B: I know you hate it when I talk politics
DI: Personally, I’m fascinated- it’s just that I can hear the torrent of readers clicking away in either boredom or outright political hostility
B: But now that 40 Senate Republicans have voted in favor of it, it’s long past time we talk about the Ryan budget.
DI: Okay. But as compensation for the good folks for putting up with you, we add in another scene in our Wonder Woman pilot script.
B: Fine.
DI: But first, because not everyone spends as much time plugged into the political debate as you, give us the basics of what the Ryan budget is.
B: In a nutshell, what this plan does, is carve about 3 trillion dollars out of Medicare and Medicaid, and hand out about 3 trillion dollars to corporations and the rich in tax cuts. It’s practically a straight swap.
There are vague murmurs in the plan to do things to offset the tax cuts, namely ending tax breaks, but given the general hostility to those measures in the past, anything that isn’t carved in stone and signed in blood is about as believable as the promise of a unicorn pony for your birthday.
DI: So you’re saying because it’s harder to do, it just won’t get done?
B: I’m stating that by not even listing which tax breaks he wants to end, Ryan is signaling, discreetly, that he doesn’t really want to end any of them. But what’s shocking is that this isn’t coming from some lone nut- it isn’t one of those Ron Paul ideas. Paul Ryan is the guy they put in charge of the House Budget Committee. Under the auspices of the Republican party, he drafted this budget, and 235 out of 239 Republicans in the House voted for this budget; and now 40 Republican Senators. If the party had their way, this would be our country.
Now, you can make the argument that maybe they didn’t read the bill, that they were just following orders, but is that really a better outcome? Either those representatives are incompetent, or they’re vicious, bordering upon evil.
DI: There aren’t any supervillains in this debate to punch- but I seem to remember you mentioning something else; your background is in business, so as a businessman, how does this look to you?
B: As a budget, the absolute worst portion is the fact that it caps revenue. Capping at a historical average doesn’t make sense. The cost of our military, and of our healthcare, and of so many functions of our government, have gone up. And more than anything, it’s the cost of health care that’s expected to cause future budgetary issues. We do have a revenue issue- caused in large part by the Bush Tax cuts. I’d like to share a graph, here.
DI: Okay. But you said yourself earlier in the year that everyone was going to have to sacrifice. Isn’t the Ryan plan what sacrifice looks like?
B: For the poor and elderly, yes. And if our budget were that dire, maybe everyone would have to suffer to that extent. But this is America, and we’re still the richest country in the world. By miles. Our economy is almost 3 times the size of China’s, and is about the size of the economies of the entire European Union.
It’s entirely within our grasp to balance our budget without cutting these programs to the bone. The Progressive Caucus in the House put out a plan that balances the budget in a decade. During that time, it would cut the debt by 10%. I don’t want to belabor this too much, but it goes far beyond just. I’m not even making a case for this specific budget- merely that this budget is far more logical and centrist than the Ryan budget plan, and that we needn’t behave like we’re going from a first world to a third world nation.
This argument is about a different view of America. The Progressive budget attempts to keep the country’s position as a leader, not just financially, but as a leader in technology and ideas. It’s about securing our place in this century, comparable to our place in the last. I have sons- adopted, yes- but I love them enough that I don’t want to give them a diminished America. The Progressive budget proves we don’t have to- certainly not to the extent Ryan wishes.
Look, I don’t care if people don’t think the same way I do, I don’t care if they come to different conclusions. But we need to think these things through. We need to know what it is we’re endorsing when we vote. The fate of our nation is very much at stake, here.
DI: All right, monkey, you’ve had your say, now dance for the people.
B: Uh, where were we?
DI: We’d just gotten through that first opening moment with the interviewer, and Diana’s impassioned defense of force.
B: Right.
DI: Interviewer
I’d like to switch gears. You wear a lot of hats- most of them tiaras- but how do you balance your roles?
B: Diana considers.
Diana
It’s mostly a question of need, and of impact. Sometimes it means I have to make difficult decisions. But thankfully, most diplomatic meetings can be rescheduled, whereas interventions can’t. I really feel bad for Etta; she’s the one who gets yelled at by foreign secretaries while I’m out saving people.
DI: Interviewer
Well, the reason I ask this is because recently you were involved in an incident. The so-called Wellys Affair. If the reports are to be believed, this even put you at odds with the vigilante knows as Batman. Would you like to tell us more about that?
We cut to daytime. Her punching you through that second floor window in the embassy- I’m sure you remember the picture, the one that was on the front page of USA Today, starting our story in media res.
B: Thanks for that. We see Diana look out the hole where the window used to be. She’s full of fury, in that instant after she threw that punch that cracked a few of my ribs. She takes a breath, and she’s suddenly calm again. She steps through the hole, and floats gracefully down to the sidewalk where I landed. A pedestrian, several of whom have gathered, helps me up. We stay in my POV, because we want me not to be the story. Her expression is pained.
Diana
I’m sorry for that. But the embassy is my home. I won’t let anyone remove a political asylum seeker from Themiscyran sole- not even you.
DI: But you can’t help yourself, can you? You choke out:
Bruce
She’s a murderer.
B: I hope you enjoyed putting words in my mouth.
Diana
She’s under my protection. That’s all you need to know.
It becomes clear that the crowd isn’t just pedestrians, as several of the people begin asking Diana questions, and one of them starts taking pictures. One voice, a reporter we’re both familiar with, breaks through the crowd.
Lois
Lois Lane, Daily Planet. Diana. Are you saying, point of factly, that you are prepared to defend a murder suspect from justice, including other members of the League such as
Lois turns to gesture to me, but I’m grappling away. She turns back to Diana, hoping for an answer, but she’s already flying back inside the embassy.
DI: Wow. Now I’d buy that for a nickel. You think we’ve made enough story progression for a commercial break? After all, Wonder Woman is bound to sell mountains of tampons and panty hose. Do they still advertise panty-hose on TV? Am I dating myself with that?
B: We follow Diana back into the embassy. A young girl, Danielle Wellys, is terrified.
DI: You do have that effect on people.
B: Wellys
Is he gone?
DI: Diana
He won’t stay away. He can’t. I can’t protect you here indefinitely.
B: Not exactly what she said- but not a terrible guess, either.
Diana (cont’d)
So you need to tell me everything you can about Cale Pharmaceuticals.
DI: No way. Veronica Cale’s company?
