday
Hello from ATHENS, GA!!!
Sorry that it took me a few days to post the past two updates, I didn't have internet access and I was really bummed but it was out of my control.
We woke up to probably the hottest morning so far, put gas in the tank and air in the tires and started driving south. I'll go ahead and kill the suspense, there won't be any pictures in this, the last post. We didn't really have any predetermined destinations left, and I took a post-road trip picture of us once we got back to the apartment but I took it on Amanda's camera and I don't have a cord for it (I've been using Chris' and Bryan's pictures this trip).
We drove through Nashville and saw the stadium that the Tennessee Titans play in, but we kept on going. We stopped in Kennesaw to meet up with Mr. Edwin and eat pizza with him, which was a great way to eat our last meal on the trip.
Then we pulled into the Exchange at 8:15 EST.
We were on the road for 13 days and 12 nights by my calculation.
We drove through 18 states: Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, California, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Illinois and Kentucky.
We saw and did more things than we can probably remember without sitting down and thinking about it.
Partly because we were probably ready to return to familiar settings, and partly because it all happened in such a short time, I know that we will not fully appreciate what this trip meant until the passage of a little time will allow us to look back on it. That isn't to say that we didn't have an amazing experience - we did. During the past two weeks, I saw so many things - the Grand Canyon, the Pacific Ocean, Las Vegas, Lake Tahoe, the Great Plains - that I had before seen in pictures, but had always wanted to see in person. Bryan and Chris have said the same.
I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that this has been a trip of a lifetime. Over the past two weeks, I saw so much of this great country with two amazing friends.
We're glad to be back safe and sound, and we thank all of you that kept us in your thoughts and prayers while we were on the road.
Highlight of the trip:
Chris: The Grand Canyon
Bryan: Las Vegas
Wes: The Pacific Ocean. Aside from the obvious, just knowing that we had gone as far west as we could was a pretty awesome feeling.
Worst part of the trip:
Chris: The rain. From about central Nevada to Missouri, we basically followed a big rainstorm across the country. Not fun.
Bryan: Driving through Wyoming. There may be parts of Wyoming that are pretty, but we didn't drive through them.
Wes: Santa Rosa State Park, New Mexico. It will probably go down as the worst night of sleep in my life. Knock on wood.
Well, this is the last post of the trip. Thanks to all that read the blog, it was a nice way for me to reflect on our daily experiences and I hope all of you were able to feel as though you were following us as we went along our journey.
Later on.
Sorry that it took me a few days to post the past two updates, I didn't have internet access and I was really bummed but it was out of my control.
We woke up to probably the hottest morning so far, put gas in the tank and air in the tires and started driving south. I'll go ahead and kill the suspense, there won't be any pictures in this, the last post. We didn't really have any predetermined destinations left, and I took a post-road trip picture of us once we got back to the apartment but I took it on Amanda's camera and I don't have a cord for it (I've been using Chris' and Bryan's pictures this trip).
We drove through Nashville and saw the stadium that the Tennessee Titans play in, but we kept on going. We stopped in Kennesaw to meet up with Mr. Edwin and eat pizza with him, which was a great way to eat our last meal on the trip.
Then we pulled into the Exchange at 8:15 EST.
We were on the road for 13 days and 12 nights by my calculation.
We drove through 18 states: Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, California, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Illinois and Kentucky.
We saw and did more things than we can probably remember without sitting down and thinking about it.
Partly because we were probably ready to return to familiar settings, and partly because it all happened in such a short time, I know that we will not fully appreciate what this trip meant until the passage of a little time will allow us to look back on it. That isn't to say that we didn't have an amazing experience - we did. During the past two weeks, I saw so many things - the Grand Canyon, the Pacific Ocean, Las Vegas, Lake Tahoe, the Great Plains - that I had before seen in pictures, but had always wanted to see in person. Bryan and Chris have said the same.
I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that this has been a trip of a lifetime. Over the past two weeks, I saw so much of this great country with two amazing friends.
We're glad to be back safe and sound, and we thank all of you that kept us in your thoughts and prayers while we were on the road.
Highlight of the trip:
Chris: The Grand Canyon
Bryan: Las Vegas
Wes: The Pacific Ocean. Aside from the obvious, just knowing that we had gone as far west as we could was a pretty awesome feeling.
Worst part of the trip:
Chris: The rain. From about central Nevada to Missouri, we basically followed a big rainstorm across the country. Not fun.
Bryan: Driving through Wyoming. There may be parts of Wyoming that are pretty, but we didn't drive through them.
Wes: Santa Rosa State Park, New Mexico. It will probably go down as the worst night of sleep in my life. Knock on wood.
Well, this is the last post of the trip. Thanks to all that read the blog, it was a nice way for me to reflect on our daily experiences and I hope all of you were able to feel as though you were following us as we went along our journey.
