I have the pamphlet from the Mosque-Cathedral of Cordoba! Actually my travel companion graciously sent me these photos of hers, which she managed to carry back to the States. I re-read the pamphlet and it confirmed the feelings I had when I first read it standing under the red and white striped arches. The Church has a narrative of Andalucia's history and it's eager to let the visitors know that it has the moral high ground.
According to the pamphlet, the Church is protector of other cultures. It preserved the mosque by converting it into a church.
It is the Church, through its Cathedral Chapter, that has made it possible to keep the former mosque of the Western Caliphate, the oldest cathedral in Spain, and a World Heritage Site, from becoming a heap of ruins. In fact this has always been one of the missions of the Church, to safeguard and inspire culture and art.
On the other hand, Moors destroyed the first church that was at this site in order to build the mosque on top of it: "Following the Islamic invasion of Cordoba, the dominating Muslims proceeded to the demolition of the [unintelligible] church of San Vicente and in the year 785, began construction of the Mosque..."
Therefore, everyone should be grateful that the church was so generous in preserving the mosque even those the Muslims destroyed the previous church.
It is a historical fact that the basilica of San Vicente was expropriated and destroyed in order to build what would later be the Mosque, a reality that questions the theme of tolerance that was supposedly cultivated in the Cordoba of the moment.
I was pleasantly surprised to this article on the NYTimes website yesterday. It brought back memories of my trip throughout Spain in early May, which was one of my fondest trips for reasons beyond the grandeur of La Mezquita-Catedral de Córdoba.
Basically the bishop doesn't want people to drop "mosque" from any references to the present day Cathedral of Our Lady of the Assumption.
Last month, the bishop of Córdoba began a provocative appeal for the city to stop referring to the monument as a mosque so as not to “confuse” visitors.
I was less surprised to learn that the church doesn't want visitors to call it a mosque or even a mosque-church. When I visited in May, it was obvious that the church has an uneasy relationship with their building's history from the pamphlet/maps distributed to visitors. Unfortunately I don't have these pamphlets to quote to you, I know, bad that I don't have evidence to backup my claims. My travel companion can back this up.
The language taking great pains to emphasize both the cathedral's Catholic past and present. It's obvious that the church's past was a mosque. Most people come to see La Mezquita as an exquisite example of Moorish architecture. But the church wants the visitors to know that this site was first a church before the mosque was built. This fact prominent in the pamphlet and in the site itself. The foundations of the 7th century church have been excavated. Near the center of the mosque-church visitors can peer down to see the ruined foundations of the 7th century church. A placard prominently tells visitors this fact.
Tthe language of the pamphlet emphasized the glory of the church after its consecration as a cathedral. There was also a line, I can't recall precisely, that basically said that the Moors weren't all happy and multicultural and tolerant as everyone thought they were. Really, it said this. The tone of the pamphlet was like this: This building happened to be a mosque sometime ago but you really shouldn't care about it so much. It was a church first. It's a church now. That stuff in between, Moors or savages or whatever, that doesn't really matter. Silly tourists.
I know that it's the church's prerogative to print whatever pamphlet it wants. The visitors have no choice but to read it because it includes a map showing the location of the mihrab, a must see. But this one seemed much preachier than other mosque-turned-church-historic-tourist site pamphlets I read elsewhere in Spain.
Finally, it's not confusing to visitors that the building is no longer a mosque. First, we're in Spain. It's very Catholic. Second, there is a giant altar with a giant crucifix from which hangs a giant Jesus. Third, there all along the perimeter are shiny golden chapels with figures of saints. It's obviously a church. No one is getting confused, as the bishop claims. [I didn't take any photos of these because I had severe church fatigue. Couldn't take any more Jesuses or Virgin Marys.]
Maybe the Mosque-Cathedral should be turned over to the Spanish ministry or culture or tourism the way Hagia Sophia has to the Turkish government. But no, that won't happen in Spain.