B: You forgot, so far this is all based around something that happened- so we can use her name. And Cale Pharmaceuticals is just a tiny portion of Cale’s empire. But it was her first- her baby- and she takes its flagging business personally. She sees Diana’s successes as easy, and her own failures as tragic. In many ways, Veronica is the Lex Luthor to Diana’s Superman; but I feel for Veronica. Maybe because she hasn’t, to this date, committed massive atrocities against civilian populations. Though what she did to Kapatelis was a step in that direction.
DI: You’re getting ahead of yourself- and possibly spoiling things.
B: Sorry. Now we cut to a commercial break.
DI: All that build-up, to cut to a commercial?
B: Always leave the people wanting more, remember?
DI: Crap, that was supposed to be my line.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Sir Charles
DI: Just to avoid any undue confusion from casual surfers with this title, I’m not looking to talk about the recent royal wedding; I wanted to bring up Charles Barkley (and the Round Mound of Rebound sounded a bit too dirty, to me).
B: I shudder to know why.
DI: Because he was quoted by the Washington Post, specifically talking about gays in the locker room. It was itself a reaction to Rick Welts, the President and CEO of the Phoenix Suns, coming out in a New York Times story.
B: Yeah, I know Rick. Socially, though- not personally.
DI: But, and given the general abrasiveness of Barkley’s persona, maybe this will come as a shock, but he didn’t really care about it. He even said he knew at least two of the three teams he played for had homosexual players, and still had excellent chemistry, excellent morale and played decently well enough. Barkley specifically said he was less critical of good gay players than he was of bad straight ones.
B: That’s very enlightened.
DI: He also mentions that he gets irritated when ESPN says that players can’t come out, that there would be open hostility to gay players in the lockers rooms. And that he doesn’t like being told how he thinks or feels. He knew there were gay players. And it’s unfair, maybe even stupid, to assume that most athletes couldn’t handle that reality.
B: You know, there’s something to that. In the League, some of the guys you’d think would be the most sensitive to the subject- or even the most hostile- were the ones who’d say, “So?” I think it’s just one of those things, where the first time someone showers in the same room as a gay person, there can be tension, and they’re a little leery, but as time goes on and nothing untoward happens, they get used to it. It becomes less of a thing.
DI: They acclimate.
B: Right.
DI: Familiarity doesn’t breed contempt so much as acceptance.
B: Exactly. Even understanding. I remember, and I won’t say his name, but a member of our League had a very outspoken reaction to one of our colleagues coming out. So outspoken, that he was almost sanctioned for it.
DI: Sanctioned? What would that have entailed?
B: Basically we told him that if he couldn’t at a minimum keep what amounted nearly to hate speech in check, he wouldn’t be allowed to stay in the League.
And we kept him away from any of the known homosexuals, anytime we had missions. It’s one thing to ask someone to be civil, another entirely to put him into positions where he wasn’t comfortable. But on some of our bigger disaster responses, there’s no way to keep teams or individuals separate. So he ended up working with homosexual heroes in the field.
And last year, he ended up in an altercation, where a group of men were harassing a gay hero. And he intervened- loudly- on his behalf. He was very passionate. He’s got an explosive temper, so that’s maybe not surprising, but just being around gay people had helped him see that there wasn’t anything to hate there. And I’ve seen the same with Muslims, Jews- even women, actually, if you can believe that, in this day and age. People are uncomfortable with the unknown- until they get to know it. Then it becomes part of their experience, and mundane.
DI: To get back to Barkley just a moment, I think it all comes down to the locker room question, whether or not people feel comfortable showering around someone who thinks of them as a viable romantic candidate. Surely you’ve dealt with that in the League.
B: But that question itself is problematic, because inherently it implies that homosexuals are more promiscuous, to the point of pouncing on straight people without regard for the inappropriateness of a locker room come-on.
DI: But aren’t homosexuals more promiscuous? I mean, you’re probably a bad example, because when you were dating women you were a man-whore, and it seems now you’re more reserved, but in general, or maybe statistically.
B: But the statistics aren’t really the issue. Even if, and I don’t know that I’ve seen an untainted study to that effect, homosexuals are more promiscuous, that isn’t the same as being inappropriately sexually aggressive. And promiscuity likely comes, in part, from lacking the same kinds of social norms. Straight people are raised with the idyllic fairy tale of the picket-fenced house, the family with two and a half kids, and the virginal wedding. Gay people can’t have those things- though there are some available facsimiles like civil unions and adoption. But we’re still in the process of building the gay American dream.
But even beyond that, promiscuity isn’t the same as hitting on people in the restroom, or the showers, or the changing room, at work. And while we’re on the subject of inappropriate sexual expression, promiscuity and homosexuality are not the same as pedophelia, either.
DI: Whoa. I might play devil’s advocate, but I wasn’t-
B: You might not have been, and you’re likely smart enough not to, but the conflation can and does happen- far too frequently for it to be just a mistake. But for clarity, I’m going to say it again: being gay, even being gay and promiscuous, is not the same as inappropriate sexual expression. I understand that some people disagree with homosexuality, and might even consider it divergent, but even to them, it shouldn’t be hard to see the difference between divergent sex between consenting adults on the one hand and sexual molestation and harassment on the other.
DI: Trawling TNR, I came across more coverage of Barkley. I didn’t know he’s been mulling a Gubernatorial run in Alabama. He’s colorful, but I was actually a little surprised, I know, stereotyping athletes, but surprised at how wide and varied his ideas about politics are.
B: Yeah. Charles is an interesting and articulate guy.
DI: Throw in bright and clean and you can be just as offensive as the Vice President.
B: Please. Biden’s word-choice was problematic, but there wasn’t racial coding there.
DI: So one old white guy wants to give another old white guy a pass?
B: And the young white guy wants to get his ass kicked by an old white guy? If you give Biden reasonable doubt, that the meaning of clean was supposed to either imply clean-cut or to not have the baggage of a Jesse Jackson, then no, I don’t think it was racial coding. Joe doesn’t come from 1950s Mississippi, he’s from Delaware.
And what I’ve always taken away from the statement was him saying that Obama was a different kind of African American candidate- as opposed to Jackson or Sharpton- who wasn’t just running on a civil rights background; I think that was always the inherent issue with their candidacies- and by extension the candidacy of any mostly single-issue candidate.