Later on.
Day 12 - Friday
Good evening from Mt. Vernon, Illinois!
Today was another full day in terms of what we did, what we saw, and ground we covered.
As predicted, we slept in later than we have all trip but it was so worth it. For lunch, Jimmy took us to Oklahoma Joe's BBQ. It is arguably the best BBQ joint in Kansas City (many many awards on the walls), and as far as I'm concerned it is the best. Man oh man, the jumbo pulled pork sandwich I had was worth fighting over. I want to thank Mr. Jimmy for the awesome hospitality he showed us, and I couldn't be more glad that we made it a point to stop by for a day. He and his wife are both lawyers in a big Kansas City firm, and he gave me a ton of great advice for law school and beyond. I really appreciated it.
After we ate, we stopped by to see Arrowhead Stadium and Kauffman Stadium (where the Royals play).
Then we started towards St. Louis, but stopped in Columbia to visit the University of Missouri. It wasn't terribly impressive, but that was probably because a lot of the campus was under construction.
After that we took off towards St. Louis. Traffic was pretty bad because the Cardinals were playing, but we finally got parked and walked over to see the Arch. One word - big. Apparently you can go up to the top and look out of it, but we got there too late. Even so, it was still a pretty awesome site.
Presently, we're sitting in what will be our last Motel 6 of the trip. So bittersweet! Haha. Accommodations in these Motel 6s haven't always been the best, but they've been cheap and anything is better than that night in Santa Rosa.
Tomorrow, we're going to get up early and head south until we arrive back where we began two weeks ago.
See y'all then.
Today was another full day in terms of what we did, what we saw, and ground we covered.
As predicted, we slept in later than we have all trip but it was so worth it. For lunch, Jimmy took us to Oklahoma Joe's BBQ. It is arguably the best BBQ joint in Kansas City (many many awards on the walls), and as far as I'm concerned it is the best. Man oh man, the jumbo pulled pork sandwich I had was worth fighting over. I want to thank Mr. Jimmy for the awesome hospitality he showed us, and I couldn't be more glad that we made it a point to stop by for a day. He and his wife are both lawyers in a big Kansas City firm, and he gave me a ton of great advice for law school and beyond. I really appreciated it.
After we ate, we stopped by to see Arrowhead Stadium and Kauffman Stadium (where the Royals play).
Then we started towards St. Louis, but stopped in Columbia to visit the University of Missouri. It wasn't terribly impressive, but that was probably because a lot of the campus was under construction.
After that we took off towards St. Louis. Traffic was pretty bad because the Cardinals were playing, but we finally got parked and walked over to see the Arch. One word - big. Apparently you can go up to the top and look out of it, but we got there too late. Even so, it was still a pretty awesome site.
Presently, we're sitting in what will be our last Motel 6 of the trip. So bittersweet! Haha. Accommodations in these Motel 6s haven't always been the best, but they've been cheap and anything is better than that night in Santa Rosa.
Tomorrow, we're going to get up early and head south until we arrive back where we began two weeks ago.
See y'all then.
Day 11 - Thursday
Hello from Kansas City, Kansas!
Today was wonderful (not that any other day wasn't) mainly because we only had a three and a half hour drive. Suddenly the drive from Athens to Leesburg doesn't seem so bad. Ha!
We stopped in Lawrence to see the University of Kansas. By far, they had the smallest bookstore we have seen so far, but downtown Lawrence is very similar to downtown Athens. It really had that college town feel.
Then we drove into Kansas City and toured the city while we waited for Bryan's friend Jimmy to call.
We checked out this little square called the Power & Light district. It was this really cool little block of restaurants, bars and stores.
When we saw this, we knew where to send Mr. Edwin for is next vacation . . .
After that, we met up with Jimmy and he took us to a local hotel & casino and treated us to an all-you-can-eat buffet of Alaskan snow crab legs. It was unbelievably good!
We're about to hit the sack. This will be the first time in eleven days that we are sleeping in something other than a tent or a cheap motel, so we may not wake up until 12. Tomorrow we're going to head towards St. Louis to see the Arch and check out Busch Stadium.
Later.
Today was wonderful (not that any other day wasn't) mainly because we only had a three and a half hour drive. Suddenly the drive from Athens to Leesburg doesn't seem so bad. Ha!
We stopped in Lawrence to see the University of Kansas. By far, they had the smallest bookstore we have seen so far, but downtown Lawrence is very similar to downtown Athens. It really had that college town feel.
Then we drove into Kansas City and toured the city while we waited for Bryan's friend Jimmy to call.
We checked out this little square called the Power & Light district. It was this really cool little block of restaurants, bars and stores.
When we saw this, we knew where to send Mr. Edwin for is next vacation . . .