*The #1 tourism cash cow of Andalucia is actually Alhambra. Tickets are really expensive (like 15 or 20 euro) and booked weeks in advance. But La Mezquita is definitely worth seeing. My travel companion convinced me to go here with her. It was a decision I do no regret.
Blogger needs a confirmation page before actually posting. ARG. Did an incoherent draft show up in your RSS readers? I think so. That's embarrassing. I apologize.
I spent the weekend in Oslo, where I was surprised to see a few other Americans.
First I saw Lincoln in Vigeland Park. This bust of honest Abe was given to Oslo by the people of North Dakota in 1914. I came around from the back of the bust and thought I spied a familiar chin. And I was right.
The next day, I was near Akerhus Fortress and saw this. I saw the name carved beneath the sculpture first. Otherwise I'm not sure I would have recognized it was FDR. I think the likeness needs a bit more work...
I follow the Disgrasian blog on my google reader and today the blog posted this AP photo from a German Rose Monday parade. (Like many European countries, Germany celebrates the days leading up to Lent with parades, dressing up, and other festivities.)
the
It's supposed to satirize U.S.-China ties. But srsly? Can we PUH-lease ditch the coolie hats?
Apparently not because Danes think Chinese people wear coolie hats too, specifically, Danes WHO HAVE ADOPTED CHILDREN FROM CHINA! I wish I had a photo of these shirts to show you all. I was at a Chinese New Year celebration at the Århus concert hall last Sunday. One of the tables set up in the foyer of the music hall was an organization of Danish parents who have adopted children from China. In addition to displaying pamphlets, they were also selling t-shirts with their organization's name and a "cute" graphic of an Asian child WITH A COOLIE HAT! Srsly?? Presumably all these parents had been to China to pick up their kids. Hm? Was everyone there wearing coolie hats? I think not
On my first day in Århus, I learned about the ghetto. "The ghetto where all the immigrants live"was the way it was described to me. This suburb of Århus is called Brabrand, to the west of the city. Students expressed their misfortune for having been placed in a dorm in this neighborhood. Some of the problem is simply its geographical distance. It's a bus ride into the city. But much of the problem is that it's "the ghetto where all the immigrants live". It was the only way I heard immigrants being described in Denmark.
There seems to me two contrasting pictures of Denmark. In one, it's a lovely country. It's people are very happy. Even if this is a myth (or the survey methodology imperfect), its is a widely believed one. The social services are really good. People bike a lot.Women participate in the workforce almost equally with men.
But a lot of people, well immigrants, aren't very happy. Denmark finds it very difficult to accept its changing demographics. Immigration and racism are sensitive topics here as it is anywhere else.
I haven't gotten a hang of how these topics are discussed in Danish society because I haven't found very good Danish news sources in English. But a few weeks back the attack on Kurt Westergaard by a Somali man brought this issues up in the States too. Time Magazine has this to say about Somali immigrants to Denmark:
Somali refugees are also among the least integrated minority groups in Denmark, a fact that experts blame on a lack of education and the strident tone of right-wing politicians. According to the Integration Ministry, only 34% of Somali men and 22% of Somali women are employed — a rate far below the average for immigrants in the country. "There are different reasons for this, but one is that there has been civil war in Somalia since 1991, and this has created a situation in which many have a poor education from their homeland," says Nauja Kleist, a senior researcher at the Danish Institute of International Studies. "But another aspect is the feeling of not being accepted by the rest of Danish society. The harsh tone of the political debate in Denmark has had the consequence that many feel they are not being recognized as equal citizens."
I heard that Denmark has very harsh immigration laws but I didn't know any specific examples until now:
Artan echoes that sentiment, saying that some Somalis feel as if they're being pushed out by the Danish People's Party, which has succeeded in passing several harsh immigration laws in recent years with the help of allies in Parliament. Last fall, a proposal was passed to pay "antisocial" foreigners 100,000 kroner ($19,000) to leave Denmark and give up their residency rights.