DI: Though civil rights and race is more a point of view about issues than a single issue itself- but if you’re running as the African American candidate, who has fought for civil rights in your community, it does make it harder to win over voters outside of that group- especially when other groups often view civil rights as a zero sum game, where advancement for one group is at cost of another.
B: In that same ballpark, I assumed, back in 2007, I think it was, that Obama was sunk after people started openly questioning whether he was black enough.
DI: So do you think he is?
B: I think it’s an unbelievably stupid question. For one, any kind of a reductionist litmus test is absurd; it places a positive value on adhering to a stereotype. Am I rich enough? White enough? Gay enough? All pretty ludicrous questions.
DI: Then why were you concerned that the question was being asked about Obama?
B: Well, at the time he was still a relative unknown, politically. He’d only been on the national stage for three years. He’s a gifted speaker, and seemed like a smart enough guy. But if he couldn’t even solidify support amongst African Americans- a stronger voting bloc for the Democrats there isn’t, and who in the primary at least would have been more likely to give him the benefit of the doubt- I didn’t think he would be able to overcome Clinton. Of course, I now realize that was naïve. I was still giving the media more credit than it deserved for being relevant.
DI: So you’re saying the media isn’t relevant anymore?
B: I’m saying that its old position as a gatekeeper of information is no longer relevant- and that particularly today they aren’t even very good at it, anymore. The media has two basic goals in reportage: to inform and entertain. Both can get you ratings, though I think it’s fair to say entertainment value is king. But increasingly, media outlets chase entertainment like greyhounds after an electronic rabbit- and information is largely left to fend for itself. So the fact that a few people questioned Obama’s blackness- it was anecdotal, and in no way indicative of the general mood of African American voters- which meant it was even less relevant as a gauge of American voters in general.
DI: I want to go back, because as a journalist it’s always fun to accuse somebody of racism in the form of a question [with all due serendipitous apology to both David Gregory and Newt Gingrich]: why would you think African American voters would have a biased affinity for a black candidate?
B: Because statistics don’t lie: voters want to vote for people like themselves. This is true of race. Of gender. Of class. Even personality, to an extent. If Al Gore had been as personable as George W. Bush, he would have been President- way beyond the margin of a few hundred contested votes from Florida.
It’s not the only factor. Policies matter. Experience matters. Name recognition matters. But if a voter can connect themselves with a candidate, everything else is easier. And for African Americans, the pulled up by his bootstraps Obama from relative poverty and obscurity is certainly more relatable than the white-privileged Southern lawyer who stuck by her cheating President husband. Demographically, if Obama couldn’t win over African Americans, he could never have beaten Clinton, and would have fared even worse in the general. Not because African American votes are that large a bloc, but because if he can’t connect with those most likely to relate to him, then the chances of his relating to anyone are lower.
DI: And that’s not racist?
B: No, it’s evolutionary. We like people like us because those like us were more likely to help us survive. Those who didn’t group together fared poorer; those who grouped well thrived. But the easiest grouping, the most comfortable, is the familiar. You can trust them because they’re like you, and from nearby, and want similar things. It’s just a look back into man’s evolutionary history. Perhaps it’s a little… vestigial, at this point, but it doesn’t make it any less real.
And at the same time, in this country, it’s impossible to recognize that there are differences to growing up black in this country as opposed to white. It’s still fair to say there’s a black experience that, at least generally, differs from the white experience in America.
DI: But isn’t a lot of that the same kind of liberal apologia that you hear about African American crime rates?
B: There are no excuses. None. For going into crime. But it’s short-sighted and foolish not to look at the circumstances that create crime, and try to mitigate them. Because fighting crime is a losing battle. I’ve done it for years, and barely made a dent. But the work I’ve done with the poor, with youth centers and charities, with organizations that provide scholarships and educational resources- that work has done more actual, measurable good than all of my costumed exploits. Eight years ago I actually ahd Oracle start tracking the statistics, so I can say this is a fact: depriving crime the fertile soil of poverty in which to grow is the best way to stop it. Period. Whenever there’s need, there’s going to be crime.
DI: But also wherever there’s greed.
B: That’s true. But greed’s a tougher thing to stamp out; and ironically, greed is often what creates need in the first place. And greed is something for law enforcement to cope with; need is something we can all impact.
B: I shudder to know why.
DI: Because he was quoted by the Washington Post, specifically talking about gays in the locker room. It was itself a reaction to Rick Welts, the President and CEO of the Phoenix Suns, coming out in a New York Times story.
B: Yeah, I know Rick. Socially, though- not personally.
DI: But, and given the general abrasiveness of Barkley’s persona, maybe this will come as a shock, but he didn’t really care about it. He even said he knew at least two of the three teams he played for had homosexual players, and still had excellent chemistry, excellent morale and played decently well enough. Barkley specifically said he was less critical of good gay players than he was of bad straight ones.
B: That’s very enlightened.
DI: He also mentions that he gets irritated when ESPN says that players can’t come out, that there would be open hostility to gay players in the lockers rooms. And that he doesn’t like being told how he thinks or feels. He knew there were gay players. And it’s unfair, maybe even stupid, to assume that most athletes couldn’t handle that reality.
B: You know, there’s something to that. In the League, some of the guys you’d think would be the most sensitive to the subject- or even the most hostile- were the ones who’d say, “So?” I think it’s just one of those things, where the first time someone showers in the same room as a gay person, there can be tension, and they’re a little leery, but as time goes on and nothing untoward happens, they get used to it. It becomes less of a thing.
DI: They acclimate.
B: Right.
DI: Familiarity doesn’t breed contempt so much as acceptance.
B: Exactly. Even understanding. I remember, and I won’t say his name, but a member of our League had a very outspoken reaction to one of our colleagues coming out. So outspoken, that he was almost sanctioned for it.
DI: Sanctioned? What would that have entailed?
B: Basically we told him that if he couldn’t at a minimum keep what amounted nearly to hate speech in check, he wouldn’t be allowed to stay in the League.
And we kept him away from any of the known homosexuals, anytime we had missions. It’s one thing to ask someone to be civil, another entirely to put him into positions where he wasn’t comfortable. But on some of our bigger disaster responses, there’s no way to keep teams or individuals separate. So he ended up working with homosexual heroes in the field.
