Hillary's Battleship is Sunk: and somehow it's Milton Bradley's fault...

So the DNC rules committee is meeting today about the Florida/Michigan primaries disaster. For those unaware of the disaster, here's my best recap: Florida and Michigan broke delegation rules by pushing up their primaries earlier in the year. This was their decision and they were warned by the DNC that if they did, the consequence would be that all of their delegates would be stripped away giving them no voice in the election process of the Democratic presidential nominee. Yes, this was a pretty harsh ruling - and no one really foresaw the race being so close that it would really matter as much as it does now - but both states moved their dates in defiance of the DNC. Both Hillary and Obama agreed to not campaign in Florida while every democratic candidate at the time (with the suspicious and curious exception of Hil-monster) took their name off the Michigan ballot. The states then held their supposed meaningless and worthless primaries and to no surprise, Hillary (the most recognized candidate at the time) won both states. 

I can't imagine a more unfair competition. People need to remember: At the time, Obama was not a household name. He was campaigning state by state, primary to primary. He didn't have the luxury of brand-name recognition like "Clinton". If you take a look at poll numbers of all of the early primary and caucus states, Obama lagged considerably behind Clinton (including South Carolina where he eventually steam rolled her) until he was able to campaign properly; organizing a grassroots support, running ads and working the stump swings. And due to FL and MI's conscious violation of the DNC delegation rules, both Obama and Hillary chose to not properly campaign there. Consequentially, the voters in both states were not given the opportunity of a fair, balanced primary process where both camps could state their cases relevant to each state. 

Now, she won Michigan mainly because she was the only name on the ballot by 55% (the rest voted "uncommitted"). When every democratic candidate, in a unifying move, took their names off the ballot, Hillary apathetically left hers on - leaving the rest of the candidates instantly suspicious, but not too alarmed since the votes weren't supposedly going to count anyway. By the time Florida voted, it was just the two of them on the "worthless" ballot. The only shred of campaigning on the Obama side was a brief television ad that was a short lived national ad. Polls showed that his name recognition nationally still didn't yet compete with Hillary's at the time. (That wouldn't start to happen until his 13 contest winning streak after Super Tuesday)

Now to the point: Where was Hillary's "passionate", outspoken struggle to save the voices of FL and MI voters before January? 

Americans didn't hear a peep from her about this "injustice" until she started getting thumped in the election primaries. She had agreed to the party rules at the beginning of the campaign season and now that she's got no other hope in sight for the nomination, she wants to suddenly change the rules and have the DNC count the votes of hideously unfair primaries. Suddenly now, she's an advocate of voters' rights. What about the voters' rights to a fair campaign? Imagine for a moment if FL and MI had overwhelmingly voted for Obama. Would she be out there with her battle cry then? This is again the Clinton machine's "Say anything, Do anything" style of politics. It's disgusting. And now she's turning her aggression on the leaders of her own party. They've organized rallies and marches to get the delegates fully seated and recognized. 

This puts the DNC in a very difficult position because, yes, the stupid idea of stripping both states of all of their votes (as opposed to the GOP's "half-vote" punishment for rule-breaking states) shouldn't have happened and they are now caught with shit on their faces. They are left with this decision: Do we stand strong with the original rules laid out against violating states and hold our ground, thus ignoring the votes of millions? Or do we show our weakness and count the votes of unfair primaries and bend the original rules at the expense of the candidate who played by them. What signal would that send to states who break the delegation rules in the future? 

The Obama camp recognizes the dilemma of shutting out the votes of both states (in light of how it would effect the voter conscience of these swing states in the general election), but also knows how cheap these wins were for her. So they're willing to compromise. Don't expect that same C word from the Hill camp. They want it all. It's their last and only hope.

But what really gets me is where the blame is being placed. Hillary and her (apparently increasingly psychopathic) supporters are taking aim at the DNC rules committee as if they had anything to do with the states' decision to go against party rules. It'd be like me and a friend sitting down to play Battleship (initially agreeing upon the rules) and blaming Milton Bradley's rules writers when my opponent is about to sink my battleship. 

In my opinion: I say "No dice". I'd be a bit more empathetic if it was the general election where we're actually voting to hire the president, but as for a political party coming together to pick their candidate, I'd be knocking down the state's party leaders demanding them to cough up the millions and fund a revote where the candidates can properly organize a real campaign process. It's their fault we're in this mess. They were the ones who went against the party's rules. They should be responsible for fixing it. (Their attempts at organizing a revote were shot down due to the high cost. They then threw the problem on the national leaders to fix.)

It wasn't until recent decades that actual civilian votes were taken to select the party's candidate. It use to be up to a handful of the party leaders in some smoky, Washington back room. This lead to statewide caucuses (which contrary to alot of my friends' opinions, I support fully) where party voting members who cared about who their party's nominee would meet and physically voice their opinions of who they felt the nominee should be. 13 states still hold caucuses today. This is an incredible process because it gets party members who've educated themselves on their party's candidates to come out and state their case to each other about who should carry the nomination - as opposed to having it on a primary ballot among a laundry list of other voting issues where any passive voter going in to vote yes or no on some local or state issue can cast their not-so-educated or not-so-challenged vote for their party's candidate - whether they understand their party's values and ethics or not. A caucus forces party members to publicly announce and defend their choice. It is not an election of a citizen tax funded government official. It is simply a party coming together under the purpose of party ethics and agenda to debate and nominate the candidate who best represents them and can best achieve them. I love it. It has it's down sides in terms of the difficulties of (for instance) senior citizen or single mom participation, but there's plenty of ways to fix those problems and it could be perfected. Just my opinion...