Denmark introduced one of Europe's strictest immigration laws in 2002. The measure restricts citizens' ability to bring foreign spouses into the country, requiring both partners to be aged 24 or older. The law also requires the Dane to pass a solvency test, prove that he or she has not drawn social security for at least a year, and posta bond of almost $10,000. A reunified family's husband and wife must both prove "close ties to Denmark."
By no means do I have even a cursory understanding of the situation, but as you all know, immigration and ethnic relations are topics close to my intellectual and experiential soul.
Food I'm craving today: hummus and pita. But I know there's bazaar in Brabrand where a lot of immigrants have stores and I intend to go very soon.
Last week I felt like I was living the idea of the "university student" because I went to a fascinating lecture on the origins of the state by a scholar in international affairs.
I may not have attended this lecture by Francis Fukuyama at the Kellogg Center last night if Francis Fukuyama's picture had not been popping up on the Aarhus University homepage. I've been frequenting that website since it is where I will be studying abroad in the spring semester. Several months ago I noticed that he is Visiting Professor there.
Even though no doubt both Fukuyama and I are traveling to Denmark, Fukuyama is concerned with the modern state, which Denmark is represents. His lectures are titled "Getting to Denmark: Where the State, Rule of Law, and Accountable Government Come From". (It's same as the title as his forthcoming book, I think.) Basically, the premise is that Denmark is a mythical country with effective and uncorrupt institutions, peace, democracy, good living standards -- all the things that developing countries want. These three components: state, rule of law, accountable government are all necessary for political order.
Fukuyama's thesis is that ancient China was the first modern state. Other great civilizations at the time -- Romans, Egyptians, Mesopotamians -- were not modern states as he defines them. Basically a modern state is impersonal, administered by meritocratic bureaucrats who levy taxes, muster armies, redistribute land. It is not a patronizing society. He said that in a modern state, you don't hire your cousin to be the chief tax collector; you hire the person who is best at administering tax collections.
I thought this was a fascinating lecture, not only because it filled my heart with Chinese pride, because Fukuyama's broader approach to modern state. His examples were from ancient, like, 1000 B.C.E., Chinese history and similar times in Indian history.
While China was the first modern state, it is missing the rule of law and accountable government. Without these two, Fukuyama said that China is just a more perfect tyranny. This has its advantages and disadvantages. The government can do whatever it wants very quickly. Want to build a dam and displace three million people? Done. Want to build world's highest railway from to Tibet? Just do it. The millions of people who will be displaced can stamp their feet but their interests are ultimately not considered.
Initially I was disappointed that I would not be in East Lansing for his third and fourth lectures, as I will be in Denmark, of all places. But I found videos of previous versions of these lectures he gave at Johns Hopkins University.
His first lecture, which I didn't go to, was on the origins of the state. I mean, the origins, like from
Jumping back to my life, I'm literally going to Denmark in about a month and a half so I'm deeply mired in the logistics of setting up life there for six months. Over the weekend I booked my round trip flight to Copenhagen, January 3 to June 22, 2010.
"She remembered Nana saying once that each snowflake was a sigh heaved by an aggrieved woman somewhere in the world. That all the sighs drifted up the sky, gathered into clouds, then broke into tiny pieces that fell silently on the people below. As a reminder of how women like us suffer, she'd said. How quietly we endure all that falls upon us."
- Khaled Hosseini A Thousand Splendid Suns
Earlier this evening swept away by this book. I picked it up from the bookstore intending to skim the first page and I was wrapped up in it for the next several hours, neglecting the homework I had spread out before me. It's a little bit like being out of control because I wanted to continue reading the book but I also had a lot on my to-do list. I would have finished A Thousand Splendid Suns in one sitting if the Barnes &Noble didn't close at 10pm.
The feeling captured in this quotation (and in much of A Thousand Splendid Suns) reminds me of a Chinese expression 命苦，literally a bitter life, as in to have a bitter life. This meaning of bitter is endurance through a lifetime of pain, grief, and harshness is used a lot in Chinese. I guess it's also used to some extent in English, though I think bitter more often describes cynical and rancorous outlook on life.