And last year, he ended up in an altercation, where a group of men were harassing a gay hero. And he intervened- loudly- on his behalf. He was very passionate. He’s got an explosive temper, so that’s maybe not surprising, but just being around gay people had helped him see that there wasn’t anything to hate there. And I’ve seen the same with Muslims, Jews- even women, actually, if you can believe that, in this day and age. People are uncomfortable with the unknown- until they get to know it. Then it becomes part of their experience, and mundane.
DI: To get back to Barkley just a moment, I think it all comes down to the locker room question, whether or not people feel comfortable showering around someone who thinks of them as a viable romantic candidate. Surely you’ve dealt with that in the League.
B: But that question itself is problematic, because inherently it implies that homosexuals are more promiscuous, to the point of pouncing on straight people without regard for the inappropriateness of a locker room come-on.
DI: But aren’t homosexuals more promiscuous? I mean, you’re probably a bad example, because when you were dating women you were a man-whore, and it seems now you’re more reserved, but in general, or maybe statistically.
B: But the statistics aren’t really the issue. Even if, and I don’t know that I’ve seen an untainted study to that effect, homosexuals are more promiscuous, that isn’t the same as being inappropriately sexually aggressive. And promiscuity likely comes, in part, from lacking the same kinds of social norms. Straight people are raised with the idyllic fairy tale of the picket-fenced house, the family with two and a half kids, and the virginal wedding. Gay people can’t have those things- though there are some available facsimiles like civil unions and adoption. But we’re still in the process of building the gay American dream.
But even beyond that, promiscuity isn’t the same as hitting on people in the restroom, or the showers, or the changing room, at work. And while we’re on the subject of inappropriate sexual expression, promiscuity and homosexuality are not the same as pedophelia, either.
DI: Whoa. I might play devil’s advocate, but I wasn’t-
B: You might not have been, and you’re likely smart enough not to, but the conflation can and does happen- far too frequently for it to be just a mistake. But for clarity, I’m going to say it again: being gay, even being gay and promiscuous, is not the same as inappropriate sexual expression. I understand that some people disagree with homosexuality, and might even consider it divergent, but even to them, it shouldn’t be hard to see the difference between divergent sex between consenting adults on the one hand and sexual molestation and harassment on the other.
DI: Trawling TNR, I came across more coverage of Barkley. I didn’t know he’s been mulling a Gubernatorial run in Alabama. He’s colorful, but I was actually a little surprised, I know, stereotyping athletes, but surprised at how wide and varied his ideas about politics are.
B: Yeah. Charles is an interesting and articulate guy.
DI: Throw in bright and clean and you can be just as offensive as the Vice President.
B: Please. Biden’s word-choice was problematic, but there wasn’t racial coding there.
DI: So one old white guy wants to give another old white guy a pass?
B: And the young white guy wants to get his ass kicked by an old white guy? If you give Biden reasonable doubt, that the meaning of clean was supposed to either imply clean-cut or to not have the baggage of a Jesse Jackson, then no, I don’t think it was racial coding. Joe doesn’t come from 1950s Mississippi, he’s from Delaware.
And what I’ve always taken away from the statement was him saying that Obama was a different kind of African American candidate- as opposed to Jackson or Sharpton- who wasn’t just running on a civil rights background; I think that was always the inherent issue with their candidacies- and by extension the candidacy of any mostly single-issue candidate.
DI: Though civil rights and race is more a point of view about issues than a single issue itself- but if you’re running as the African American candidate, who has fought for civil rights in your community, it does make it harder to win over voters outside of that group- especially when other groups often view civil rights as a zero sum game, where advancement for one group is at cost of another.
B: In that same ballpark, I assumed, back in 2007, I think it was, that Obama was sunk after people started openly questioning whether he was black enough.
DI: So do you think he is?
B: I think it’s an unbelievably stupid question. For one, any kind of a reductionist litmus test is absurd; it places a positive value on adhering to a stereotype. Am I rich enough? White enough? Gay enough? All pretty ludicrous questions.
DI: Then why were you concerned that the question was being asked about Obama?
B: Well, at the time he was still a relative unknown, politically. He’d only been on the national stage for three years. He’s a gifted speaker, and seemed like a smart enough guy. But if he couldn’t even solidify support amongst African Americans- a stronger voting bloc for the Democrats there isn’t, and who in the primary at least would have been more likely to give him the benefit of the doubt- I didn’t think he would be able to overcome Clinton. Of course, I now realize that was naïve. I was still giving the media more credit than it deserved for being relevant.
DI: So you’re saying the media isn’t relevant anymore?
B: I’m saying that its old position as a gatekeeper of information is no longer relevant- and that particularly today they aren’t even very good at it, anymore. The media has two basic goals in reportage: to inform and entertain. Both can get you ratings, though I think it’s fair to say entertainment value is king. But increasingly, media outlets chase entertainment like greyhounds after an electronic rabbit- and information is largely left to fend for itself. So the fact that a few people questioned Obama’s blackness- it was anecdotal, and in no way indicative of the general mood of African American voters- which meant it was even less relevant as a gauge of American voters in general.
DI: I want to go back, because as a journalist it’s always fun to accuse somebody of racism in the form of a question [with all due serendipitous apology to both David Gregory and Newt Gingrich]: why would you think African American voters would have a biased affinity for a black candidate?
B: Because statistics don’t lie: voters want to vote for people like themselves. This is true of race. Of gender. Of class. Even personality, to an extent. If Al Gore had been as personable as George W. Bush, he would have been President- way beyond the margin of a few hundred contested votes from Florida.
It’s not the only factor. Policies matter. Experience matters. Name recognition matters. But if a voter can connect themselves with a candidate, everything else is easier. And for African Americans, the pulled up by his bootstraps Obama from relative poverty and obscurity is certainly more relatable than the white-privileged Southern lawyer who stuck by her cheating President husband. Demographically, if Obama couldn’t win over African Americans, he could never have beaten Clinton, and would have fared even worse in the general. Not because African American votes are that large a bloc, but because if he can’t connect with those most likely to relate to him, then the chances of his relating to anyone are lower.
DI: And that’s not racist?
B: No, it’s evolutionary. We like people like us because those like us were more likely to help us survive. Those who didn’t group together fared poorer; those who grouped well thrived. But the easiest grouping, the most comfortable, is the familiar. You can trust them because they’re like you, and from nearby, and want similar things. It’s just a look back into man’s evolutionary history. Perhaps it’s a little… vestigial, at this point, but it doesn’t make it any less real.
