politics and more

Alright, i've been scolded a few times now for not posting new stuff on my blog. its really not my fault...just that my life hasn't been all too interesting lately and i didn't wanna have to bore you with the way in which i got up from bed, brushed my teeth, got into my car (which is in the shop for the second time), turned on the radio, got to work, etc...i will mention the fact that i almost lost it with the phone people the other day. i've been trying to get a contract phone for ~a month now (i'm still on pay-as-you-go) and everytime i go theres one problem or another. this past saturday, i finally got the contract fully authorized and actually got my new phone and was told it would be activated in 24-48hrs. well, 48hrs came and went and nothing happened...i gave it more time and eventually checked the new phone to find that i'd received an sms welcoming me to vodacom and giving me my new number and stating what contract plan i was on. 2 problems: 1. my number was not supposed to change; 2. it stated the wrong plan. so i call the store and they apologize and tell me that they're fixing the problem, but they need to give me a new sim card which i have to come to get. 1 problem: 1. this store is 45 minutes away from me. so i ask if they're going to pay for my gas to get there and for all the other times i'd been there fruitlessly. i wasnt joking. well, eventually i got them to agree to ship the sim card to a nearer-by store and it should be there by thursday. im not holding my breath.

lets talk politics a bit - south-african-style:
many people are worried about the inevitable "election" of jacob zuma as president next year. tho i must say, i'm impressed that i've also noticed a lot of people who are desperately trying to put the situation in the best light, knowing there's really not much they can do. i've been hearing on the radio lately that people should just give this guy a chance, and given all his mistakes, he could actually turn out good for the s.african people and even the economic situation. i also heard today a dj mocking people for expecting political leaders to be moral leaders. i kind of agree with this; however, i got to thinking...i liked prez clinton even during his much publicized infidelities, so what makes zuma, and his much publicized polygamous ways, different. but i think there's a difference, ne? there was a sense that clinton knew what he was doing was wrong and so tried to keep it hidden. zuma, on the other hand, makes no effort to conceal the fact that hes on wife 4 (and working on #5 and 6, all simultaneously). now i recognize that polygamy still occurs in some cultures and it may be fine in some older communities, but in the world we live in today, i am a strong believer that the incumbent of the office of presidency of any nation should be someone worthy of being a role model. what does it say to the society when the most developed country in africa is led by a 60-something yr old man, taking 20-something yr old women as wives? and why isnt there more discussion about the inevitable ensuing fight among the women regarding who will be first lady? anyway, just strikes me as not right.

2ndly: the latest bruhahah is over a forum for black journalists that was held here recently. white journalists that were excluded from the meeting weren't too happy. so the question arose: in a democratic south africa, is there room for organizations solely based on race? my initial reaction was of course not. but its not that simple. if a group feels there are issues that pertain especially to them, they should be able to organize to find ways to deal with those issues, ne? however, if a similar organization for white journalists was established, wouldn't there be a huge row about the racist nature of such organization? in america there are many race based organization (congressional black caucus, society of black engineers, black student associations, etc). i think the very definition of democracy is the ability for any group to organize based on pretty much any interest as long as it does not unnecessarily or violently infringe on the rights or the interests of other groups. so where do you draw the line? are these organizations acceptable cuz their membership at one time were discriminated against? or is it because they are minorities and minorities, at times, need to organize to get their voices heard? if the latter is the case, then the s. african situation is a bit awkward, because whites are the minority and, with that argument, they could organize and claim that the black govt is not listening well to them...touchy issues. thoughts?

to the US we go:
have you seen John mccain's wife. i mean, have you looked into her eyes? next time she's on tv take a good gaze into her eyes and you'll notice, you cannot see the brown (or whatever color it is) in her eyes. it looks all white. its really scary. like a ghost. it freaked me out. and still does. and when i heard her speak, i almost shit my pants. for all my conservative friends, there's no insult meant by my comments; her eyes just freak the hell out of me. i actually like john mccain, except for his unwavering support for the war and new found fondness, and courtship, of W.

lamest campaign line: "that's not change you can believe in, that's change you can xerox"...luckily she redeemed herself later with a sentimental, congratulatory nod to BO ("...i am honoured to be here with barack obama..."). thanks for the endorsement hillary. thanks for the memories.

post-post: i just saw some pics of snow covered chicago. i love snow, so it looked lovely, but i also know it won't take long for that snow to turn into dangerous, disgusting ice, so i feel bad for y'all chicago-ans. its nice and sunny and warm here, so feel free to drop by for the weekend for some warm weather!