Well I certainly took a hiatus. It was unplanned, actually. I apologize to all two of my dedicated followers. :-)
Since July 17, the date of my last post, we've gone on vacation to Colorado. We went white-water rafting and hiking and soaked in the hot tub under the Rocky Mountain stars. What I remember most though, is that my daughter got sick with what I assumed was a stomach bug - she was complaining of stomach pain and throwing up, with a fever. After a day of letting her sleep at the rental cabin, I went to check on her and "something" suddenly kicked in. My mom-instincts flashed on and I told my husband I really needed to take her to the ER. Turns out that mom-instincts are pretty awesome. She had appendicitis and was in surgery 4 hours after we arrived at the ER. I've tried to figure out exactly what it was that triggered my instincts. Logically, it was a combination of things - she was complaining about stomach pain more than usual, she had mentioned to me that she was peeing every time she threw up (which was multiple times that night), she groaned when she sat up...but still, the right side of her abdomen wasn't where her pain was centered, and everything else just screamed "normal stomach bug". It was partially the few unusual things, but also - I think that I could just tell something was different in a very hand-wavy sort of way. I can't articulate it. Perhaps if I was better at diagnosing my feelings or fears, or if I was better at remembering minute details I could tell you. But ultimately, something deep inside went from "off" to "on" and I KNEW, I absolutely KNEW within an instant that this was not a stomach bug.
Thank goodness, too, because her surgeon told us her appendix was particularly nasty and he could see an abrasion along it where it looked like it was close to rupturing. Oh, and her surgeon told us her appendix happened to be located in the center of her abdomen.
So.
We came home and finished up the summer. My kids mostly played video games and watched TV and ate microwaved hot pockets. This is not what I'd wished for them, but it's what they did. I would have enjoyed if they had taken up knitting or art while I was at work, and if they'd eaten cucumbers and green beans and peaches from our CSA. But you know, they enjoyed their little bit of independence and they DID do the chores I left outlined for them in the dreaded "summer notebooks" each day. They called me multiple times each day while I was at work, so I pretty much knew what they were doing each minute. They begin their new school years tomorrow. All supplies have been bought and are either already at school or are in their backpacks. They have new lunchboxes, and have enough new clothes (or uniforms in the case of my son) to get them through at least a week. They both went to bed on time tonight, after showers, and set their alarms. We're good to go.
In the meantime, I'm still reeling from the insanity in the US. Don't get me STARTED on the shrill nonsense the ultra-right is spewing over President Obama's planned speech to school children tomorrow. We've had our own minor uproar here locally when a parent used our PTA volunteer email list to send political propaganda against the speech. Me, being the DOOFUS that I am, noticed that he planned to pull his child out of school tomorrow because he was so against him hearing the speech. While I fail to understand how anything ANYTHING the president plans to say tomorrow justifies such action, I did take note that my information (which happened to have come directly from the superintendent of our school district) indicated that our school planned to tape the speech and air it Wednesday. Part of me giggled at the idea of him keeping his son home Tuesday only to discover after the fact that he would have been exposed to the dreaded "socialist propaganda" which encouraged children to work hard and stay in school when his son returned on Wednesday. But then my f*cking moral, earnest part kicked in and I thought the man deserved to at least know the facts. So I sent him an email telling him that while I didn't agree with him politically, I thought we should all have access to the facts.
Well. Stoopid me. Several emails later, I realized that he was not going to quit arguing with me over the appropriate use of our PTA email list, or demanding to know why my information on when the speech would be shown didn't mesh with the media's, so I told him to take it up with our president and that I wished to have no further correspondence with him. As a past president, I did feel a little guilty about this, especially since I'm good friends with the current president. But there you are. He'll figure it all out when the principal sends home a note tomorrow explaining exactly what will be happening on Wednesday and what he needs to do to protect his child from the Nazi-socialist-propaganda.
For the love of GOD!!!!!
I thought political games were nasty months ago. I had no idea how stupid they were yet to become.
And yet, life goes on. I had a lovely LOVELY conversation today with my beautiful friend Jamie, reminding me that friends are what it's all about. I will consider not picking up and moving to New England just so I can stay near her and many of my other friends here who make it easy(er) to live down here amidst so many many MANY people with political and cultural opinions that are lifetimes away from my own. It's all OK. I only need a little connection to make it OK.
(But Jen K, keep an eye out for good home opportunities up there just in case).