And at the same time, in this country, it’s impossible to recognize that there are differences to growing up black in this country as opposed to white. It’s still fair to say there’s a black experience that, at least generally, differs from the white experience in America.
DI: But isn’t a lot of that the same kind of liberal apologia that you hear about African American crime rates?
B: There are no excuses. None. For going into crime. But it’s short-sighted and foolish not to look at the circumstances that create crime, and try to mitigate them. Because fighting crime is a losing battle. I’ve done it for years, and barely made a dent. But the work I’ve done with the poor, with youth centers and charities, with organizations that provide scholarships and educational resources- that work has done more actual, measurable good than all of my costumed exploits. Eight years ago I actually ahd Oracle start tracking the statistics, so I can say this is a fact: depriving crime the fertile soil of poverty in which to grow is the best way to stop it. Period. Whenever there’s need, there’s going to be crime.
DI: But also wherever there’s greed.
B: That’s true. But greed’s a tougher thing to stamp out; and ironically, greed is often what creates need in the first place. And greed is something for law enforcement to cope with; need is something we can all impact.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Pilot Error
DI: So you might be happy to hear that the Wonder Woman pilot was scrapped.
B: I’d heard rumblings. But of the many issues I had with the show, I think one of the most important aspects should be why she signed off on it in the first place.
DI: And why do you think that was?
B: You forget, I know her. And she told me. She’s unintentionally built up this persona, this almost allegation in the public sphere, for perfection. She chided me for perpetuating, it, actually. But she isn’t perfect.
She has thoughts. And fears. And even inconsistencies. She wanted people to be able to see what and who she’s really like. Because I think there’s a perception out there, either that she’s the Venus de Milo, perfection in stone, or that she’s just “superhero Barbie.” Even her activism is treated with the same derision that movie stars speaking about politics is.
DI: Hmm. I think I want to try something different. Between the two of us, I’m a writer, and you’re intimately familiar with her. So let’s give writing her pilot a shot. Right now. In real time.
The framing device, because I’m a uncreative journalist, is an interview setting. It creates an easy context for us to get viewers into Diana’s head without cheesy voice-overs or even cheesier girls-night-outing.
But we open on Diana, sleeping.
B: She’s mussed, but still oddly beautiful. Even asleep.
DI: Overlaid, we hear the voice of another woman:
Interviewer
Walk us through your typical day.
Diana’s eyes flutter open.
B: Diana
I wake up around 7 am.
DI: Cut to the interviewer, in smart business attire, sitting in Diana’s office, comfortable and even welcoming, but with an aura of respectability- after all, it’s also an embassy.
Interviewer
So you do sleep?
B: Diana laughs.
Diana
Five or six hours a night.
DI: We cut back to Diana, rising from bed.
B: Diana (voice-over)
I used to exercise in the morning, jog through Central Park. But these days, I jump right into business. My morning secretary, Etta, has been up since five, and she briefs me on my day’s activities, and anything that happened overnight.
DI: Etta enters, and they converse, unheard.
B: Diana (voice-over)
We eat breakfast together, usually something light, bagels and sliced fruit.
DI: We see the things you’re describing happen, so I don’t have to keep interrupting.
B: Diana (VO)
Usually by nine there’s important embassy work, meeting with dignitaries.
DI: We cut back for a moment to the interview.
B: Diana
My position as an ambassador means I get to help solve world problems. It’s gratifying, but it’s also necessary; that’s why it comes at the beginning of my day- it’s where I have the least give.
DI: Cut back to her day.
B: Diana (VO)
From there, I usually proceed to fundraisers or events. I usually spend the bulk of my daylight hours volunteering. Broken up occasionally by having to intervene in a situation.
DI: Cut back.
Interviewer
You mean fight crime.
B: Cut to Diana in costume, hoisting a gunman’s hands over his head, using her lasso thrown over a fire escape as a fulcrum, as a gray-haired woman he was mugging acts surprised.
Diana (VO)
Some might call it that.
The sounds of the interview fade away, and the background sounds of New York City fade in.
DI: I didn’t realize she operates out of New York.
B: She’s an ambassador to the UN. Where else would she be?
DI: Good point.
B: But we see Diana talking to the gunman, who is young, and nods his head. The sound fades in on Diana speaking. She’s soft, and intense a moment later.
Diana
Life is a gift. I love life- and I hate taking its gift away.
The gunman by this point is remorseful- and just the tiniest bit afraid.
Diana
So tell me: have you seen the error in your ways?
The moment is tense, and when he finally speaks, he’s nearly crying.
Gunman
Yes.
Her lasso, still around his wrists, glows brighter. She loosens it, and lets him go.
Diana
Go.
DI: The old woman is still there. She’s less happy about the escaping hoodlum.
Bitty
You should have punched his damn head off.
B: Diana isn’t surprised by the reaction. She walks with the old woman a moment.
Diana
Revenge is an easy answer. But it leaves part of the question nagging- to be asked again. I pray your safety and health.
DI: Wait- does that actually work?
B: Shockingly enough, it does. It wouldn’t, for me. I would have knocked his fool head off. But Diana, she has a presence. A certain quality that when she says things like that, people listen. Really just sit up and take notice. I’m actually referring to something I saw one day. And at the time I was pissed at her. I thought she let a mugger go free only to stick a gun in somebody else’s face. And given my history, that pushed buttons. So I tracked the guy. On his way home, he pawned the gun. From his address, I got his name, and kept track of him. He works for the sanitation department now, not so much as a parking ticket since.
Her approach works. New York has recidivism rates as high as 65%. Educational programs like the one at Rikers can cut that by ten percent. But Diana, less than a third of the people she talks to recidivate. She isn’t perfect. But you can see it in everything about her, that she tries. She’s an example for people to strive for. She makes you really want to be better.
DI: But don’t you think that in a way she’s an unachievable goal? I mean, she isn’t technically human, even.
B: Maybe. But I would place her more in the category with Michael Phelps, people who are extraordinary, and beyond the reach of normal people- but should still be held up as goals, achievable or otherwise. But you’re derailing our pilot: we cut back to the interview.
Diana
By this point Etta has gone home for the day, and my evening secretary, Mala, takes over for her.
Interviewer
Mala- she’s Amazonian, like yourself, right?
Diana
Yes. Officially, she’s deputy ambassador. But effectively, she helps me with the day to day; she’s usually the person in the chair at the UN. But my evenings are largely taken up by charity and awareness dinners. It sounds more fantastic than it is: squeezing into a dress to shake hands with dignitaries or wealthy socialites.