I admit Hosseini's plotlines are rather melodramatic but I can't deny that I was moved by stories of women against the backdrop of violence, political turmoil, and the snow-capped mountains.I think this is what drew me to A Thousand Splendid Suns rather than The Kite Runner, which explores the relationships among men, fathers, and sons.
It hasn't snowed yet this winter though I think it will soon. And when it does, I will think about the snowflakes.
Watch This TED Talk. I love it. So touching, so eloquent.
Nigerian novelist Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie talks about the danger of one voice dominating storytelling of a people. Her talk focuses on the single story of Africa told by Europeans and Americans and her experiences as an Africa writer in pushing back against this tradition. She also speaks more broadly to the prevalence of "single stories" perpetuated today about all groups of people by many other people, not Americans against Africans. As a child she believed a narrative of poor uneducated Nigerians until she went to their village and saw how they lived. After living in America, she believed the single story of Mexicans told in anti-immigration debates: poor uneducated people all clamoring to illegally get to the US. When she went to Mexico and actually saw Mexicans doing normal things, she realized she believed the narrative.
It makes me consider what we believe about people we do not personally know, people near and far from here. Geographic distance does not correlate with unfamiliarity. People who live five, fifty, or five thousand miles from East Lansing can all be foreigners to us, and us foreigners to them. We need not travel far to encounter different ways of life, to see people much but not quite like us. I wanted to excerpt some parts of her talk, but ended up copying down a lot. In her words:
As the creator of a single story: I come from a conventional, middle-class Nigerian family. My father was a professor. My mother was an administrator. And so we had, as was the norm, live-in domestic help, who would often come from nearby rural villages. So the year I turned eight we got a new house boy. His name was Fide. The only thing my mother told us about him was that his family was very poor. My mother sent yams and rice, and our old clothes, to his family. And when I didn’t finish my dinner my mother would say, “Finish your food! Don’t you know? People like Fide’s family have nothing.” So I felt enormous pity for Fide’s family.
Then one Saturday we went to his village to visit. And his mother showed us a beautifully patterned basket, made of dyed raffia, that his brother had made. I was startled. It had not occurred to me that anybody in his family could actually make something. All I had heard about them is how poor they were, so that it had become impossible for me to see them as anything else but poor. Their poverty was my single story of them.
As the subject of a single story: Years later, I thought about this when I left Nigeriato go to university in the United States.I was 19.My American roommate was shocked by me.She asked where I had learned to speak English so well,and was confused when I said that Nigeriahappened to have English as its official language.She asked if she could listed to what she called my "tribal music,"and was consequently very disappointedwhen I produced my tape of Mariah Carey.She assumed that I did not know howto use a stove.
What struck me was this: She had felt sorry for meeven before she saw me.Her default position toward me, as an African,was a kind of patronizing, well-meaning, pity.My roommate had a single story of Africa.A single story of catastrophe.In this single story there was no possibilityof Africans being similar to her, in any way.No possibility of feelings more complex than pity.No possibility of a connection as human equals.
On representations of America: I would never have occurred to me to thinkthat just because I had read a novelin which a character was a serial killerthat he was somehow representativeof all Americans.And now, this is not because I am a better person than that student,but, because of America's cultural and economic power,I had many stories of America.
On the dangers of a single story: I've always felt that it is impossibleto engage properly with a place or a personwithout engaging with all of the stories of that place and that person.The consequence of the single storyis this: It robs people of dignity.It makes our recognition of our equal humanity difficult.It emphasizes how we are differentrather than how we are similar.
I don't want this cake for my birthday. They are made by people who believe they can tell other people what to do or not do with their bodies. cupcake + anti-choice = bad cake
It's the national pro-life cupcake campaign. The idea is to "imagine a nation where every child is allowed to have a birthday" by writing pro-life message on cupcakes. The website reads: The vision is that thousands of high school and college students would bring the pro-life message into their school via cupcakes! If you have a heart for such a loving mission, we would like to help you in any way that we can.
