Visit The School Of Life for more…

John-Paul Flintoff writes:

When you are able to improvise, almost anything becomes possible. I really believe that – and just as I was planning to write this blog post I was handed a wonderful example of improvisation actually saving people’s lives.

But what do I mean by improvise? Well, an improviser doesn’t sit waiting for the perfect moment to arrive. An improviser takes whatever is available, and makes the best use of it. Where others may see only unpromising materials and situations, an improviser sees abundant possibilities.

But those possibilities can only be realised if we train ourselves to accept what we have been given, and to tap into our natural creativity.

I tell my students that no moment is too small to accomplish some finite portion of a desired task. Yet, I am as guilty of longing for the perfect moment, the uninterrupted expanse of time, the unbroken solitude that I rarely find, as anyone.

One critical bit of wisdom that comes from Walter Mosley keeps me going. He wrote:

How can I create when I have to go to work, cook my dinner, remember what I did wrong to the people who have stopped calling? And even if I do find a moment here and there – a weekend away in the mountains, say – how can I say everything I need to say before the world comes crashing back with all of its sirens and shouts and television shows?

“I know I have a novel in me,” I often hear people say. “But how can I get it out?”

The answer is, always is, every day.

Back to work.

Sherry Chandler writes:

[Poetry puts] folks in a place where they feel a little vertiginous, a little out of control. In such a state, sometimes surprising things emerge.

I wish more people I knew would meet folks like those in Vicco, Kentucky.

Via Mano Singham…

Glenn Greenwald asks:

Are there really people who can read [of the numerous ways that we have learned that the NSA jeopardizes the privacy rights of Americans and the security of the internet] and think to themselves: I sure do wish Edward Snowden had let us remain ignorant about all of this?

A bit further down in the post, Greenwald rephrases the question:

Does anyone disagree with [Alex Abdo’s assertion that No matter what you think of the lawfulness of these programs, I think everyone should think their legitimacy or illegitimacy is better debated in public and decided by a court.]? Is there anyone who thinks things were better pre-Snowden when the DOJ could successfully block legal challenges to the US government’s spying activities by invoking secrecy and standing claims?

I served in the United States Navy in the 3rd and 7th fleets when the most recent Enterprise, CVN 65, was part of the fleet. The name always bothered me because of the association I made between the name and business. I just didn’t get how such a name could be appropriate for what was, at the time, arguably the most powerful war machine on the planet.

Because I’ve been binge-watching the Star Trek television shows that I’ve missed (Voyager, Enterprise and Deep Space Nine) I took a few seconds to look up the word in the dictionary and discovered that the definition I’ve been using all these years is actually third on the list. The first and second definitions are:

A project or undertaking that is especially difficult, complicated, or risky; and readiness to engage in daring or difficult action, initiative

That makes perfect sense.

Robert Reich writes:

Political scientists have noted a high correlation between inequality and polarization. But economic class isn’t the only dividing line in America. Many working-class voters are heartland Republicans, while many of America’s superrich are coastal Democrats. The real division is between those who believe the game is rigged against them and those who believe they have a decent shot.

Losers of rigged games can become very angry, as history has revealed repeatedly. In America, the populist wings of both parties have become more vocal in recent years — the difference being that the populist right blames government more than it does big corporations while the populist left blames big corporations more than government.

Attachment to views, intolerance, discrimination and dogmatism, are the foundation for exclusion, fear, anger, craving and despair. If you are truly practicing Right View, there is no room for these sufferings. p. 72

From Good Citizens: Creating Enlightened Society by Thich Nhat Hanh

Previously…

Found in my electronic chapbook.

Via Mano Singham…

I’ve been binge watching Star Trek: Enterprise (I’m just on the second year) and this morning I watched episode 35 (season 2, episode 9): Singularity. A sub-plot in the story is that Captain Jonathan Archer has been asked to write a preface to a biography of his father, Henry Archer.

At timemark 4:02 we see part of the biography on a computer screen. We only see the screen for a few seconds, but thanks to the pause button, I was able to read the text and saw this sentence near the bottom of the screen:

This time he would run the entire field analysis protocol, and he would use his won parameter set.

Clearly, computer copy-editors have not improved in the 22nd century.

Robert Reich writes:

Congressional Republicans have gone directly from conservatism to fanaticism without any intervening period of sanity.

First, John Boehner, bowing to Republican extremists, ushers a bill through the House that continues to fund the government after September 30 but doesn’t fund the Affordable Care Act. Anyone with half a brain knows Senate Democrats and the President won’t accept this — which means, if House Republicans stick to their guns, a government shut-down.

A shutdown would be crippling. Soldiers would get IOUs instead of paychecks. Hundreds of thousands of federal employees would be furloughed without pay. National parks would close. Millions of Americans would feel the effects.

And who will get blamed?

House Republicans think the public hates the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) so much they’ll support their tactics. But the fact is, regardless of Americans’ attitudes toward that Act — which, not incidentally, passed both houses of Congress and was signed into law by the President, who was re-elected with over 50 percent of the vote, and constitutionality was upheld by the Supreme Court — Americans hate even more one party using the United States government as a pawn in their power games.

Reich concludes:

The Republican Party is no longer capable of governing the nation. It’s now a fanatical group run out of right-wing states by a cadre of nihilists, Know-nothings, and a handful of billionaires.

The degree to which this is true will govern to what extent change is possible within the party of Lincoln. Self-identifying Republicans who disagree with Reich’s cadre may not be able to turn their ox. If that is the case, then just as the Republican Party emerged from a coalition of like-minded citizens in the mid-19th century, then perhaps the time is right for a new party, created by a similar coalition, to form.

Via Mano Singham…

Roldo Bartimole writes:

Get ready to have your pocket picked.