DI: Interviewer
Like Bruce Wayne?
B: Diana
Bruce and I are friends.
DI: Interviewer
That isn’t what US Weekly said.
B: Diana
He’s a humanitarian and a philanthropist. And we’ve known each other for years. But we aren’t together.
DI: Interviewer
So that means US Weekly was wrong, and both you and Bruce are on the market.
B: Diana
I won’t speak for Bruce, but I don’t really have the time. For every charity event I attend, there were three I couldn’t because they conflicted. And with all the preventable suffering in the world, looking for love just isn’t a priority.
DI: Interviewer
Apparently not- if even a billionaire playboy doesn’t catch your eye. Er. Sorry. But it sounds like you have a very busy schedule. But what does Wonder Woman do for fun?
B: Diana pauses a moment to think, then smiles.
Diana
This. I enjoy spending time with people. When I get free time, I like to read, the classics, poetry. I have a soft spot for Aristophanes- my mother read me Lysistrata when I was a girl.
DI: Interview
Seems a little crass for children’s literature.
B: Diana
But it was informative. Themyscira was founded by women looking for a different way. The Amazons co-existed with men for centuries, but left, when Amazons decided that men would always seek war and conflict. My ambassadorship is the reverse, trying to reach out the olive branch we learned to live by.
DI: Interview
By hitting people in the face?
B: Diana
Sometimes force is the only way to achieve justice, and justice is the only way to achieve peace.
DI: Interviewer
When liberty comes with her hands dabbled in blood, it is hard to shake hands with her.
B: Diana
I agree. My methods are imperfect, and often imprecise. But they are a match for our imperfect world- one I hope to make better.
DI: I actually got a little goose-bumpy, there. And I know you weren’t speaking in your own voice, you were, for lack of a better word, channeling Diana.
B: Diana is what Robert Fulghum was talking about when he said, “Peace is not something you wish for; it’s something you make, something you do, something you are, and something you give away.” That’s what Kelley missed.
DI: This was fun. We might even have to do it again.
B: I’d heard rumblings. But of the many issues I had with the show, I think one of the most important aspects should be why she signed off on it in the first place.
DI: And why do you think that was?
B: You forget, I know her. And she told me. She’s unintentionally built up this persona, this almost allegation in the public sphere, for perfection. She chided me for perpetuating, it, actually. But she isn’t perfect.
She has thoughts. And fears. And even inconsistencies. She wanted people to be able to see what and who she’s really like. Because I think there’s a perception out there, either that she’s the Venus de Milo, perfection in stone, or that she’s just “superhero Barbie.” Even her activism is treated with the same derision that movie stars speaking about politics is.
DI: Hmm. I think I want to try something different. Between the two of us, I’m a writer, and you’re intimately familiar with her. So let’s give writing her pilot a shot. Right now. In real time.
The framing device, because I’m a uncreative journalist, is an interview setting. It creates an easy context for us to get viewers into Diana’s head without cheesy voice-overs or even cheesier girls-night-outing.
But we open on Diana, sleeping.
B: She’s mussed, but still oddly beautiful. Even asleep.
DI: Overlaid, we hear the voice of another woman:
Interviewer
Walk us through your typical day.
Diana’s eyes flutter open.
B: Diana
I wake up around 7 am.
DI: Cut to the interviewer, in smart business attire, sitting in Diana’s office, comfortable and even welcoming, but with an aura of respectability- after all, it’s also an embassy.
Interviewer
So you do sleep?
B: Diana laughs.
Diana
Five or six hours a night.
DI: We cut back to Diana, rising from bed.
B: Diana (voice-over)
I used to exercise in the morning, jog through Central Park. But these days, I jump right into business. My morning secretary, Etta, has been up since five, and she briefs me on my day’s activities, and anything that happened overnight.
DI: Etta enters, and they converse, unheard.
B: Diana (voice-over)
We eat breakfast together, usually something light, bagels and sliced fruit.
DI: We see the things you’re describing happen, so I don’t have to keep interrupting.
B: Diana (VO)
Usually by nine there’s important embassy work, meeting with dignitaries.
DI: We cut back for a moment to the interview.
B: Diana
My position as an ambassador means I get to help solve world problems. It’s gratifying, but it’s also necessary; that’s why it comes at the beginning of my day- it’s where I have the least give.
DI: Cut back to her day.
B: Diana (VO)
From there, I usually proceed to fundraisers or events. I usually spend the bulk of my daylight hours volunteering. Broken up occasionally by having to intervene in a situation.
DI: Cut back.
Interviewer
You mean fight crime.
B: Cut to Diana in costume, hoisting a gunman’s hands over his head, using her lasso thrown over a fire escape as a fulcrum, as a gray-haired woman he was mugging acts surprised.
Diana (VO)
Some might call it that.
The sounds of the interview fade away, and the background sounds of New York City fade in.
DI: I didn’t realize she operates out of New York.
B: She’s an ambassador to the UN. Where else would she be?
DI: Good point.
B: But we see Diana talking to the gunman, who is young, and nods his head. The sound fades in on Diana speaking. She’s soft, and intense a moment later.
Diana
Life is a gift. I love life- and I hate taking its gift away.
The gunman by this point is remorseful- and just the tiniest bit afraid.
Diana
So tell me: have you seen the error in your ways?
The moment is tense, and when he finally speaks, he’s nearly crying.
Gunman
Yes.
Her lasso, still around his wrists, glows brighter. She loosens it, and lets him go.
Diana
Go.
DI: The old woman is still there. She’s less happy about the escaping hoodlum.
Bitty
You should have punched his damn head off.
B: Diana isn’t surprised by the reaction. She walks with the old woman a moment.
Diana
Revenge is an easy answer. But it leaves part of the question nagging- to be asked again. I pray your safety and health.
DI: Wait- does that actually work?
B: Shockingly enough, it does. It wouldn’t, for me. I would have knocked his fool head off. But Diana, she has a presence. A certain quality that when she says things like that, people listen. Really just sit up and take notice. I’m actually referring to something I saw one day. And at the time I was pissed at her. I thought she let a mugger go free only to stick a gun in somebody else’s face. And given my history, that pushed buttons. So I tracked the guy. On his way home, he pawned the gun. From his address, I got his name, and kept track of him. He works for the sanitation department now, not so much as a parking ticket since.