Well I can think of a million arguments why the so-called "pro-life" campaign does not have the interests of women, children, and families at heart.
But I find this cupcake campaign infuriating because it assumes all children have the luxury of celebrating their birthdays with presents and treats. The website reads, "In fact one in three children will never celebrate their first birthday due to abortion. We simply don't think it's fair that so many children don't ever get to have a birthday party. So we thought that we would schedule a day to remember the children, who never get to blow out the candles, unwrap their gifts and eat some cake."
Newsflash! There are children right now whose birthdays pass without fanfare, without cupcakes with pastel frosting because they cannot afford to. I simply don't think it's fair that so many children don't ever get to have a birthday party because they live in crushing poverty. They also never get to blow out candles, unwrap their gifts and eat some cake because their families can't afford to.
Instead, take those cupcakes and a bake sale at your schools and contribute the money you make to a truly worthy cause. Educate women and girls, give women access to family planning resources (yes, condoms and contraceptives), train doctors and nurses, increase women's participation in public life so we can focus on improving the lives of children already in this world.
I have a crush on Nick Kristof, the New York Times columnist, because he consistently highlights the importance of women and girls in bettering societies, domestically and abroad. In particular, he always makes a strong case linking the importance of women to the most pressing, most challenging issues of the day. And I’m publicly declaring my love for him today because he and his wife Sheryl WuDunn wrote the cover piece for this past weekend’s New York Times Sunday Magazine, a special edition on women, that perfectly explains his view of the relationship between women’s empowerment and development.
In many poor countries, the greatest unexploited resource isn’t oil fields or veins of gold; it is the women and girls who aren’t educated and never become a major presence in the formal economy. With education and with help starting businesses, impoverished women can earn money and support their countries as well as their families. They represent perhaps the best hope for fighting global poverty.
“The world is awakening to a powerful truth: Women and girls aren’t the problem; they’re the solution,” writes Kristof and WuDunn. Aid to women is not a pity cause, a pet cause, or a charity case. But I think sometimes these problems are perceived as such. The developed world, as individuals and as nations, give money to social causes as “charity”. “They” are poor and “we” are going out of our way to do a good deed. In contrast, money for, say, investment in developing markets is business and both sides are business partners. There is occasional hubbub — charity concerts and the like — over social programs, but they are generally given lip service. The bulk of global development efforts are devoted to political and economic issues. But Kristof and WuDunn very eloquently show that aid to women benefits everyone. Women will lead their families, their communities, and their countries to prosperity.
Like Kristof, I have always believed that treating women right is a vital part of any country that wants to security, stability, and become a player in the global community. But I don’t think many of those in power in this country and elsewhere share this belief because the more I have learned about world politics, the more I have come to see the gulf separating “hard” issues like security, arms control, trade and “soft” issues like education, nutrition, child and maternal health, and social issues. At times it makes me mildly embarrassed even, to say that I care about women’s issues because I think it pigeon holes me as idealistic and naive. Like I want to “help people” but have no understanding of national governments and global institutions. So I’m all the more glad to see Nick Kristof using his position as a widely-read journalist to explain that women’s rights is a vital part of the solution to global problems.
There is “hard” evidence now that helping women does help the whole society. It often happens that men who control the family finances don’t spend it well. And when you have very little to spend, you must spend wisely.
One reason involves the dirty little secret of global poverty: some of the most wretched suffering is caused not just by low incomes but also by unwise spending by the poor — especially by men.
When women have control of money, they spend less on entertainment — alcohol, tobacco — and more on the family — food, medical care. So giving women greater financial power also helps families prioritize their spending.
The economist Esther Duflo of M.I.T. found that when the men’s crops flourish, the household spends more money on alcohol and tobacco. When the women have a good crop, the households spend more money on food. “When women command greater power, child health and nutrition improves,” Duflo says.
Terrorism is one today’s most pressing issue today and women’s empowerment is a key part of it. Kristof concedes that the precise mechanism of this is unclear, but societies in which women participate are less likely to breed terrorism.
