Schadenfreude

Schadenfreude: n. Pleasure derived from the misfortune or discomfort of others.

Schadenfreude is a big buzz word in liberal circles these days. Mostly it seems to be used by liberal scolds (of which there are plenty) telling us to pipe down, that we shouldn't gloat, that we shouldn't rub the right wingnuts' noses in their defeat. To which I reply, "Why not? They've certainly gotten plenty of glee from rubbing our noses in it over the years!"

My intellectually superior companions at breakfast this morning laughed at me when I admitted that the word was new to me. I really didn't know the meaning of it until it started popping up over the last several days in the blogs and online media that I read and I had to look it up. I think that probably the reason I wasn't familiar with it was that throughout much of my life I've been on the receiving end of Schadenfreude.

So, now, since I am a bleeding heart liberal, my heart is supposed to bleed for the radical wingnuts who have done - and will continue to do - their best to hijack my country? I'm supposed to be mature and magnanimous and have compassion for their suffering??? Sorry, I guess I'm just not that mature! 

On the contrary, I totally agree with Salon.com's Rob Spillman's take on subject,  that gloating, in this instance, is a patriotic duty :

And isn’t this what this election has been about, the outsiders versus the entitled? For once gays, women, Latinos, African-Americans, math geeks (hello, Nate Silver), science nerds (global warming, anyone?) and even pot-smokers banded together to win the day against the anti-intellectuals (Santorum’s boastful “we’ll never get the smart people”), anti-science (Romney jokingly saying at the convention, “President Obama promised to slow the rise of the oceans and to heal the planet. My promise is to help you and your family”), anti-women (pick your insane rape statement by any number of Republican candidates, all of whom lost, not to mention Lilly Ledbetter), anti-gay (the Republican platform called for a ban on gay marriage and for bringing back Don’t Ask Don’t Tell), anti-Latino (they used the word “illegals” so often that even the notoriously conservative Cuban-Americans voted for Obama), and to top it all off there was the attempted bum rush of statistical wienie Nate Silver. Was that the tipping point? When the Fox and company bloviators went after Silver for, gasp, using math and logic, and did so in their characteristically smug and condescending manner, as if addressing the uneducated help sweeping out their dressage horse stables, this was when they were putting the finishing touches on the Schadenfreude targets.  

Oh, yes, for those of us who have long endured the condescension of the anti-scientific, anti-reality know-nothings, this is our moment and Schadenfreude is sweet! Just let us enjoy it for a few more days.

Thank you, veterans

Thank you to all veterans and to their families who also served and still serve. And thank you especially to my own favorite veteran.

...For all you did and still do.

Thank God it's over!

We've had a few days now to absorb and reflect on the news of Tuesday's election, and thank God it's over! The sense of satisfaction that many of us feel about the results has only deepened. One of the most mendacious campaigns for president in the history of the country was rejected by voters. Candidates for the senate who appealed to misogyny, racism, and magical economic thinking were mostly defeated. In the races for the House of Representatives, some of the worst of the worst (I'm talking 'bout you Joe Walsh and Alan West!) were defeated and others (Michele Bachmann, Steve King, etc.) had close calls and suffered scares which may bode well for the future. Even in Texas, the Republicans lost their super-majority in the state legislature and will no longer be able to ride roughshod over the objections of their opponents. It is very likely that except for the gerrymandering and the voter suppression efforts by Tea Party Republican state governments, the rejection of the non-reality-based philosophy of that party by the voters would have been even more drastic.

