BARACK OBAMA: inauguration day
On January twentieth
It was Barack Obama's day.
So many came to worship him
I thought that God had come to stay.
God didn't though; and where God is
I'm certain God will be annoyed
That once again the voters think
This President can fill the void.
Obama could have led the way
Toward the change we all ignore.
Instead he left the 'law' that says
The President we must adore.
My hope for real change has been dashed.
I wished not for another star.
It says we're "equal"; if that's so
We should praise each for who we are.
We each should have our own parade
To celebrate what we can be.
For President and cobbler too
We should recite some poetry.
The Presidency can't contain
More meaning than in mending shoes.
Perpetuation of this myth
Ensures more of our life we'll lose.
The change that leaves us "equal" all,
To "happiness" and "life" pursue,
Is not the President's to make.
It's something only we can do.
If each of us dispelled the "myth",
Which is a major source of strife,
Without Obama signing law
We could inaugurate new life.
Barack Obama: attack on greed
Barack Obama: a cautionary view
Barack Obama: fighting for change
Barack Obama: victory speech
Barack Obama: my hope
Barack Obama: professing change
Barack Obama: sacrificing lives
Barack Obama: healthcare
Barack Obama: his Gulf oil war
Barack Obama: winning the future
Thursday, January 15, 2009 at 11:01AM
Reader Comments (7)
Beautiful poem
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extraordinarily beautiful comment. Thank you. Doug.E.Barr
By that logic we should abandon Christmas because it's the celebration of a single, probably mythical, person. This poem is hogwash because it's dishonest. It's just another "bandwagon" piece that rids the coattails of a person or event for reflected glory and recognition. I assure you, author, that even you don't feel as your poem indicates.
Be honest in your writing and, even if I disagree with it, I'll applaud you. This poem is not honest and should be re-written.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your assessment of the logic is correct. Your assessments of me and my poem are incorrect. Doug.E.Barr
Yes - my quick comment was unfair. Please accept my apologies. I fired it off blithely and it came off much more severe than I intended. I posted a more thorough explanation of why I feel the way I do on my blog: http://binarybiker.blogspot.com .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am sorry. I too busy today. Perhaps some of my visitors will be interested in reading about your thoughts on my poem on your site. Doug.E.Barr
01/21 It took me all day yesterday before I finally felt I understood why you accused me of being dishonest. What prevented me from understanding immediately were the apparently irreconcilable phrases "band wagon" and "rid the coattails". It was only after I realized you probably meant to write "ride the coattails" that I was able to guess you might have been trying to say I was taking advantage of the moment to make a philosophical point that in your view is only tangential to the inauguration ceremonies; and that using "Barack Obama: inauguration day" as my title was therefore dishonest.
You would be correct if I didn't see the trappings of the presidency (or the papacy, or the monarchy) as the epitome of what I have been calling for 40 years the preeminence reaction to the void, one of 8 self-destructive efforts to fill the void in our lives, which incidentally include religions. The preeminence reaction is motivated by the perceived need to be the richest, best, in this case the most powerful and so on in order to fill "the void".
Now, trying to fill the void in any combination of the 8 ways may very well be the end goal of our billion year old evolutionary process. Judging by the evidence though, my sense is that continuing all efforts to fill the void will bring an end to our evolutionary process. It might not happen this time and it may not matter. However, at the moment I still feel like pointing out that the system of organizing humanity which results in the situation where the guy at the top gets to install a basketball court in his house while millions of guys at the bottom have to play basketball on asphalt, with hoops without nets, is not sustainable; and I should not be accused of being dishonest for using the occasion of Barack Obama's inauguration to make my observation that despite the rhetoric "all men are (not) created equal".
Had Barack Obama concluded his oratory of change with, "Yes we can..create a society in which there is no need for the designations upper class, middle class, lower class and no class; yes we can..eliminate the need for the words privileged and underprivileged, fortunate and less fortunate, rich and poor and so on, I would not have been able to write my poem or title it the way I did, honestly. As it is, I wrote my poem honestly with the hope that in some small way it will help usher in a period in history in which the Declaration of Independence for all humanity will not be just irrelevant words on a dusty piece of paper. Doug.E.Barr
Doug;
Just red your reply above to me. You're quite the idealistic philosopher; this is turning out to be a very interesting discussion. I want to key into the word "idealistic." I saw elements of communism, spiritualism, and pity for the human condition in your reply. You want true equality, lament the fact that humans are all alone inside their heads, and suggest that there are ways people can deal with knowledge of their own mortality. For that is what the "void" is - humans are the only species on this planet with knowledge that he will die.
This knowledge brings us no happiness, in most cases. This knowledge, of our own mortality, creates religion, anxiety, suffering, useless bargaining, and endless quests for unbounded self-gratification in this life. Much of the self-destruction of which you speak. We all deal with the Gilgamesh Problem at some point in our lives.
Idealistic, you are, because you hope for better from humanity. You want a society of true equality. I'm not sure that's even a laudable dream, Doug. But then, all I know is capitalistic democracy. I want to get ahead. I want to better my situation and the situation of my loved ones. My circle of friends and loved ones is more important to me than yours. Or anyone else's. That's just the way it is; that's human.
Can we rise above? Maybe. I can envision it, but if the creating of true equality means LESSENING my control, power, influence, and stature - I don't want it. If everyone can be raised UP, great - but I do not want to step down. Again - that's human. That's our evolution, as you say.
Obama is not a savior. He will not change the basic precepts of democracy and capitalism in this nation. I know this. I support him BECAUSE of it. More than any other culture on this planet, Doug, the capitalistic democracy of the United States has done good and raised the global standard. When a better way truly becomes available, I'll consider it. I just haven't seen it yet.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I just finished responding to Chris. I need a break. Later. DEB
01/22 How are you today? I hope your are feeling well enough to read and write. When I read your account about how chemo is affecting you on your blog last night my first reaction was "that really sucks". I hope you live somewhere warm so you can go for a ride on your motorcycle.