Anyway!!!... Hillary can go ahead and try to act like she's suddenly the messiah of "voters rights", but it's painfully obvious that she wouldn't be out there working it if it wasn't going to throw her horrendously organized, sickeningly miscalculated, and pathetically negative campaign a fucking bone. :-) Just don't go screaming foul at the rules you agreed to play by.

Monkeys control a robot arm with their thoughts

My Life Philosophy: Success and its relation to you and those "out there".

There is no failure in life. Just learning. The only failure is if you refuse to learn. 

Our culture demands quite a bit from us in terms of "success". This success comes in a variety of forms and measurements depending on many variables. Examples of said forms could be monetary, fame based, procreation rate, popularity level, ethics or exoticism while the said measurements of these forms are based on the expectations held by the ones who judge your success or (more importantly) your own personal expectation. A few examples of said variables would be 1.) your personal (perceived or in some cases delusional) circumstances in your present life 2.) the (perceived/unperceived) circumstance of the "judger's" present life in relation to yours 3.) your personal history of "success" - just to name a few. 

So the question is, what is your personal expectation of success? Is it monetary? Are you trying to be wealthy? Or just wealthier than those around you? Are you looking to achieve fame? Locally or nationally? Are you wanting children and a family? Are you looking to achieve a balanced ethical life? Or at least the perception of such? Or are you one who bases success on the exotic experiences the world has to offer - the amount of travel, activity, recreation?

Now I'm not saying that it's one of the above. It can most definitely (and usually is) a combination of these. For some, a successful life consists of being wealthy with a large family and a healthy balance of ethics. While for others, national fame is the one and only goal. And so on...

That may be well and good, but what bogs many down is the expectations of success of those around us - or as I say "out there". What do those "out there" expect us to achieve in order to label us successful? Many view your success based on what they perceive is important to you. If you grew up loving the stage, they base your success based on whether or not you achieve national fame. If you grew up in the church they'll base your success on how ethical you conduct your life. And so on...

These successes are then measured by your scale and theirs. And all too many times, our own scale is affected by those "out there". Who doesn't like being perceived as "successful"? Who doesn't like to have a quick impressive answer to what's going on in their life? But these measurements are determined by a slew of variables - most notably circumstances. For instance, someone who has encountered a divorce in their life leaving them with pennies in the bank will have a lower expectation level when success is measured in terms of monetary achievements. This is why it's always so impressive when this someone springs back fast and acquires a large sum of wealth on their own. They become a success story. Trauma in one's life lowers expectations of those "out there". 

So now my point: Rhetorically, are you someone who plays the success game for those "out there"? Are you one who projects a standard for those to base their measurements? Are you one who's bogged down by everyone else's opinion of what "success" is for you? Do you cause or project the image of trauma in your life to lower expectations? 

I've decided to live for me - my own happiness - my own form of success - my own measurement - under my own true circumstances. It's easy to let others determine it for you, yet it's also easy to sabotage yourself when your life circumstance gets bumpy. I won't lower my own goals for personal success, nor will I inflate the severity of "trauma" I incur or receive on my way there. Besides, most people out there are more impressed with those who're able to see that and actually live it without caring about outside opinion.

On that note, I leave on this: On the road of life and its destination toward success: There are no failures in life. Just learning. The only failure is if you refuse to learn. - I've learned to not let myself get snagged on personal "failures". The word failure has such a dismal, irredeemable connotation. We as humans learn (from very young ages) from so called failures. It's how we grow and survive. We learn from them. They aren't bad. They're good. These so called failures teach us. - With that said, the only dismal, irredeemable failure comes when we refuse to learn from them. We have the ability to dig our own graves in this sense. 

So finally: Failure, like success, is what we make of it. Live for you. Not someone else's "you". And grow from life's gifts of mistakes. That's what I've decided for myself. 

Pretty amazing.

MUTO a wall-painted animation by BLU from blu on Vimeo.

Why I love Brooklyn

It's just one of those amazing days.

I stepped out of my apartment today onto the sunny, leafy streets of my neighborhood. Eastern Parkway was buzzing with locals all along the pathways busy with church events, community organizing meets and general stroll. The air was perfect at just the right temperature and not a cloud in the sky. As I headed east toward Park Slope, my sneakers felt like it had some extra bounce and I continued that bounce past the Brooklyn museum; its fountain in full working splendor and a large handful of observers lazily relaxing on the oversized cement bleachers and steps, sunbathing and chatting. The fountain shot up chunks of water and they'd glimmer like sliver dollars in their midair spin only to splat down to the water surface with playful claps.

Just beyond the museum is the monstrous opening to Prospect Park. There in the Plaza, in front of the Grand Army Arch, was the Saturday morning open market. Dozens of booths lined the opening sections of the park gates. It seemed as though every ethnic group was represented with excited, beaming shoppers hopping from booth to booth. The air was potent with the fragrance of flowers and fresh baked goods. I stopped by a booth and picked up an herb roll for 50¢ (!!) and nibbled it as I passed through.

Making my way along the slate sidewalks toward Park Slope, I stopped to check out what the homeowner called "a good old fashioned stoop sale" in front of his brownstone. Nothing really caught my eye, though he had a good literature selection for sale. I passed a few more before cutting through to 5th ave.

And here I am now at one of my favorite brunch places in Brooklyn sipping coffee and enjoying to atmosphere. I love days like this and I love being reminded why Brooklyn is my favorite borough. It's got that neighborhood feel with the Manhattan historical charm. I love where I am in life and I feel like I'm on the right track. I'm just going to soak it in until I head to Europe for the summer. I'll sure miss it while I'm gone.