Meanwhile, we watch, bemused, as the right wingnut pundits "analyze" their losses. They were so sure that they were in for a big victory celebration on Tuesday. They were all prepared to lord it over their weak liberal opponents and crow about their "mandate." They were going to repeal the Affordable Care Act on their first day in office, followed quickly by an overturning of Roe v. Wade, a denial of health insurance coverage for female contraceptives (But, of course, full coverage for male enhancement drugs like Viagra or Cialis!), building a 20-foot tall wall all around the country and rounding up and deporting all who can't prove their citizenship or their legal entry into the country, and, naturally, getting rid of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid and removing all regulation on Wall Street. Yes, beginning November 7, they believed in spite of all evidence to the contrary that they would be entering the Randian world of their fondest dreams. They had convinced themselves that all those nasty little geeks who relied on real-world data were just skewing their predictions to make the Democrats look good. I have to admit that watching their self-inflicted combustion on Tuesday night and since has been quite entertaining. Gloat-inducing even.

In an article in New York Magazine today, Frank Rich writes about the propensity for self-delusion that is rampant in today's GOP. The title of his piece is "Fantasyland." Never was an article more accurately titled. He writes:

As GOP politicians and pundits pile on Romney in defeat, they often argue that he was done in by not being severely conservative enough; if only he’d let Ryan be Ryan, voters would have been won over by right-wing orthodoxy offering a clear-cut alternative to Obama’s alleged socialism. In truth, Romney was a perfect embodiment of the current GOP. As much as the Republican Party is a radical party, and a nearly all-white party, it has also become the Fantasyland Party. It’s an isolated and gated community impervious to any intrusions of reality from the “real America” it solipsistically claims to represent. This year’s instantly famous declaration by the Romney pollster Neil Newhouse that “we’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers” crystallized the mantra of the entire GOP. The Republican faithful at strata both low and high, from Rush’s dittoheads to the think-tank-affiliated intellectuals, have long since stopped acknowledging any empirical evidence that disputes their insular worldview, no matter how grounded that evidence might be in (God forbid) science or any other verifiable reality, like, say, Census reports or elementary mathematics. No wonder Romney shunned the word Harvard, which awarded him two degrees, even more assiduously than he did Mormon.  

This is a party that is not going to let its policies be dictated by facts. They deny science. They deny any verifiable reality which contradicts what their gut - i.e., their prejudices - tells them is true. They live inside an intellectual bubble where they only listen to and read others who think like them. This is a formula for creating a psychosis which cannot recognize and accept the real world when it intrudes. In the days following the election, the residents of the bubble have continued to deny reality and blame all sorts of things for the failure of their party. It was Hurricane Sandy's fault. The Democrats suppressed the vote. (!!!) Mitt Romney wasn't conservative enough. It was those damn liberal pollsters and other media types. It was Chris Christie's fault. It was all those women and brown voters who weren't smart enough to figure out what was going on and were deluded by Obama.

What they absolutely refuse to even consider is that it was their policies that did it. It was their demonizing of those brown people and of women who want to control their own lives and bodies. It was their insistence that people who have worked their entire life and contributed to the funds which are the source of the country's social safety net are moochers when they retire or become disabled and begin to receive the benefits of that net. Likewise, that veterans who have given up a portion of their life and sometimes their limbs or their ability to live a normal life are moochers for expecting the assistance of the country they defended! And, perhaps most obnoxiously, their insistence that super-rich people must not under any circumstances be required to give up any of their riches - which they were able to garner because of the laws and protections of this country - to support and defend the society which has enriched them. These policies were rejected, rather resoundingly, by American voters on Tuesday in favor of a philosophy of inclusiveness and communitarianism.

Again, here's Frank Rich:

At the policy level, this is the GOP that denies climate change, that rejects Keynesian economics, and that identifies voter fraud where there is none. At the loony-tunes level, this is the GOP that has given us the birthers, websites purporting that Obama was lying about Osama bin Laden’s death, and not one but two (failed) senatorial candidates who redefined rape in defiance of medical science and simple common sense. It’s the GOP that demands the rewriting of history (and history textbooks), still denying that Barry Goldwater’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Richard Nixon’s “southern strategy” transformed the party of Lincoln into a haven for racists. Such is the conservative version of history that when the website Right Wing News surveyed 43 popular conservative bloggers to determine the “worst figures in American history” two years ago, Jimmy Carter, Obama, and FDR led the tally, all well ahead of Benedict Arnold, Timothy McVeigh, and John Wilkes Booth.