After that, we met up with Jimmy and he took us to a local hotel & casino and treated us to an all-you-can-eat buffet of Alaskan snow crab legs. It was unbelievably good!
We're about to hit the sack. This will be the first time in eleven days that we are sleeping in something other than a tent or a cheap motel, so we may not wake up until 12. Tomorrow we're going to head towards St. Louis to see the Arch and check out Busch Stadium.
Later.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Day 10 - Wednesday
Hello from Hays, Kansas!
Today, we spent a good amount of time touring Denver, a really cool city pushed up under the Rocky Mountains.
We walked around Coors Field . . .
Then we saw the Pepsi Center and Mile High Stadium . . .
For lunch, we ate at The Buckhorn Exchange, the oldest restaurant in Denver (thanks Daddy!). We had some amazing buffalo burgers and checked out the liquor license at the bar - the first one the state of Colorado ever issued.
Then we jumped in the car and continued the eastward advance.
Right now we're relaxing in another Motel 6. Thankfully, it's not that far to Kansas City so we'll be able to sleep in for the first time in several days. We're excited about meeting up with Jimmy tomorrow and sleeping in a house for the first time in over a week!
Highlight of the day: Well, I'm somewhat embarrassed and somewhat relieved to report that the "Beard Idea" has come to an end. Seriously, we can't take it any longer, the itching overwhelms us. So, I'll post the pictures. This is as mountain men as we get.
Me:
Bryan:
Chris:
Ok, then. In the words of Chris (aka baby mountain lion), "Adios Muchachos!"
Today, we spent a good amount of time touring Denver, a really cool city pushed up under the Rocky Mountains.
We walked around Coors Field . . .
Then we saw the Pepsi Center and Mile High Stadium . . .
For lunch, we ate at The Buckhorn Exchange, the oldest restaurant in Denver (thanks Daddy!). We had some amazing buffalo burgers and checked out the liquor license at the bar - the first one the state of Colorado ever issued.
Then we jumped in the car and continued the eastward advance.
Right now we're relaxing in another Motel 6. Thankfully, it's not that far to Kansas City so we'll be able to sleep in for the first time in several days. We're excited about meeting up with Jimmy tomorrow and sleeping in a house for the first time in over a week!
Highlight of the day: Well, I'm somewhat embarrassed and somewhat relieved to report that the "Beard Idea" has come to an end. Seriously, we can't take it any longer, the itching overwhelms us. So, I'll post the pictures. This is as mountain men as we get.
Me:
Bryan:
Chris:
Ok, then. In the words of Chris (aka baby mountain lion), "Adios Muchachos!"
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Day 9 - Tuesday
Greetings from Denver, Colorado!
Today we got woke up to a rainy Salt Lake City. We went to the University of Utah so Chris could buy his twenty-second coffee mug of the trip.
After that, we rode up to the Salt Lake City Olympic Park and had a great time looking at all of the old bobsled and ski jump courses.
Then we did a little bobsledding ourselves.
After checking out the 2002 Olympic events, some fellow tourists suggested we go to No Name Saloon and Grill for lunch and try the buffalo burgers. We had originally planned to eat some bison burgers in Denver, but we were told that we had to try out No Name so we decided to head that way.
In my opinion, the burgers were awesome. I could definitely taste the difference and I really liked it.
Presently, we are about to hit the sack and then get up in the morning so we can see a lot of Denver. Even though we drove in during the night, I can tell it's going to be a beautiful city.
We're going to drive into central Kansas tomorrow and get another cheap motel, so I should be able to get up another post.
So far, we are still in good spirits and we're excited about the sights to come.
Until then, take it easy.
Today we got woke up to a rainy Salt Lake City. We went to the University of Utah so Chris could buy his twenty-second coffee mug of the trip.
After that, we rode up to the Salt Lake City Olympic Park and had a great time looking at all of the old bobsled and ski jump courses.
Then we did a little bobsledding ourselves.
After checking out the 2002 Olympic events, some fellow tourists suggested we go to No Name Saloon and Grill for lunch and try the buffalo burgers. We had originally planned to eat some bison burgers in Denver, but we were told that we had to try out No Name so we decided to head that way.
In my opinion, the burgers were awesome. I could definitely taste the difference and I really liked it.
Presently, we are about to hit the sack and then get up in the morning so we can see a lot of Denver. Even though we drove in during the night, I can tell it's going to be a beautiful city.
We're going to drive into central Kansas tomorrow and get another cheap motel, so I should be able to get up another post.
So far, we are still in good spirits and we're excited about the sights to come.
Until then, take it easy.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Day 8 - Monday
Good Evening from Salt Lake City!