Her approach works. New York has recidivism rates as high as 65%. Educational programs like the one at Rikers can cut that by ten percent. But Diana, less than a third of the people she talks to recidivate. She isn’t perfect. But you can see it in everything about her, that she tries. She’s an example for people to strive for. She makes you really want to be better.
DI: But don’t you think that in a way she’s an unachievable goal? I mean, she isn’t technically human, even.
B: Maybe. But I would place her more in the category with Michael Phelps, people who are extraordinary, and beyond the reach of normal people- but should still be held up as goals, achievable or otherwise. But you’re derailing our pilot: we cut back to the interview.
Diana
By this point Etta has gone home for the day, and my evening secretary, Mala, takes over for her.
Interviewer
Mala- she’s Amazonian, like yourself, right?
Diana
Yes. Officially, she’s deputy ambassador. But effectively, she helps me with the day to day; she’s usually the person in the chair at the UN. But my evenings are largely taken up by charity and awareness dinners. It sounds more fantastic than it is: squeezing into a dress to shake hands with dignitaries or wealthy socialites.
DI: Interviewer
Like Bruce Wayne?
B: Diana
Bruce and I are friends.
DI: Interviewer
That isn’t what US Weekly said.
B: Diana
He’s a humanitarian and a philanthropist. And we’ve known each other for years. But we aren’t together.
DI: Interviewer
So that means US Weekly was wrong, and both you and Bruce are on the market.
B: Diana
I won’t speak for Bruce, but I don’t really have the time. For every charity event I attend, there were three I couldn’t because they conflicted. And with all the preventable suffering in the world, looking for love just isn’t a priority.
DI: Interviewer
Apparently not- if even a billionaire playboy doesn’t catch your eye. Er. Sorry. But it sounds like you have a very busy schedule. But what does Wonder Woman do for fun?
B: Diana pauses a moment to think, then smiles.
Diana
This. I enjoy spending time with people. When I get free time, I like to read, the classics, poetry. I have a soft spot for Aristophanes- my mother read me Lysistrata when I was a girl.
DI: Interview
Seems a little crass for children’s literature.
B: Diana
But it was informative. Themyscira was founded by women looking for a different way. The Amazons co-existed with men for centuries, but left, when Amazons decided that men would always seek war and conflict. My ambassadorship is the reverse, trying to reach out the olive branch we learned to live by.
DI: Interview
By hitting people in the face?
B: Diana
Sometimes force is the only way to achieve justice, and justice is the only way to achieve peace.
DI: Interviewer
When liberty comes with her hands dabbled in blood, it is hard to shake hands with her.
B: Diana
I agree. My methods are imperfect, and often imprecise. But they are a match for our imperfect world- one I hope to make better.
DI: I actually got a little goose-bumpy, there. And I know you weren’t speaking in your own voice, you were, for lack of a better word, channeling Diana.
B: Diana is what Robert Fulghum was talking about when he said, “Peace is not something you wish for; it’s something you make, something you do, something you are, and something you give away.” That’s what Kelley missed.
DI: This was fun. We might even have to do it again.
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Holy Terror
DI: Did you ever seriously consider going after bin Laden?
Bruce: Honestly? New York is in my backyard. I was surprised, frankly, when they got hit and we didn’t back in ’01. Like every other American, I wanted to find him. Unlike most Americans, there was a fantasy in my head that I actually could.
DI: Well, you are the goddamned Batman. I mean, if you don’t have the skills and resources to track down a man like that, who would?
B: But I don’t. I’ve had some training in manhunting. And I had enough wealth. But there are other kinds of resources. The annual intelligence budget for the US is about $50 billion dollars. But beyond their superior monetary resources, which admittedly are spread in a lot of directions, not all thrown at bin Laden, they have thousands upon thousands of people working every day to make contacts, and build networks. Now I’m very proud of the people I’ve worked with in Gotham, and a lot of them have placed themselves in far greater peril than I ever did, to stop criminals. But it took me a third of a lifetime to build that coalition. Starting from scratch to hunt bin Laden across Asia would have taken more lifetimes than I had left, and I knew that- at least after a few moments of contemplation.
DI: Fair enough. But as someone who’s spoken out against the death penalty, and even refuses to use lethal apprehension tech, how do you feel about his death, particularly the way it’s being celebrated in the US and other places? Do you think it has any parallels to the public response in the Middle East to the 9/11 attacks?
B: I think, for the most part, the reaction has been more restrained. For a decade, bin Laden has been the devil. Now the devil’s dead. It’s asking too much for us not to have a visceral reaction to that. But the difference is, people are happy to not have that sword of Damocles hanging over their heads, they aren’t happy that a human being is dead- they’re relieved, that a long, tragic nightmare for our country is over. Which is an admittedly naïve thought, but also an infectious one. I’ve felt it. I slept a little better the night I heard the news- I won’t lie.
As to the lethality of his apprehension, my methods were a choice, a personal one. Every time I went out, I was choosing to trade optimal stopping power for minimal lethality, and I was risking my life for a principle. It wouldn’t be right to ask, let alone expect, others in the same position to choose the same.
And while we don’t know at this point whether he died according to the rules of engagement, I’m more than inclined to give the soldiers on the ground the benefit of the doubt. Regardless of what television and films tell us, war is hell. When shots are being fired, when your life and the lives of people you care about protecting hang in the balance, you don’t always react the same way you would discussing it over stale coffee. Barring evidence that he was executed after being taken into custody, I’m willing to assume the soldiers acted in good faith.
DI: I’ll admit it, I’ve been kind of surprised at how it played out. I expected, especially after news that he’d been buried at sea, that al Qaeda would claim he hadn’t died, that we were full of crap. A denial would have stolen a feather out of Obama’s cap, and I think given ammunition to conservatives- especially those who see nefarious motives behind any government action.
B: I think for a while al Qaeda benefited from posturing against conservatives. You remember in ’04, when conservatives said that the terrorists wanted liberals to win because they would be soft on terrorism- similar to the usual smear about crime. Well I think in truth it was the opposite: terrorists liked have conservatives as a foil.
DI: You’re saying that the terrorists wanted conservatives to win? That’s… awfully inflammatory.