It would be satisfying if we could just ignore all these crazy relatives in the attic room of our country. Unfortunately, they still have the capacity to create a lot of havoc and a lot of misery for the rest of us, and so we have to find a way to deal with them - to persuade those who may be persuadable and to blunt the ability of the fanatics to throw monkey wrenches into the works. It is not an enviable task. President Obama certainly has some heavy lifting to do in the next four years. May he find the strength he needs.

And may those who so successfully planned and ran his campaign start organizing now to give him a majority in the House and a greater majority in the Senate in 2014. If that happens, the last two years of this president's last term could be truly transformational.

Love Songs From a Shallow Grave by Colin Cotterill: A review

I am a big fan of Colin Cotterill's Dr. Siri Paiboun series. Dr. Siri is really one of the most charming characters in all of the mystery genre and I always enjoy reading about his adventures and absorbing his gentle wisdom and view of the world. That being said, I was disappointed in this particular book. In trying to analyze just why, I came to the conclusion that it was because it tried to do too much.

These stories take place in 1970s Laos, just after their revolution, as the new socialist government was trying to find its footing. Across the border in Cambodia, a much darker tale of transition was taking place. The Killing Fields were in full production. The population and the culture of the country were being systematically destroyed by the Khmer Rouge. In this book, Cotterill attempts to address that tragedy along with the more mundane events of Vientiane, if serial murders can ever be described as mundane. The contrast between Cambodia - Kampuchea - and the more benign society of Laos is stark. But the contrast is really too stark, too dissonant and disruptive and too difficult to take in. 

Cotterill's device for bringing in the Khmer Rouge story is that Dr. Siri is lured to Cambodia, along with his friend Civilai, on an all-expense-paid diplomatic mission. There, Siri's natural curiosity and abrasiveness lead him to stick his nose in where his hosts don't want it to be and he winds up afoul of the Khmer Rouge and chained and locked in a horrible prison where he is tortured and starved and where he expects to be killed.

Before he went to Cambodia though, Siri had been involved in the investigation of a serial murder case in Vientiane. Three young women have been killed, skewered by epees and with a Z carved into their thighs. There seems to be no logical connection between the three murders, and Siri and his usual posse struggle to find the solution to the puzzle. Before he is able to reach a conclusion, the trip to Cambodia interferes. The story proceeds on two tracks, in Vientiane and in Cambodia.

We know that Dr. Siri will survive his horrible experience, because the series continues, but how he does so is more than a little incredible. After all, the 74-year-old national coroner of Laos is hardly James Bond, but his escape from Cambodia seems all too Bond-like. 

Moreover, we know that he will solve the serial murder case. In this instance, the list of questions that he leaves for policeman Phosy before going to Cambodia leads to the surprising solution. But it's all just a bit too much, a bit too convenient. 

My disappointment with this book is certainly not enough to put me off the series and I'll be looking forward to reading the next entry. I just hope it is a bit more narrowly focused.

The Beginner's Goodbye by Anne Tyler: A review

If it's Anne Tyler, we must be in Baltimore again. 

This time she introduces us to a family publishing company, a small concern that mostly publishes vanity books. It has a line of "self-improvement" books called "The Beginner's..." which covers everything from cooking to you-name-it.

One of the editors at the company is Aaron, the scion of the family. Aaron has a crippled right arm and leg and has had to deal with an older sister who feels the need to protect him and manage his life. Nandina is unmarried and lives in the family home.

Aaron is married to Dorothy, a doctor who is very independent and outspoken. She is a plain, somewhat dumpy woman who is not interested in physical appearance or taking pains to make herself attractive. She is also not interested in taking care of Aaron or managing his life. Aaron adores her and they have a relatively happy marriage.

Then one day, the unthinkable happens. Aaron and Dorothy are at home together and they have a disagreement. Dorothy takes her things and goes out to the sunroom to work. A storm blows down a big tree which crashes into the house, crushing and killing Dorothy. Aaron is devastated.

