Dear Assembly Members,
	I have sent the following letter in response to an L.A. TIMES  
editorial.  If language shapes our thinking, grammar shapes the  
framework in which our thinking takes place.  We are at a crossroads  
where narrative meets process, where past, present, and future meet  
the eternal present, surrounded by infinite possibilities.  I send  
this to you in hopes that it resonates with your thinking.
	I look forward to reading your responses.
		Sincerely,
		Gregg Heacock

Dear Editor,
          Jonah Goldberg in “Obama’s rhetoric, American realities” is  
right to raise the issue of whether a diverse community with a  
history of individual grievances could come to the same table to plan  
together for their common future.  Quoting Robert Putnam, author of  
“Bowling Alone,” he says, “In the presence of diversity, we hunker  
down,” and he interprets this lack of “social trust” as possibly  
being a form of “realism.”  As a teacher of English, I respect our  
realistic inclination to challenge other people’s thinking by saying,  
“Yes, but . . . ,” “So what!,” and “Oh, yeah?  What makes you think  
so?  How do you know?”  These challenges, based on logical conditions  
of sufficient grounds, relevance, and acceptability, are filters that  
protect us from intellectual pollution.  The question is whether our  
filtration system gets so clogged with lack of basic trust that it  
never lets any new information get through.  Do our histories and  
personal grievances get in the way of being realistic?  What makes  
Obama such an agent of change is that he has found a way to move us  
beyond ourselves.
          Grammar provides us with two frames through which we view  
our lives.  Scientific, or process, paragraphs are written in the  
eternal present:  We do this, then do that to bring about a desired  
result.  Historic, or narrative, paragraphs are written in the past  
tense, exploring how the past affects the present and could repeat  
itself in the future.  Most of us a pleased to imagine ourselves in  
the eternal present for we are never lost in the here and now and the  
possibilities before us are infinite.  Our decisions, therefore, are  
guided by hope.  When we think of the harm we have suffered in the  
past and contemplate how we might continue to be harmed in the  
future, our decisions in the present are guided by fear.
          Because Obama is a pluralist, honoring all groups and all  
proposals and setting criteria for discerning which ideas are  
presently acceptable, he is about process, not about grievance.   
People who come to the table may carry resentments, but, relevant  
though they may be to evaluating the worth of a plan, they are  
subsumed by the criteria agreed upon by all.  Obama has already shown  
us how this process works.  In the pre-Nevada caucus debate, John  
Edwards challenged him on his willingness to include the nuclear  
power industry in negotiating our energy policy.  He said the history  
of the nuclear industry showed it could not be trusted. Obama  
countered by saying that one of the conditions for any energy plan is  
that it must be safe.  So far, the nuclear industry has not shown  
itself to be able to dispose nuclear waste safely.  Edwards agreed,  
then, that their positions were essentially the same.  Excluding the  
nuclear power industry from the table would not be fair.  Telling the  
nuclear industry that it must meet certain safety criteria is  
straight-forward and honest.
          Politics of the past has been based on excluding people and  
proposals from the table.  Obama’s way of thinking is new on the  
American and international scene.  Its newness makes it hard for us  
to understand.  But, it is inherent in the very language we use that  
shapes our thinking.  It is what makes Obama a uniter, not a  
divider.  That’s why we trust him to serve as our agent of change.

                   Respectfully,

                   Gregg Heacock
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/