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Monday, September 07, 2009
Sunday, July 12, 2009
swimming against the current
If you read the news, you've probably heard of the incident of the private swim club in Pennsylvania that told a mostly-minority daycamp that they were no longer going to be allowed to bring their kids there to swim this summer. One of the families that attends the daycamp just filed a lawsuit against the swim club for racial discrimination.
Really?
First, and most importantly, this particular daycamp wasn't the only one affected; the swim club had changed its mind about letting several daycamps utilize their private facilities this summer. The other daycamps affected aren't predominately minority. How then can racisim be claimed as a motivating factor?
I can so easily envision a possible (likely?) scenario:
Many public pools in Philadelphia have closed because of the horrid economy. Mr. Private Swim Club director sees an opportunity to make some extra cash by opening his pool up to nearby summer child cares and camps. He probably means well but didn't spend enough time thinking through the consequences of this decision. Hoards of children descend upon the pool, surprising and angering dues-paying members who expected their investment to yield a quiet, controlled pool environment. [The daycamp in question brought 65 children to the pool. SIXTY FIVE children in a pool is a LOT.] Paying members complain to Swim Club director, who realizes he'd not thought this through very well, so he returns the money for all of the local day cares and camps who had decided to participate and informs them it's not going to work after all. Only one of those facilities is predominately minority, and it decides to throw the word "racism" into the scenario. At that point, all hell breaks loose.
One of the daycamp children claims to have heard a club member ask why so many "black kids" were at the pool that day. That is probably true. Private club member mom probably said something stupid. But to extrapolate that to racism on the part of the swim club is an awfully quick and sloppy determination. Another daycamper reported that they heard an adult member worry that her child was going to be "hurt" by the kids. (You can interpret this to mean she was worried that black children would hurt her child, or you can interpret this to mean she was worried that her child would be hurt in an overcrowded pool. Your choice.) Further, in response to the incident, the director replied "There was concern that a lot of kids would change the complexion...and the atmosphere of the club". That statement has been held up as proof of his racist attitude. His use of the word "complexion" is, apparently, the ringer. Complexion can mean "the hue and appearance of the skin" but can also mean "overall aspect or character." Taken in context, it seems obvious to me that he was using the word with the latter definition. Too many children made the pool uncomfortable and unsafe. Do people really think that by "complexion" he meant color? Really? Or are they jumping all over that to continue to fuel their rage? Honestly, when I read his statement, it never occured to me that his use of the word mean skin color. Good grief.
I know I know I know I KNOW that racism is a real problem in the U.S. I know real cases of it exist and they make my stomach turn and should never be ignored. But this kind of reaction - this immediate bandwagon response of calling out RACISM only exaserbates our problems. The most common response I hear when people read about this incident is surprise. Opinion writers opine their "SURPRISE" that such blatent racism still exists today. If that is true - if these reporters and opinion writers are so surprised that this kind of racism would happen - then why does the default assumption immediately fall on the side of racism?
I think this is ridiculous. In addition to the lawsuit, Arlen Spector has weighed in and requested an investigation by the Federal Department of Justice. The state Human Relations Commission is investigating at the request of the NAACP. What a waste of resources.
The director of the daycamp, Alethea Wright, has been quite vocal about the incident. She has stated that she is looking for a psychologist to talk to the children about the incident. Perhaps she means well. Perhaps she really feels like there is racism at play. I think her reaction to this incident has done more harm to the kids in her care than anything else. She is teaching them to live life as victims and teaching them that discrimination is to be expected. She is teaching them that the "others" in the US are not to be trusted and to suspect the motives behind every action. She is teaching them that they are different.
And with that, I guess my liberal-lefty membership card will soon be revoked.
[Funny aside. I read about the suit earlier and didn't remember where I'd seen it. I wanted to link to it, so I did a quick google search to find the article. You need more than "swim" and "suit" to narrow this one down. Gads I can be such a dork sometimes.]Racial discrimination?
Really?
First, and most importantly, this particular daycamp wasn't the only one affected; the swim club had changed its mind about letting several daycamps utilize their private facilities this summer. The other daycamps affected aren't predominately minority. How then can racisim be claimed as a motivating factor?