Time passes but Aaron is no closer to coming to terms with his grief. But then a magical thing happens - Dorothy appears to him. And she keeps appearing to him, always at unexpected times and places. 

Gradually, Aaron finds that these appearances are helping him to learn to live in the present once again. He begins to feel more at peace with himself and his life.

Meanwhile, Nandina finds love with the contractor who is repairing Aaron's house, and Aaron finally notices that Peggy, one of the publishing house's employees and an old schoolmate of his, may be interested in more than just his friendship. Over time, he comes to believe that he has found a way to say goodbye to Dorothy and to get on with his life - The Beginner's Goodbye.

Anne Tyler's writing is always filled with her wise and penetrating observations of human nature and is frequently suffused with a gentle humor. All of that is present in this book as she explores the kind of "magical thinking" employed by this middle-aged man whose life was upended by the death of his wife. 

It is a pleasure to get to know Aaron and to see him begin to heal from his terrible loss as his dead wife comforts and guides him through his period of recovery. Tyler's wise and gentle stories are always uplifting and illuminating. I very much enjoyed this one.

Wordless Wednesday: Big Bend vistas

Wonder what Molly would say about Romney? Here's a clue!

Home again! Just in time for the election.

Well, actually, my election took place a couple of weeks ago. We voted before we left town for our trip to Big Bend National Park. A lot of people were voting that day. I think early voting is one of the best ideas to come along in a while in regard to our elections.

Big Bend was wonderful and more about that later, but one of the best things about it was that it sort of insulated us from the last two weeks of hysterical reporting on the campaigns which is the stock-in-trade of much of our national media. We had only limited links to the outside world and those were easy to ignore, especially when there was so much amazing beauty around us.

But re-linking myself to that outside world today, I came across a quote from Molly Ivins, possibly my all-time favorite Texan, outside of members of my family. The quote was from November 2003 and she was talking about her fellow Texan, George Bush, but, as I read it, I thought it could just as easily apply to one of the candidates in this year's presidential election.

What you end up with is a guy who sees himself as a perfectly nice fellow---and who is genuinely disconnected from the impact of his decisions on people. [...]

Okay, we cut taxes for the rich and so we have to cut services for the poor.  Presumably there is some right-wing justification along the lines that helping poor people just makes them more dependent or something.  If there were a rationale Bush could express, it would be one thing, but to watch him not see, not make the connection, is another thing entirely.  Welfare, Medicare, Social Security, food stamps---horrors, they breed dependency. Whereas inheriting millions of dollars and having your whole life handed to you on a platter is good for the grit in your immortal soul?  What we're dealing with here is a man in such serious denial it would be pathetic if it weren't damaging so many lives. (My emphasis.) 

Bush's lies now fill volumes.  He lied us into two hideously unfair tax cuts; he lied us into an unnecessary war with disastrous consequences; he lied us into the PATRIOT Act, eviscerating our freedoms.  But when it comes to dealing with those less privileged, Bush's real problem is not deception, but self-deception.

The Republican campaign for the presidency this year has been based on such a web of lies, deception, and self-deception that it would put even that consummate liar George W. Bush to shame. This is where a once great political party that actually stood for something has come to in the year 2012.

Well, tomorrow it will all be over. At least we can hope that it will be. We can also hope that the recent polling across the nation proves to be correct and that President Obama will win a second term. For as much as I sometimes disagree with him and as much as he sometimes irritates me, there's one thing about him that I am absolutely sure of: He always does what he believes is the best for this country, even if it is not politically convenient or popular. He has a moral compass. We know where he stands on things and we know what he will try to accomplish as president. We know what he has already accomplished as president. Quite a lot actually.

As for the other guy. we don't know where he stands on anything or what he would do as president, but we strongly suspect that he would rip beyond repair the minimal social safety net that this country has and that his main concern would be to make himself and his fellow .0001 percenters even richer. Even from the grave Molly Ivins understands his kind.