Yes, I am a: cracker, honkey, gringa, whitey, blondie, guera, rubia, almost albino, master-oppressor race, aryan-looking woman.  My native English is the slow rural English from the upper Midwest, which seems to inspire more jokes about the movie "Fargo" that I would ever care to admit to.  What should this tell you?  I should be racist, sit down with a can of "the beast" (as we call it) and tell some racist joke.-Perhaps not, Wisconsinites have been known to be pretty open and accepting.  At least if I think of "Men of Honor".

Either way, a rural white upbringing can easily be stained with racism.  I begin to question whether I am racist, because I would never be able to put myself under that critical light.

Someone noted to me that the audience of a show I played in was extremely white.  In context, it makes sense.  She had just visited an exhibition celebrating some of the cultures of Africa.
-As a side note, someone will consider that extremely disrespectful because I am generalizing a continent.  Think about it, it happens to everyone.  You are white, though your ancestry could be from a multitude of countries with completely different traditions.  My family celebrates Polish traditions, but we are just white.  Latinos are Latinos, though they could be Colombian, Peruvian, Mexican, Panamanian etc.  Asians are just Asians most of the time, though they to hail from a vast number of countries whether it be Mongolia or Malaysia.  We as humans are just too lazy to learn geography.-
Returning to the story: I cannot convey the same tone of disdain, that seemed to imply that I keep myself walled up in cracker-land.
Am I racist for staying in the land of honkeys?  I'm probably racist for using so many derogatory terms, but if I'm racist I would deserve the terms.  I didn't expose myself to new cultures.
I also didn't stare at people like tropical fish in a fishbowl.

Often times I see this and I notice it in myself (though it tends to make me rather nauseated), that we look at people and their culture while saying "oh how neat" or "how interesting" without seeing them as real people.  They are creatures that do funny things like dance a certain way: they probably don't live like we do.  This is an extreme example, but the general idea is my goal.  After a certain point of studying a culture or immersing oneself in it when things don't seem strange or you don't feel a need to question is when you start seeing the person rather than the funny creature.  The best example I can think of is when on Ecuadorian public transit it doesn't seem strange that the driver puts the pedal to the metal, even on steep curves, while the three Jesus pictures taped to the inside of the bus look down on the passengers.  This was a turning point for me.
I've been the tropical fish in the fishbowl.  I've had seen hordes of children who sit and stare with their mouths dropping nearly to the floor, because of the tall whitey.  It's funnier when they think I don't understand Spanish.  I do my best to laugh, but it still irritates me.  I'm a person, not an animal in a zoo to at which to gawk.

In an exhibition you are meant to stare, are you meant to understand and accept?  It might be implied.  Then again you could just be staring at a pretty fish or so you thought.

Who's to say who is racist?  I didn't even take the first step.  Is it really even a first step or a zoo?
I couldn't tell you, perhaps we both deserve a large scarlet "R" on our chests to show the world our racist sides.

I just thought it would be ironic to point out that I usually get 2-4 footprints per day if any. They are also usually from misguided google searches (by the way, if you put "fucking" in as a title of a blog you will receive a lot of hits from people looking for pornography).

Thanks for visiting my page :)

Why are shooting stars fleeting?  Why is that the first image that pops into my head when "fleeting" comes into conversation?  I assume it's because the Spanish word "fugaz" is quickly associated and fire=fuego which is like fugaz, right?  Then again, it's a weak assumption. 

Truth be told, snippets of conversation are far more fleeting than shooting stars.  Usually walking every day (typically for an hour or more, I live far from school and work) I lose my head.  I must look like a zombie staring with my glazed eyes at nothing.  Despite this I hear a lot of little things people are saying as we pass.  Sometimes it's cute like a mother and child "Mommy!!! Look it's a duck!!!" or the ever-popular frat type boys urinating on the hat store, (whose urine content is probably comprised more of alcohol than anything else) "OH MY GOD.  THE HOBOS ARE GONNA BEAT EACH OTHER UP!!!".  I hardly remember any of it, even much of the passionate debates. 

Just listening I think I missed the self-righteous boat.