I can so easily envision a possible (likely?) scenario:
Many public pools in Philadelphia have closed because of the horrid economy. Mr. Private Swim Club director sees an opportunity to make some extra cash by opening his pool up to nearby summer child cares and camps. He probably means well but didn't spend enough time thinking through the consequences of this decision. Hoards of children descend upon the pool, surprising and angering dues-paying members who expected their investment to yield a quiet, controlled pool environment. [The daycamp in question brought 65 children to the pool. SIXTY FIVE children in a pool is a LOT.] Paying members complain to Swim Club director, who realizes he'd not thought this through very well, so he returns the money for all of the local day cares and camps who had decided to participate and informs them it's not going to work after all. Only one of those facilities is predominately minority, and it decides to throw the word "racism" into the scenario. At that point, all hell breaks loose.
One of the daycamp children claims to have heard a club member ask why so many "black kids" were at the pool that day. That is probably true. Private club member mom probably said something stupid. But to extrapolate that to racism on the part of the swim club is an awfully quick and sloppy determination. Another daycamper reported that they heard an adult member worry that her child was going to be "hurt" by the kids. (You can interpret this to mean she was worried that black children would hurt her child, or you can interpret this to mean she was worried that her child would be hurt in an overcrowded pool. Your choice.) Further, in response to the incident, the director replied "There was concern that a lot of kids would change the complexion...and the atmosphere of the club". That statement has been held up as proof of his racist attitude. His use of the word "complexion" is, apparently, the ringer. Complexion can mean "the hue and appearance of the skin" but can also mean "overall aspect or character." Taken in context, it seems obvious to me that he was using the word with the latter definition. Too many children made the pool uncomfortable and unsafe. Do people really think that by "complexion" he meant color? Really? Or are they jumping all over that to continue to fuel their rage? Honestly, when I read his statement, it never occured to me that his use of the word mean skin color. Good grief.
I know I know I know I KNOW that racism is a real problem in the U.S. I know real cases of it exist and they make my stomach turn and should never be ignored. But this kind of reaction - this immediate bandwagon response of calling out RACISM only exaserbates our problems. The most common response I hear when people read about this incident is surprise. Opinion writers opine their "SURPRISE" that such blatent racism still exists today. If that is true - if these reporters and opinion writers are so surprised that this kind of racism would happen - then why does the default assumption immediately fall on the side of racism?
I think this is ridiculous. In addition to the lawsuit, Arlen Spector has weighed in and requested an investigation by the Federal Department of Justice. The state Human Relations Commission is investigating at the request of the NAACP. What a waste of resources.
The director of the daycamp, Alethea Wright, has been quite vocal about the incident. She has stated that she is looking for a psychologist to talk to the children about the incident. Perhaps she means well. Perhaps she really feels like there is racism at play. I think her reaction to this incident has done more harm to the kids in her care than anything else. She is teaching them to live life as victims and teaching them that discrimination is to be expected. She is teaching them that the "others" in the US are not to be trusted and to suspect the motives behind every action. She is teaching them that they are different.
And with that, I guess my liberal-lefty membership card will soon be revoked.
Friday, March 20, 2009
perspective
This current blowup over AIG - I'm having a hard time getting het up about it. Seems as if I'm one of the few that aren't jumping on the popular righteous anger bandwagon.
First off.
The amount of these bonuses relative to the bailout money received by AIG is ($165,000,000/$180,000,000,000) = .0009166. Speaking in percentage terms, this is .09166%, less than 1/10 of 1 percent. Let's round up to one tenth of a percent. Say you make $50,000 per year salary. One tenth of 1% of this amount is fifty bucks. If you make on the order of $100,000 per year, we're talking one-hundred bucks. No, you don't seek out to toss $50 or $100 out the window. You *might* haggle over it during a car buy, but speaking for myself, I'd be willing to let if go if I was tired and wouldn't lose a wink of sleep over that decision. Let's talk kids. Say we give them $20.00 for their birthday money. Say they lose 2 cents of it. I wouldn't hang mine by their toenails, refuse to ever give them money EVER AGAIN and ground them for life because of the poor choices that caused them to lose 2 cents.
Perspective, people. Bad choices? Yes. A tragedy of epic proportions? I don't see that.
Second.
Retention bonuses are a commonly used practice by companies to keep important employees during times of crisis. I'd say AIG fits the bill for being in current crisis. People - like it or not, the US taxpayers now own 80% of this company. We do not want it to fail at this point. Really. There's something to be said for keeping employees there who know enough about the business to unravel the mess that AIG and the US public is entangled in. Tell me what talented financier on earth would go to work for AIG now? I imagine the resumes aren't exactly pouring in. You don't want to lose any quality employees at this point. We WANT AIG to pull itself out of this mess. This will take people who know what they are doing. They need a reason to continue to work for AIG.