Brent Larkin last week started the campaign to tax Cuyahoga County residents several hundred million dollars for people who should be paying their own way.

He’s worried about them leaving us.

Here’s what he should be worried about (from American Community Survey):

– Median income in Cleveland 1999-2012: down 32.1 per cent.
– Poverty rate in Cleveland 1999-2012, 36.1 percent: up 8 percent.
– Median home value in Cleveland 1999-2012 $96,000 to $71,000: down 26 percent.

Very dismal statistics.

It’s all in what you care about, people.

Next step from Brent: You who have little must chip in to help the rich. Inequality isn’t vast enough, Larkin is telling us. Please donate daily.

People and families who are billionaires must be helped. In an industry awash in cash – professional sports. Nothing like cheerleading for a bit more inequality.

They want you to extend the sin tax for 20 years. That’s atop the original 15 years and the extension of 10 years. So for 25 years Continue Reading »

From a White House statement:

The president has said that he understands and regrets the concerns that disclosures of alleged U.S. intelligence activities have generated in Brazil and made clear that he is committed to working together with President Rousseff and her government in diplomatic channels to move beyond this issue as a source of tension in our bilateral relationship.

Huh? If you disclose information, then the information is factual. If the information is not factual then alleged doesn’t apply.

John Cusack writes:

Another week and another wave of stories on the NSA and the unconstitutional out-of-control surveillance state hit the digital newsstands, showing once again why the tide is turning. Some revelations are so surreal, it’s hard not to assume they’re satire. NSA chief Keith Alexander seems to be modeling his ambitions and visions for international spying after General Curtis LeMay’s views on nuclear war.

Meanwhile, despite the massive smear campaign against Edward Snowden, opinion polls stand clearly with the truth-tellers. People know they have a right to know what the government is doing in their names. State secrecy is on the run, while American privacy, long rumored dead, is alive and kicking and wants the fight out in the open – in the sunlight and in the public square.

More…

To improve my vocabulary (and my reading) I always keep a dictionary close at hand because I aspire to a Shakespearian vocabulary. Inspired by the PBS Kids show Word Girl, I’ve decided to add My Words as an occasional feature here at Have Coffee Will Write. Today’s words are effulgence, apologue and abject.

From The Myth of Sisyphus by Albert Camus:

As [the feeling of absurdity] is, in its distressing nudity, in its light without effulgence, it is elusive. Effulgence – radiant splendor, brilliance.

For this apparent paradox is also an apologue. Apologue – an allegorical narrative usually intended to convey a moral.

The absurd world more than other derives its nobility from that abject birth. Abject – extremely bad or severe,* very humble, feeling or showing shame, very weak, lacking courage or strength.

*While I’ve known the definition — as in abject poverty — I did not know the other meanings.

Sadly, I must add the case of Aaron Alexis to this discussion…

Protagoras argues persuasively:

The New Statesman columnist Mehdi Hasan recently addressed his online interlocutors thus: “Dear thickos on Twitter, for the 100th time: opposing arming the rebels does not make one ‘pro-Assad’.”

Now, there’s a lot happening in this short rhetorical moment – including invective and hyperbole aimed at the refutation of a false syllogism. But overall it is an argument about arguments. Hasan wants to argue over the question “Should the UK arm the rebels in Syria?”; others would prefer the question: “Should the UK support Assad?” Although connected, these are two distinct questions. Which one is asked makes quite a difference to how a discussion about policy towards Syria will unfold. In any argument what we are arguing about may be the most important thing to dispute.

Previously…

Personally, I like nos. 4, 6 and 8 best.

Marc Lefkowitz writes:

1. Implement the Cleveland Climate Action Plan — The plan provides a detailed inventory of where and how much carbon is being emitted from both city operations and the community. The next step will be to create an action agenda with priorities on where to start reducing the city’s carbon footprint and saving money.

2. Paint 100 miles of bike lanes — One of the fastest and cheapest ways to change the look and feel of a city is to stripe lots of bike lanes on the streets.

3. Build up historic places, not an urban highway — Could the goal of improving access to jobs in University Circle be accomplished with much less expense — such as with a targeted investment in E. 55th Street and Woodland Avenue — and in ways that do more to improve living conditions in one of Cleveland’s poorest neighborhoods? And could programs to reduce driving around University Circle (better transit, bike facilities, carpooling, telecommuting, four-day work weeks, etc.) be a more sustainable way to alleviate congestion?

4. Remove zoning obstacles to sustainable development — Cities… are replacing traditional zoning with “form-based codes” that set standards for buildings (type, height, distance from the street, etc.) but leave the building use up to the developer.

5. Link to the lake — The focus should be on public spaces that connect people to the water — a open and attractive pedestrian bridge from the Mall to North Coast Harbor, boardwalks for strolling, an intimate waterfront Continue Reading »

Robert Reich writes:

In reality, the “free market” is a bunch of rules about (1) what can be owned and traded (the genome? slaves? nuclear materials? babies? votes?); (2) on what terms (equal access to the internet? the right to organize unions? corporate monopolies? the length of patent protections? ); (3) under what conditions (poisonous drugs? unsafe foods? deceptive Ponzi schemes? uninsured derivatives? dangerous workplaces?) (4) what’s private and what’s public (police? roads? clean air and clean water? healthcare? good schools? parks and playgrounds?); (5) how to pay for what (taxes, user fees, individual pricing?). And so on.

These rules don’t exist in nature; they are human creations. Governments don’t “intrude” on free markets; governments organize and maintain them. Markets aren’t “free” of rules; the rules define them.

The interesting question is what the rules should seek to achieve.

Precisely. I happened to be discussing the concept of Free Markets with one of my students yesterday. I’ll be forwarding this link and looking forward to hearing the student’s perspective on Reich’s insights.