Certainly, I have opinions and theories.  Does this mean I should push them on anyone?  No one wants to hear that.  I can't even read the entire editorial section of the newspaper (not that I know anyone who can read that entire section).  Why on Earth would I even consider trying to give the slightest inkling of proselytization?  There are few who have been able to change my mind about things.  Generally, I listen to people trying to change my opinion or proselytize me and think they are crazy, stupid; or think about some new tap rhythm in my head and how to fancy it up.  Talking to brick walls drives me batty, thus I do my best to understand where someone is coming from and understand them on a human level.  This is not to say that I will ever share their opinion.  This would, in fact, be my own warped form of trying to implement the idea that we have two ears and only one mouth.

Now, what inspired this new wave of hatred for the overly talkative masses.  Richard Dawkins recently came to my campus to speak about his new book "The God Delusion".  I have been an atheist for about nine years now while growing up in a Catholic family (not strict Catholic either, this was not a form of rebellion.  It was a personal decision).  Many people I know went to see him speak.  Fortunately, I couldn't.  Even if I hadn't been working, I wouldn't have gone.  Dawkins bothers me, primarily because he is ruining the reputation of Atheists everywhere, but also because he cannot relate to people anymore from the pedestal he has put himself on.  I have had a hard time convincing religious friends of mine that I don't eat babies and that despite my religious beliefs I have morals.  My conduct has been baffling for some people.  She's atheistic and doesn't get trashed every weekend (I find it more surprising that I was born and raised in Wisconsin and I hardly drink) while smoking crack.  No, I will never try to get you not to believe in your religion.  That is your responsibility and frankly, probably a lot more complicated of a situation than I would ever want to throw myself into.  Now Dawkins is going about telling people how stupid religion is as if to try to convince them to believe what he does.  Mostly he is talking about how religion is so absurd that believing it would be utterly ridiculous, so the people who believe it must be stupid.  On a clip I saw of him he couldn't understand why an evangelical would be angry with him for talking about evolution.

Has Dawkins removed himself so far from reality that he can no longer relate to his fellow man?  Is it beneath his dignity to attempt to put himself in someone else's shoes?  How would he react if an evangelical came storming into his office giving a lot of evidence for creationism and then proceeded to attempt to exorcise him?  This thought must be below Dawkins, because he is an accomplished scholar and clearly knows more than anyone else around him.

The part that seems hilarious to me is that Dawkins is stealing techniques from the very people he is more or less claiming to be his scholastic arch-enemies.  He's going around giving presentations to people who have hero-worship for him.  He preaches his ideas to these people.  Is Dawkins encouraging these people to think for themselves and come to their own conclusions?

I have to say that both sides of this religious debate can agree that any followers they have should be geniune believers in the ideology rather than sheep who listen and go with the crowd.

I must admit that Dawkins has a lot of valid points and I agree with nearly all of them considering I am atheistic, but he is a terrible leader for us.  He's like the Bush of atheism.

Now Dawkins isn't the only thing that has happened to show my lack of self righteousness.  In a class of mine we spoke at length about what we think of smoking.  Is the United States persecuting smokers?  Should smoking in public be legal? etc. 

It is important to note that I don't smoke.  It smells like burning road tar mixed with yuckies to me.  However, it doesn't bother me too much if someone smokes around me.  It is not as if most people are so rude that they would blow the smoke in your face.  It is a personal decision to smoke and if you do you are expected, just like with anything else that you do, to be courteous about it.  Most smokers will generally put the carton away when they see the mother forcing the two year old to use their inhaler.

Certainly there are rude smokers.  I remember having to sit with a little boy (he was 2-4 years old during this time. It lasted a few years) while he inhaled steroids twice per day due to his severe asmtha, which was a result of smoking during pregnancy.  He had other health problems and hated "taking his medicine".  I sat with him encouraging him to keep the mask on and to distract him as much as possible.

Now there are these kids in my class that talk about how smoking should be banned and how evil it is.  How you must be a least a little stupid or disillusioned to even start.  What on Earth have these kids seen to make them so passionate about that?  Have they had to sit with little boys who had to inhale steroids as well?  Maybe I could talk to them and relate to them, because they must have experienced something to get that passionate.

Ha! Look out Will Robinson we have found over zealous college students again!!!

I think there must be something wrong with me that I cannot seem to grasp this zealousness that people around me have.  It really only comes out here.  I guess that makes me a hypocrite, especially considering how much of a sermon I just wrote.