You can get the impression I am an idealistic philosopher when reading single pieces of writing but if you were to read my precis I think you will agree that I am rather, a realistic analyst. I have used "reason and argument in seeking truth and knowledge of (life)"...which is the definition of philosophy but I don't appreciate the academic connotation. Similarly, although I see in all of us a measure of the 'ideal" I regard "life in its true nature and (explain) it...", a slightly modified definition of realist.
Communism I will accept if you allow me to define it as "working together for the common purpose of individual and consequently collective self-realization. To me spiritualism is religion lite and therefore not acceptable in my view. However, I do understand spirit, which I also define in my precis, to be one of the four facets of our common human nature. You correctly conclude I lament our "human condition" because truly all men were "created equal" but when men took control of creation they created inequality and thus separated us so we feel "all alone inside our heads."
Here is my short essay on "the void". There is an "ideal", as in best suited to our needs, reaction that results in self-realization. A measure of the ideal reaction is a condition of life but it can be more than minimal. If I said more I'd be copying my precis and that doesn't make much sense. In it you will also find "religion, anxiety, suffering...and endless quests for unbounded self-gratification" which is a fairly good definition of our materialistic reaction to the void.
Capitalist democracy is the consequence of our materialistic reaction to the void, an effort to fill the void with money and the "endless" list of stuff it buys. If you try to fill the void with money you have to "get ahead" because the void cannot be filled with money or any of the other 7 ways we can try. Can there be any doubt given the evidence of our current financial crisis that more is simply not enough. Similarly there can be no doubt that more "control, power, influence, or stature" will never be enough. The need to have a "circle of friends and loved ones more important to me than yours" is reasonable considering the isolating effects of our efforts to fill the void; but it is not a natural need.
What happens in life is that we each blend a measure of the ideal reaction and a complementary measure of trying to fill the void, the self-destructive absolutely restrictive reaction. (you will have to read about it) All our individual resultant reactions to the void create a resultant reaction of humanity that is somewhere between the ideal and absolutely restrictive. In my assessment our resultant reaction to the void positions humanity closer to self-destruction than self-realization. I don't know if there is time but to quote President Obama, "Yes we can" raise our resultant reaction above its present level. "Yes we can" make the necessary healing change to move it closer to the ideal. However, I don't think we can, as he seems to propose, raise the level of humanity by repairing the 'vehicle' that has brought us to our current level; but I will wait like everyone else to see.
The major engine in this 'vehicle' are the western capitalist democracies, lead by the United States as you say, that have developed under the influence of our materialistic reaction to the void. We have created a god the economy upon which we depend for jobs and which is currently on life support. That cannot be good. In our efforts to "get ahead" we are consuming resources at an unsustainable rate. If we think our current conflicts are bad, wait until, for example, the citizens of Atlanta begin looking up stream for water to drink; and wait until raising ocean levels force coastal dwellers inland looking for land. I don't think it is going to be good. There is no dispute among rational scientists that the consequences of our consumption is raising the temperature of our oceans. One of the least publicized results is that jelly fish populations are squeezing the life out of the marine populations we haven't yet eaten to extinction. This can't be good. However, I have an open mind and I am willing to listen to any explanation of how we have "done good" and what "global standard" we have raised because "I...haven't seen it yet. Doug.E.Barr
I suggest you two check your motives. Your comments smack of intellectual bullying, which makes you look pretty ugly.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where ever you are Felix, I am sorry and I thank you for helping me to refocus. I have deleted all the exchanges between the "two" of us, that were about poetry. Henceforth if a comment is about poetry I will delete it. If the comment is about life I will respond which is all I ever wanted to do. I must say though, I resent being described as "pretty ugly". Doug.E.Barr
We're so full of propaganda that it's a breath of fresh air to see someone speak plainly about events in front us.
I hope we can appreciate the analysis without the 7 layers of self-referencing rhetoric.
Every man has a right to tell the truth regardless their intent or ability (or lack thereof) to self examine.
Honesty begins with the truth not with a finished project.
Truth being a revolutionary act, let's appreciate every drop.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It would seem that Intelitary Milligence is a sign of intelligence. Doug.E.Barr
Doug, I wasn't calling you ugly. My comment was adressed to the two prevoius commenters. There were two right?
I must say though, I find your moderation efforts a little draconian, I was simply making an observation - not calling for the posts to be removed!
regards
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are a good guy Felix. After deleting the crudest I was one of the two creating the distraction. I didn't really believe you called me "pretty ugly". My sense was you were describing an ugly situation. My reference to it was an attempt at humor. For a few hours on the 20th and the 20th I too thought I should allow the criticisms to stand because I feared being criticized for not being able to stand criticism. However, as I was beginning a second defense of my poetic presentations I decided with the help of your observation, that debating opinions about poetry was not something I wanted to do. I could spend the rest of my life defending my poetry for opinions are like anuses, everyone has one. Now if someone wants to talk to me about my ideas, those I will gladly spend the rest of my life discussing. Deleting those posts was not at all Draconian. It was necessary to eliminate an ugly distraction, two guys arguing the merits of poetry that have nothing to do with the ideas it expresses. Thanks again for your interest. Doug.E.Barr
I just reread your post but rather than rewrite mine I am adding a post script. There were two flame throwers and if you say you were directing your comment to them then you were thoughtfully questioning their motives on my behalf; and I don't mind that you called those guys "pretty ugly". So I have to thank you twice, first for coming to my defense and then for inadvertently helping me come to my senses. D.E.B