Yet another reason to educate and empower women is that greater female involvement in society and the economy appears to undermine extremism and terrorism. It has long been known that a risk factor for turbulence and violence is the share of a country’s population made up of young people. Now it is emerging that male domination of society is also a risk factor; the reasons aren’t fully understood, but it may be that when women are marginalized the nation takes on the testosterone-laden culture of a military camp or a high-school boys’ locker room.
The piece opens with a Chinese saying that women hold up half the sky. It is a saying that I like very much and am familiar with. For now it seems that women should not peek through the cracks of a world that men have built and run. But a few good people, Nick Kristof included, know that they should be leading the world.
There are many worthwhile causes to champion, injustices to fight, both financially and through other actions. Should I donate to an organization that, say, helps fund the education of girls, clean water, or HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment? Should I fund a domestic or international cause? Should I lobby for environmental issues? Universal healthcare in the U.S.?
I feel that I am prioritizing one condition over the other by devoting my efforts to a cause. Of course we should contribute toward solving all the world's problems, but I recognize that our resources -- money, time, political will -- are limited, so we can only give publicity to some diseases and not others.
Now expand this on the scale of national governments, multilateral aid organizations. We all have to make choices about how much to fund for what. Each foreign aid budget, domestic health budget, and NGO has to prioritize what it will spend the most money on.
I often read about how easy and cheap it is to cure a certain disease but there's no effort to do so. No global funds, no rock star benefit concerts, no massive whatever-color-ribbon campaigns. There is no publicity, funding, and political for very urgent needs with simple solution. I've heard that with just a little more push we can eradicate the last few pockets of polio, or with some cheap drug we can save lots of people from something terrible.
The latest example of this is Nick Kristof's column about pneumonia published on Mother's Day (The Killer No One Suspects). According to Kristof, a course of antibiotics to treat pneumonia costs only 27 cents, but pneumonia registers on few people's consciousness as a widespread, emergent disease.
This leads me to ask why some diseases or conditions get more attention than others. Is there some general fascination with the new and incurable disease that plagues all of us? Is it only greed and fame of politicians, drug companies, and scientists that set funding priorities?
I checked categories to which this entry belongs, I'm selecting many of them. This is because that at some level, these health, gender, environmental, and social issues are interrelated, cycles of poverty, environmental degradation leading to health effects, tuberculosis exacerbating AIDS, etc. But most organizations have one or several focuses, some of which leave other behind. Inevitably, aid organizations or lobbies will be fighting for the same funding, the same piece of the pie so to speak. Expansion of one program may see cuts in another. Am I second guessing myself too much? Is this the activists' curse of caring too much?
I know this is the THIRD blog post on essentially the same story, but I want to bring another angle to it.
When I first read this story, I actually thought about Aristophanes' play Lysistrata. It has made me think about the power of sex and the power of women when they use it.
A couple days ago I posted on my facebook status a link to this BBC article titled "Kenyan women hit men with sex ban". Basically, women's organizations in Kenya are calling on Kenyan women to deny sex to their husbands for seven days in hopes the men will resolve the disagreements between political rivals in the government. I guess this movement is really taking hold in Kenya. An update (Wife of Kenyan PM Backs Sex Ban) says that the wife of Kenya's Prime Minister supports the ban too.
After I posted the Kenya article as my status, I got several "like" comments. But I felt rather uneasy about the story. I thought it was rather sad because it showed that in some ways, women do not have any more power than they did 2400 years ago.
The play Lysistrata was set in the 5th century BCE. Lysistrata is about the role of women in bringing an end to the Peloponnesian War, a long and destructive war between Athens and Sparta and their allies from 431 to 411 BCE. The title character, an Athenian woman named Lysistrata organizes the women of Greece to withhold sex from their husbands until they end the war. The sex-strike works, the war is over, and in the end everyone has sex again.
The women of ancient Athens and contemporary Kenya have little political power. There is a saying that goes something like, "behind every powerful man is a strong woman." I suppose the sex-strike shows the power women have over their men. But I wish that the woman is the powerful one in front.