Connie Reeve in an article from CBC News, Canada:
(click to see the full article).
The use of retention bonuses is not exactly an unusual move.
Distasteful? Perhaps. Well, a hearty YES.
Worthy of gnashing of teeth and threats? Mmmmmm, no.
These bonuses frustrate me. They do not, however, signal the end of civilization as we wished it were, however. I don't know it all, but I am willing to open myself up enough to acknowledge that there may be legitimate reasons for paying out bonuses. I think we are at a place in history right now where more than ever, intellect needs to trump emotional knee-jerk reactions. Before threatening to massacre those receiving bonuses with piano string, before we allow Congress to hastily pass an excessive and ill-thought-out tax on a small group of individuals, we need to take a collective deep breath, regain perspective and attempt to make judgments and decisions based on facts and not emotions. Hold on - slow down and think this out.
A bit of frustration is fine, and I join with you all in that. This collective outpouring of abject hatred is pretty frightening to me, on the other hand.
First off.
The amount of these bonuses relative to the bailout money received by AIG is ($165,000,000/$180,000,000,000) = .0009166. Speaking in percentage terms, this is .09166%, less than 1/10 of 1 percent. Let's round up to one tenth of a percent. Say you make $50,000 per year salary. One tenth of 1% of this amount is fifty bucks. If you make on the order of $100,000 per year, we're talking one-hundred bucks. No, you don't seek out to toss $50 or $100 out the window. You *might* haggle over it during a car buy, but speaking for myself, I'd be willing to let if go if I was tired and wouldn't lose a wink of sleep over that decision. Let's talk kids. Say we give them $20.00 for their birthday money. Say they lose 2 cents of it. I wouldn't hang mine by their toenails, refuse to ever give them money EVER AGAIN and ground them for life because of the poor choices that caused them to lose 2 cents.
Perspective, people. Bad choices? Yes. A tragedy of epic proportions? I don't see that.
Second.
Retention bonuses are a commonly used practice by companies to keep important employees during times of crisis. I'd say AIG fits the bill for being in current crisis. People - like it or not, the US taxpayers now own 80% of this company. We do not want it to fail at this point. Really. There's something to be said for keeping employees there who know enough about the business to unravel the mess that AIG and the US public is entangled in. Tell me what talented financier on earth would go to work for AIG now? I imagine the resumes aren't exactly pouring in. You don't want to lose any quality employees at this point. We WANT AIG to pull itself out of this mess. This will take people who know what they are doing. They need a reason to continue to work for AIG.
Connie Reeve in an article from CBC News, Canada:
"As you can imagine, in businesses where the intellectual capital is the essence of the business, losing your best and brightest because people fear what is going to happen in the future is a bad thing," she said. "Retention bonuses have a place because they serve a legitimate corporate purpose."
(click to see the full article).
The use of retention bonuses is not exactly an unusual move.
Distasteful? Perhaps. Well, a hearty YES.
Worthy of gnashing of teeth and threats? Mmmmmm, no.
These bonuses frustrate me. They do not, however, signal the end of civilization as we wished it were, however. I don't know it all, but I am willing to open myself up enough to acknowledge that there may be legitimate reasons for paying out bonuses. I think we are at a place in history right now where more than ever, intellect needs to trump emotional knee-jerk reactions. Before threatening to massacre those receiving bonuses with piano string, before we allow Congress to hastily pass an excessive and ill-thought-out tax on a small group of individuals, we need to take a collective deep breath, regain perspective and attempt to make judgments and decisions based on facts and not emotions. Hold on - slow down and think this out.
A bit of frustration is fine, and I join with you all in that. This collective outpouring of abject hatred is pretty frightening to me, on the other hand.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
crowded streets
You may recall that in my last post, I wrote that I am, at the core, a solitary person and I enjoy quiet and being alone. So you can maybe imagine my discomfort on Monday given the following:
There were more people there than I have ever been around in my life. At one point, we couldn't move very well for about 30 minutes, as we were in the middle of a large sardine crush. I was wondering how soon I would know if I were, in fact, being crushed to death. Would it happen quickly, or would I be aware during the whole thing?