Then again I will always openly admit my stupidity :)

I return today after a 50 minute walk to get from class to my apartment.  My fingers are about as agile as the three inch layer of ice that seems to be permanently stuck to every sidewalk I disgrace with my presence. As usual I encountered inspiration as I walked with my heads in clouds and partially in a newspaper I picked up.

I would like to return to my original purpose of the blog.  To quejarme de todo, or to complain about everything.  There is no point in starting in on the university or the city.  It would merely be redundant to express that Satan's anus isn't a great place.

Newspapers: The big news that took up the majority of the articles was on the primary.  Wisconsin voted yesterday, it is the big event here.  It would have to be even bigger in a college town with the multitude of misguided college students who still believe they can change the world, politicians don't lie and that their vote counts.  They have yet to learn that Rome wasn't built or destroyed in a day and change is a painstaking process.  The sad part of having such repetitive newspapers means they do not cover other and probably more important news.   Yesterday Fidel Castro stepped down from power as the president of Cuba.  This is a history changing event!  This could be a change or removal of the embargo that has been in place for 46 years.  The embargo was placed because of that leader and tensions of the time.  That time has passed, those tensions are gone and now that leader is out of power; yet this step down from power deserves an inch on the back page while every other page is full of election stories.  I know what McCain and Obama's faces look like and know they won the primaries here.  Do I need to see a guy in a giant badger costume encouraging a college student to vote, who inevitably is one of the misguided people?
No I do not.  Why are we not talking about one of the final threads with a tenacious grip on nearly nonexistent cold war tensions?
To add to this lunacy this is what the Cuban embassy in other countries puts out
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e370/Cinderumpelstiltskin/DSCN1004.jpg
If this isn't evidence of horrid relations between the US and Cuba is, I don't know what is.  I read the pamphlet, well as much as I could; it was rather dry.  It more or less "quoted" things that Bush said, especially about Cuba.  However, I am sure I believe that Bush would have that much to say about a country that was banned from the thoughts of the US public in 1962.

Toasters: Why does the highest setting exist?  I think someone must have written a toaster company complaining about how much work it is to push their toast down twice to burn it.  Who likes burnt toast anyway?  I want to eliminate this from my toaster.

Now back to something a little more serious.  I also have a new idea of why Obama supporters tend to be the younger crowd.  Take a look at the main word rolling off of his lips. Change.  Younger people are notorious for having a revolutionary spirit.  People grow conservative once they are older and feel like they have to take care of things (making sure they have money for retirement and a stable place to be).  This younger generation (which I am a part of, so I guess I am hypocritical) hasn't met hardship yet.  We seem to think that things are terrible and that changing them has to make them better, but abrupt change (revolutions, take a look at Latin America in during their revolutionary era) leads to instability and true hardship.

Much to my dismay, I cannot change minds and will just sit and watch as this change runs us into the ground as have many a failed revolution.

This is a tangent, but I also despise people who wear Che Guevara shirts and express their coolness that way.  If you feel that everything is going to hell in a handbasket, I cannot argue you, but only use him as a symbol for the revolutionary spirit.  From being a Latin American studies geek I find Che's ideology very belligerent.  If you are a hippie looking for revolution you may have chosen the wrong symbol for revolutionary spirit.  The aspect that nearly splits my side with laughter is when the suburban middle class US wears Che memorabilia.  Unless I am mistaken, these people probably epitomize Che's enemies. He probably wanted them dead.

Do Che shirt wearers support Obama? I wish I knew.  It looks like revolutionary spirit doesn't die with the times, it will probably stay in specific age groups.

My hope for Obama is that he can unite a nation and be able to restore some faith in a nation where the president is little more than an easy way to crack a joke.  Bush jokes are now becoming easier to make than Michael Jackson jokes.  What does this tell you?

Week from hell... I am just tired and may feel like commenting more when my eyes don't feel like they have been liquified

The sun still shines though you're not here
It's a cold sun though, barely warms even a fly
Flies have fallen from the cold too

I hear your voice wherever I go
It echoes in my ears and almost haunts my mind
Not haunt, for haunt implies fear
I hear laughter, some nondescript sarcasm
but overall a nicety that shall forever ring in everyone's ears

Your laughter was contagious
Not false and somewhat infectious
I can only wish you the best, wherever you may be
and hope all those you have touched find some peace
Maybe they will see the shining sun