Monday, December 28, 2009

“MY BAD!” — HOW SORRY MUST I BE?

By Edwin Cooney

I like to do nice things for people that make them feel personally comfortable and appreciated in the present, as well as secure and optimistic in their future.

Hence, a couple of weeks ago, when a loving and well-meaning friend of many years sent me an item announcing that cell telephone numbers were about to be made available to telemarketers, I was anxious to spread the word. Their calls to your cell phone would end up costing you money.

Perhaps the greatest avenue of unfiltered everything these days is the internet. (I had started to write “unfiltered knowledge” but everything on the internet, or almost everything, is unfiltered, isn’t it?!) In short, the internet is a vast library of fact, fiction, fear, anger, love, hope, confidence, warnings, assurances, past, present and anticipated future.

The little announcement my friend sent to me explained that one could keep one’s cell phone number from intrusive telemarketers by calling the national “Do Not Call List” at 888-382-1222. The blurb assured readers that this would keep one’s cell phone number private for the next five years. Recipients of this information were to telephone the national “Do Not Call List” from their cell phones, not their landline phones. It sounded reasonable enough to me, so I passed this information on to most of my very favorite people.

Several very conscientious friends responded within minutes informing me that my information was false — and, even worse, a hoax. As documentation they sent me a link to Snopes, the urban legend people, who make it their business to separate fact from fiction in these volatile times. Here’s your copy:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/cell411.asp

Fortunately for me and for my friends, the “hoax” was harmless. Calling the number (as I did) will add your cell phone to the Do Not Call Registry, but the government already prohibits telemarketers from calling cell numbers. Nevertheless, budding columnists are under a special obligation to distribute factual information even when doing so merely as a good neighbor. Hence, I’ve had to learn a basic lesson once again: get your facts straight, Cooney!

Embarrassing as the need for this reminder is, my need to “spread the word” is as American as Paul Revere, Samuel Morris, Alexander Graham Bell, Joseph Pulitzer or Bill Gates —- all individuals who employed various means to communicate information quickly.

The question for me then has to do with the urgency of communicating. What’s behind that urge?

When someone calls you to tell you that Uncle Harry has struck it rich or an old classmate is finally getting married or that a man named Washington got caught telling a lie in traffic court, what is your immediate tendency?

If you are like me, you will often have an urgent desire to share that information with those who mean the most. Seldom is that information ever documented and yet usually it is accurate.

A sense of urgency is inevitably based on one’s values. Certainly Paul Revere’s sense of urgency on the night of April 18-19, 1775 was not only a realistic urgency but, as it turned out, an historic one. The colonists’ safety and security was certainly in jeopardy. The desire to protect the wellbeing of others is a most basic and essential force that drives our individual sense of urgency.

I believe that most of us, in one way or another, strive to be helpful to others on a daily basis. All of us, in one way or another, like to inform, protect, and entertain those who matter to us. Therefore, we freely pass on tidbits of humor, inspiration, and information to one another. One of our strongest human needs, after all, is to be useful or, even more, to be needed.

Last week, I thought I had useful and perhaps even urgent information that I ought to pass on to others as a good citizen and as a friend.

Alas, my information was false. Even worse, it was a hoax and I was had. Due to my own recklessness, others might also be had. My bad!

Of course, information is valuable only if it is true. As one whose reputation as a writer largely depends on sound judgment, my lesson this week is that I must check and double check information even when I’m merely trying to be a good neighbor.

If the egg on my face from this occasion can hardly be anything but scrambled, the irony is that much of what I know that is wise and good very often can’t even be measured, let alone documented.

Hmmm! This just occurred to me. I wonder if I wouldn’t be better off as a distributor of ideas rather than being a distributor of FACTS! Don’t good ideas often create conditions for new and sound facts?

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
EDWIN COONEY

Monday, December 21, 2009

MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY HOLIDAYS — IT’S THE SEASON OF THE BLEEDING HEART

By Edwin Cooney

About ten days ago, someone sent me an email (complete with attachment) showing Christmas Trees with the insistence that “…These are Christmas trees, not Hanukkah Bushes, Holiday Trees or Allah Plants. These are Christmas Trees.”

Okay, okay already — I hear you! I get it that you want to be wished a Merry Christmas. Okay, “Merry Christmas” and may you have many more merry Christmases with trees and nativity scenes and Santa Clauses and all that good stuff! So, why all the fuss?

The answer is simple. Some politically-oriented “Christmas traditionalists,” convinced by those who insist that they hate “liberal victim-hood,” believe that Christmas has become the victim of deadly attack by left wing socialist secularists — of course. Hence, Christmas must be saved.

As for who will save Christmas? Why, patriotic Americans, that’s who! I know George Washington, Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson resisted celebrating Christmas back in the eighteenth century seeing it as a “bloody British” holiday, but many facts are disconcerting. Even though Washington, Franklin and Jefferson didn’t much like Christmas, they can still be considered true patriots. They might even have preferred to wish you “happy holidays!”

The surface issue is, of course, old-fashioned religion, but the cause is good old-fashioned merchandising. Nothing wrong with it; it’s as genuinely American as apple or cherry pie. The sad part about it however is that it’s a culture war at Christmas time --nothing more! A “Merry Christmas wish” is good. A “Happy Holidays wish” is pretty close to evil.

Tell me true now: when you receive a Christmas greeting from JCPenney, Nordstrom, Chevron or your bank, don’t you feel warm and cuddly all over?

If someone wishes you “Merry Christmas” and someone else wishes you “Happy Holidays,” does either wish do damage to your personal dignity, political freedom, or religious beliefs? Are you incapable of having a Merry Christmas during your Happy Holidays?