In response to Kia's question, I don't think sex should be used as political leverage because it can so easily be leveraged against women.
The same day that I was inspired by strong pro-woman women politicians, I get an ugly reminder that women in politics are still judged by the way they look by this Maxim magazine list that The State News covered.
Today I had the great fortune of attending the 4th Annual March for Choice at the State Capitol. The first speaker and one of the most energetic was Senator Gretchen Whitmer and she knew how to work the crowd! She has been a stronger supporter of pro-woman and pro-choice issues. She is a Democrat and represents the 23rd district, which includes most of Ingham county.
Move over, MSU Playboy models — State Sen. Gretchen Whitmer, D-Lansing, is in town. And now she’s been put in Maxim magazine, too. Whitmer was named the eighth hottest politician in the world by Maxim magazine.
“I’m taking it with a grain of salt and a good sense of humor,” Whitmer said. Whitmer is not the only Michigan politician with winning looks.Gov. Jennifer Granholm was named the “Sexiest Governor 2005” by www.billyeakes.com and www.moonshinerepublic.com.
But Whitmer’s Maxim honors have caused her to be “teased mercilessly” — mainly by Sens. Randy Richardville, R-Monroe, and Wayne Kuipers, R-Holland — because of a comparison to the woman who comes in at No. 2 on the list.
“They think it’s funny that I’m on a list with (Republican vice presidential candidate and Alaska Gov.) Sarah Palin because they’re both Republicans,” Whitmer said.
She's put in the difficult position of having to play along with this "compliment". I'm cringing as I read this article and I imagine that that's what Whitmer really means when she says she takes with with a grain of salt and good humor. If she complained about it, she'd be Bitch!Politician. "Teasing" from male Republican senators recalls a frat boy's immaturity toward women.
Note that Maxim is trying to give us a lesson in international politics, by making their list international politicians. Thanks for the International Relations lesson.
It's within Maxim's disgustingness to publish such Top 10 lists, but The State News, I'm disappointed in you too for passing it along to MSU.
I know I should be talking about progressive issues that were discussed at the Campus Progress Conference but surely one of the highlights was hearing Linda Sanchez speak. She recounted a story in which two men in business suits in the elevator of a House office building politely asked which office she worked in. "Oh, I have my own office here," she replied.
She also left us with these words of wisdom: Top Ten Reasons I Don't Date Republicans by Linda Sanchez
10. The only time they believe in fiscal restraint is when the dinner bill comes. 9. His idea of getting to second base is fondling my stock portfolio. 8. He thinks that Emily's List is a call girl service. 7. His idea of oral stimulation is getting me to recite the Contract with America. 6. He thinks that white pantyhose and pearls are sexy--and you should see what he wants me to wear. 5. Because when Republicans say that they want to create opportunities for minorities, that means they want to date me and Loretta [Linda's sister. Also a congresswoman]. 4. Despite all the hype, I still can't find his weapon of mass destruction. 3. His pending prison term for political corruption is just another excuse for him to be emotionally unavailable. 2. Republicans are only interested in screwing the poor. 1. Because they make love like they make war: they lie to get in and don't have a plan for what to do once they get there
I started this blog in part to keep track of my adventures this summer, so I am now making the official announcement about my plans:
I will be a Policy and Government Affairs intern at AIDS Alliance for Children, Youth & Families, an non-profit in Washington DC. (I'm going to Washington!) AIDS Alliance is an advocacy group particularly for women, children, youth, and families with and affected by HIV.
As a Policy and Government Affairs intern, I will research policy, legislation, write letters to policymakers, and maybe even go to Capitol Hill. I think I'm going to learn a lot about domestic policies about funding, prevention, and education for HIV/AIDS.
I'm leaving Memorial Day weekend and won't be back until the weekend before the fall semester starts, so pretty much the entire summer.
I will be posting my weekly essays here and uploading photos of lovely Washington DC. I hope someone reads this so my efforts are not soley for my own archives.