B: I’m not saying they agreed with their politics- I’m saying I think it helped them achieve their goals. Conservatives are linked with the religious right, and I think al Qaeda benefited from a philosophic war with Christianity. It let make it not about a petty political squabble, but link it back to the Crusades, and a Muslim’s holy duty- I can’t think of a more effective recruitment campaign, frankly. What they didn’t benefit from was an international pissing contest with a Christian cowboy. I think their not denying bin Laden’s death is in part a reversal of this policy, and an acknowledgement that they overplayed their hand.
DI: So you think Bush dealt with the terrorists well?
B: I’m not saying that. I’m saying that his response hurt them. The question that’s important is whether or not the damage we did to them was worth what it’s cost us, in terms of blood, in terms of treasure, in terms of prestige. And no, I obviously don’t think that the ends justify his particular means.
DI: So you don’t think we should ever have been in Afghanistan?
B: No- I’m saying we should have gone into Afghanistan, smashed the Taliban, salted the earth so it could never grow again, decimated any al Qaeda there, and seized bin Laden at Tora Bora. I’m saying the years of dithering, and the distraction of Iraq, were the issue, not the initial decision to join that conflict.
DI: Damn. I was hoping I’d caught you in a contradiction. We journalists live for the kind of stuff. But I was reading a BBC article about this, because it’s always fascinating to me to hear a voice outside of our influence sphere, about the Pakistani reactions to news of bin Laden’s death. And one Taliban fighter said near the end of the article, "Let them rejoice now - soon they will feel fear again."
B: It makes me think- terrorists are a superstitious and cowardly lot. If I were twenty years younger- and healthy- well, that’s wishful thinking, I suppose. But their own religion speaks to justice, and justice will find them. Sooner or later. And bin Laden’s demise is just further proof of that.
Bruce: Honestly? New York is in my backyard. I was surprised, frankly, when they got hit and we didn’t back in ’01. Like every other American, I wanted to find him. Unlike most Americans, there was a fantasy in my head that I actually could.
DI: Well, you are the goddamned Batman. I mean, if you don’t have the skills and resources to track down a man like that, who would?
B: But I don’t. I’ve had some training in manhunting. And I had enough wealth. But there are other kinds of resources. The annual intelligence budget for the US is about $50 billion dollars. But beyond their superior monetary resources, which admittedly are spread in a lot of directions, not all thrown at bin Laden, they have thousands upon thousands of people working every day to make contacts, and build networks. Now I’m very proud of the people I’ve worked with in Gotham, and a lot of them have placed themselves in far greater peril than I ever did, to stop criminals. But it took me a third of a lifetime to build that coalition. Starting from scratch to hunt bin Laden across Asia would have taken more lifetimes than I had left, and I knew that- at least after a few moments of contemplation.
DI: Fair enough. But as someone who’s spoken out against the death penalty, and even refuses to use lethal apprehension tech, how do you feel about his death, particularly the way it’s being celebrated in the US and other places? Do you think it has any parallels to the public response in the Middle East to the 9/11 attacks?
B: I think, for the most part, the reaction has been more restrained. For a decade, bin Laden has been the devil. Now the devil’s dead. It’s asking too much for us not to have a visceral reaction to that. But the difference is, people are happy to not have that sword of Damocles hanging over their heads, they aren’t happy that a human being is dead- they’re relieved, that a long, tragic nightmare for our country is over. Which is an admittedly naïve thought, but also an infectious one. I’ve felt it. I slept a little better the night I heard the news- I won’t lie.
As to the lethality of his apprehension, my methods were a choice, a personal one. Every time I went out, I was choosing to trade optimal stopping power for minimal lethality, and I was risking my life for a principle. It wouldn’t be right to ask, let alone expect, others in the same position to choose the same.
And while we don’t know at this point whether he died according to the rules of engagement, I’m more than inclined to give the soldiers on the ground the benefit of the doubt. Regardless of what television and films tell us, war is hell. When shots are being fired, when your life and the lives of people you care about protecting hang in the balance, you don’t always react the same way you would discussing it over stale coffee. Barring evidence that he was executed after being taken into custody, I’m willing to assume the soldiers acted in good faith.
DI: I’ll admit it, I’ve been kind of surprised at how it played out. I expected, especially after news that he’d been buried at sea, that al Qaeda would claim he hadn’t died, that we were full of crap. A denial would have stolen a feather out of Obama’s cap, and I think given ammunition to conservatives- especially those who see nefarious motives behind any government action.
B: I think for a while al Qaeda benefited from posturing against conservatives. You remember in ’04, when conservatives said that the terrorists wanted liberals to win because they would be soft on terrorism- similar to the usual smear about crime. Well I think in truth it was the opposite: terrorists liked have conservatives as a foil.
DI: You’re saying that the terrorists wanted conservatives to win? That’s… awfully inflammatory.
B: I’m not saying they agreed with their politics- I’m saying I think it helped them achieve their goals. Conservatives are linked with the religious right, and I think al Qaeda benefited from a philosophic war with Christianity. It let make it not about a petty political squabble, but link it back to the Crusades, and a Muslim’s holy duty- I can’t think of a more effective recruitment campaign, frankly. What they didn’t benefit from was an international pissing contest with a Christian cowboy. I think their not denying bin Laden’s death is in part a reversal of this policy, and an acknowledgement that they overplayed their hand.
DI: So you think Bush dealt with the terrorists well?
B: I’m not saying that. I’m saying that his response hurt them. The question that’s important is whether or not the damage we did to them was worth what it’s cost us, in terms of blood, in terms of treasure, in terms of prestige. And no, I obviously don’t think that the ends justify his particular means.
DI: So you don’t think we should ever have been in Afghanistan?
B: No- I’m saying we should have gone into Afghanistan, smashed the Taliban, salted the earth so it could never grow again, decimated any al Qaeda there, and seized bin Laden at Tora Bora. I’m saying the years of dithering, and the distraction of Iraq, were the issue, not the initial decision to join that conflict.
DI: Damn. I was hoping I’d caught you in a contradiction. We journalists live for the kind of stuff. But I was reading a BBC article about this, because it’s always fascinating to me to hear a voice outside of our influence sphere, about the Pakistani reactions to news of bin Laden’s death. And one Taliban fighter said near the end of the article, "Let them rejoice now - soon they will feel fear again."
B: It makes me think- terrorists are a superstitious and cowardly lot. If I were twenty years younger- and healthy- well, that’s wishful thinking, I suppose. But their own religion speaks to justice, and justice will find them. Sooner or later. And bin Laden’s demise is just further proof of that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)