We had a lot of fun today hiking around Lake Tahoe, despite the fact our exploring was followed by 8+ hours of driving. We started out in South Lake Tahoe, CA, and drove clear across Nevada (boring!) and half way across Utah into Salt Lake City.
I'll just post a bunch of pictures of Lake Tahoe since that was the focus of our day.
Highlight of the Day:
Aside from the grandeur of Tahoe, the highlight was most likely ".49 cent Taco Monday" at Taco Bell in South Lake Tahoe. We decided to face the gastrointestinal consequences and loaded up on cheap tacos. The simple pleasures of a poor college student.
Alrighty then, tomorrow we're going to check out Salt Lake City in the morning and then head towards Denver. We're excited about the Rockies and the possibility of trying out some buffalo burgers or steaks in Denver. Tomorrow night looks like another Motel 6 night so I'll most likely be able to post another update.
Over and out!
We had a lot of fun today hiking around Lake Tahoe, despite the fact our exploring was followed by 8+ hours of driving. We started out in South Lake Tahoe, CA, and drove clear across Nevada (boring!) and half way across Utah into Salt Lake City.
I'll just post a bunch of pictures of Lake Tahoe since that was the focus of our day.
Highlight of the Day:
Aside from the grandeur of Tahoe, the highlight was most likely ".49 cent Taco Monday" at Taco Bell in South Lake Tahoe. We decided to face the gastrointestinal consequences and loaded up on cheap tacos. The simple pleasures of a poor college student.
Alrighty then, tomorrow we're going to check out Salt Lake City in the morning and then head towards Denver. We're excited about the Rockies and the possibility of trying out some buffalo burgers or steaks in Denver. Tomorrow night looks like another Motel 6 night so I'll most likely be able to post another update.
Over and out!
Monday, May 17, 2010
Day 7 - Sunday
Wow, I just typed "Day 7" and it hit me, we've been on the road for a whole week. Let me tell you something, it feels like we've been gone for a month. We can hardly remember what Memphis looked like at this point!
Two major things to take away from today: first, San Francisco was an awesome experience and second, we have turned back east, and are heading back home slowly but surely.
San Francisco was the largest city we have seen so far, and it was very unique. From the Golden Gate Bridge, to Fisherman's Wharf, to the general weird layout of a city that stretches across hill, valley and coast line.
Alcatrez
We had a nice seafood lunch at Fisherman's Wharf, and then we walked to Ghirardelli's Square.
We also saw an opportunistic sea lion hanging out next to the boats returning with fish. He hasn't missed many meals.
This is when we had a few pictures taken of us by the trolley driver. It's probably the best picture of the day.
After leaving San Francisco in the early afternoon, we headed towards Lake Tahoe. Presently, we are holed up in another Motel 6 watching a show about elephants on Animal Channel. Chris is fascinated. Hahaha. To be fair, it is a pretty cool show. Bryan is eating sliced ham straight out the package. No one can say we aren't roughing it!
Here are a few pictures of our drive into Tahoe. Tomorrow we're going to go looking for some red woods and sequoias. We're on the way back!
Two major things to take away from today: first, San Francisco was an awesome experience and second, we have turned back east, and are heading back home slowly but surely.
San Francisco was the largest city we have seen so far, and it was very unique. From the Golden Gate Bridge, to Fisherman's Wharf, to the general weird layout of a city that stretches across hill, valley and coast line.
Alcatrez
We had a nice seafood lunch at Fisherman's Wharf, and then we walked to Ghirardelli's Square.
We also saw an opportunistic sea lion hanging out next to the boats returning with fish. He hasn't missed many meals.
This is when we had a few pictures taken of us by the trolley driver. It's probably the best picture of the day.
After leaving San Francisco in the early afternoon, we headed towards Lake Tahoe. Presently, we are holed up in another Motel 6 watching a show about elephants on Animal Channel. Chris is fascinated. Hahaha. To be fair, it is a pretty cool show. Bryan is eating sliced ham straight out the package. No one can say we aren't roughing it!
Here are a few pictures of our drive into Tahoe. Tomorrow we're going to go looking for some red woods and sequoias. We're on the way back!
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Day 6 - Saturday
Hello from California!
Ok, it's late and we're really tired, so I'm just going to post a few pictures really quick for this blog since I'm sure that is what you guys enjoy the most. Long story short, California is quite beautiful.
Unfortunately, we may be camping for the next day or two so I don't know about internet availability. So, if there isn't an update, don't worry. I'll have something up before too long.
Later!
Ok, it's late and we're really tired, so I'm just going to post a few pictures really quick for this blog since I'm sure that is what you guys enjoy the most. Long story short, California is quite beautiful.
Unfortunately, we may be camping for the next day or two so I don't know about internet availability. So, if there isn't an update, don't worry. I'll have something up before too long.
Later!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)