Emotionally, I’m a traditionalist. I love Christmas and leave it to my sensibilities as to what degree I allow commercialism to affect me. I love Baby Jesus, Mary and Joseph, the Three Wise Men and “It Came Upon a Midnight Clear” (my favorite Christmas carol alongside “Joy to the World” and “O Holy Night”). I love the Christmas tree, the cookies, and the Christmas punch. (Here, you can have my eggnog — drink all the eggnog you want — I’ll stick with the brandy.) I love Santa Claus, hugs and other possibilities under the mistletoe, but I don’t see the preservation of Christmas as a moral issue. Nor indeed should it be a political one.

Of course, no American institution as popular and profitable as Christmas can be entirely exempt from politics. However, as one who loves politics and many politicians, I’d like to see politicians and talk show hosts both on the right and the left take the season off. They should be home with their families generously imbibing and distributing Christmas and/or Holiday cheer. Christmas is, after all, the season of the bleeding heart. To celebrate the Christmas season or holiday time is a free choice. I know government subsidizes Christmas by paying workers even when they’re on holiday, but shucks, private CEO’S also get paid for doing exactly nothing on both Christmas and New Years Day.

Christmas is a season to give and to receive in joy, not in political resentment. (I know political resentment is a “joy” to both the left and the right, but some joys are more appropriate than others depending on the season). Christmas or Holiday Season is a time for love and laughter. If someone wants to refer to his or her tree as a Christmas tree, or as an Allah Tree, or a Hanukkah Bush, how does that lessen the value of what I call my tree?

If Uncle Henry wants to call his evergreen tree his “Drinking Tree,” with good cheer, let him. Even better, join him under his “Drinking Tree” and have a hot chocolate if that’s what you want.

Let this holiday season be about goodwill and good wishes. Let it be about the comfort and satisfaction of others. Never mind either Christmas commercialism or religious pomposity. Allow others to be as secular or as religious as they choose. Forget about others’ attitudes in comparison to your own. Cheer their hopes, especially when their hopes are about them and not in the least about you. If someone wants to celebrate another religion or no religion, offer him or her your blessing.

How about this idea for a Christmas or holiday project: offer everyone around you, regardless of their political or spiritual faith, the most splendid gift within your power to grant them. Extend to them and expect them to extend to you the willingness to be your friend.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
EDWIN COONEY

Monday, December 14, 2009

MUCH MORE THAN A SONG!

By Edwin Cooney

Last Tuesday, December 8th, 2009, marked the 29th anniversary of one of the more tragic events in American history. At approximately 10:50 p.m. EST, twenty-five-year-old Mark David Chapman put four .38 caliber hollow point bullets into the back of John Lennon as Lennon and Yoko Ono entered the 72nd Street entrance of the Dakota, their New York City home.

The deed possessed the magnitude of a presidential assassin’s mission. It tore the hearts and rent the souls of millions of people all over the world.

In less than a half hour following the shooting, thousands of people amassed in front of the Dakota as well as outside of St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Hospital Center where Dr. Stephan Lynn pronounced John Lennon dead at 11:15 p.m.

“All we are saying,” They tearfully sang, “is Give Peace a Chance.”

Next they would sing “Imagine,” the title song of John Lennon’s September 1971 solo album release.

To imagine is to create a mental image of something beyond one’s normal capacity to grasp. To imagine is to create, believe in and sustain, beyond all logic, a concept or cause that can’t possibly be measured. Thus, John Lennon invited you and me to:

Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace

You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world

You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one.

As I, last Tuesday, listened once again to those immortal words, I felt compelled to decide for myself what the power of that song really was.

Since no one can measure the depth of one’s capacity to imagine, I decided at the outset that John Lennon’s suggestion that we “imagine” is an invitation. Invitations are ultimately far more powerful than commands. Commands can only be issued for measurable outcomes. An invitation is reserved for powerful opportunities such as the commitment to a humane cause or love for a person.

To imagine there’s no heaven or hell and that all the people might live for today, is, it seems to me, an invitation to advocate for grace and goodness, but without the expectation of an ultimate reward.

To imagine that there are no countries, nothing to live or die for, no religion and that all the people may live life in peace, is an invitation to sweep aside the significance of personal limits, politics and international borders.

To imagine that there are no possessions, no greed or hunger, would by itself bring about “the brotherhood of man.” Hence, all of the people sharing all of the world would assure all of us would live as one.

It’s tempting, as one listens, to decide that nothing about the song is real. After all the song contains three glaring ironies; first, John Lennon--one of the richest men on earth--invites you and me to imagine that there are no possessions; second--as perhaps leader of the “British invasion” of the rich American record market, he bids us to “…imagine there’s no countries” asserting that “…it isn’t hard to do.”

Finally, comes the greatest irony of all. John Lennon, if not an atheist, certainly an agnostic, invites us to imagine “…no religion.” Yet, as “Imagine” reaches its climax, one realizes that this man of music, poetry, and intellect has just brought forth much more than a mere song. To comprehend the possibility of a world without war, without the need for possessions, greed, and hunger is a world not of a dreamer, but rather, a definition of Heaven on earth.

As the music stops and silence prevails, the source of its power hits you with full force. “Imagine” by John Lennon is much more than an invitation, poem or song.
Perhaps he didn’t realize or even intend it back in the days dominated by his passion for art, music, poetry, political activism and Yoko Ono when he composed it, but John Lennon’s “Imagine” is ultimately a prayer.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

EDWIN COONEY