Quite honestly, it was the perfect setup for a dangerous situation. There were too many people in the city relative to the preparations. There were not enough police, and not enough information dissemination. So many people, frustrated and crushed together, is a toxic combination.
But I was quite amazed and heartened by the fact that it never even almost went the bad direction. People were smiling and laughing at the situation (though obviously pissed off at what was happening in general). There was no taking out frustrations on each other. Rather, there was a feeling of being in a rotten situation together and what more could you do than share in it? We shared horror stories with other folks all day. We helped elderly ladies who were lost as we were strolling down the interstate, and laughed with people as they struggled to crawl over the medians.
I was there in DC to celebrate the end of a presidency that I abhored, the beginning of a presidency that I have much hope for, and the historic moment that it was wrt the inauguration of a black president. I did all of those things and enjoy the fact that I can say I was there. But the most striking thing for me that day was the realization that humans, en masse, might not be as bad as I have always assumed. There was mob patience shown that day, mob kindness, and a general wish to just share the moment with each other. It was a nice thing to learn.
There were more people there than I have ever been around in my life. At one point, we couldn't move very well for about 30 minutes, as we were in the middle of a large sardine crush. I was wondering how soon I would know if I were, in fact, being crushed to death. Would it happen quickly, or would I be aware during the whole thing?
Quite honestly, it was the perfect setup for a dangerous situation. There were too many people in the city relative to the preparations. There were not enough police, and not enough information dissemination. So many people, frustrated and crushed together, is a toxic combination.
But I was quite amazed and heartened by the fact that it never even almost went the bad direction. People were smiling and laughing at the situation (though obviously pissed off at what was happening in general). There was no taking out frustrations on each other. Rather, there was a feeling of being in a rotten situation together and what more could you do than share in it? We shared horror stories with other folks all day. We helped elderly ladies who were lost as we were strolling down the interstate, and laughed with people as they struggled to crawl over the medians.
I was there in DC to celebrate the end of a presidency that I abhored, the beginning of a presidency that I have much hope for, and the historic moment that it was wrt the inauguration of a black president. I did all of those things and enjoy the fact that I can say I was there. But the most striking thing for me that day was the realization that humans, en masse, might not be as bad as I have always assumed. There was mob patience shown that day, mob kindness, and a general wish to just share the moment with each other. It was a nice thing to learn.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
I'm liking 2009 already.....
Tonight, as I was working on the buffalo chicken to take over to our neighbor's house for their New Year's Eve party, Mare called me. She wanted to let me know that the two of us have tickets to the swearing in of Barack Obama as president of the United States of America on January 20, 2009.
(pause)
GAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! happy happy happy dance dance dance fist pump fist pump Whoot whoot whoot!!!!!!!!
(end pause)
It's gonna be tough. We'll have to drive up to DC the day before to pick up the tickets. On MLK day. With inauguration activities going on. And knowing that we'll have to be in Richmond by 5 am the next morning to catch the Amtrack train into DC. And we're a lot older now than we used to be...meaning creakier.
But I feel like I have been waiting for this to happen for so long. Aretha Franklin will be performing. And Barack Obama will be sworn in as president. And I'll be there. With Mare.
Things are looking up. So far, 2009, I love you.
(pause)
GAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! happy happy happy dance dance dance fist pump fist pump Whoot whoot whoot!!!!!!!!
(end pause)
It's gonna be tough. We'll have to drive up to DC the day before to pick up the tickets. On MLK day. With inauguration activities going on. And knowing that we'll have to be in Richmond by 5 am the next morning to catch the Amtrack train into DC. And we're a lot older now than we used to be...meaning creakier.
But I feel like I have been waiting for this to happen for so long. Aretha Franklin will be performing. And Barack Obama will be sworn in as president. And I'll be there. With Mare.
Things are looking up. So far, 2009, I love you.
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Oh yes, it's personal
This is the traditional Tibetan prayer flag sent to me several weeks ago from my dear friend Kath. The colors represent the "five pure lights," or elements. Blue (sky/space), White (air/wind), Red (fire), Green (water), Yellow (earth). Each flag has a picture of a "Ta" (a strong horse) which is a symbol of speed and the transformation of bad fortune into good fortune. Traditional mantras are written around the Ta on each flag that promote peace, compassion, strength and wisdom. When you hang it in the winds, they are supposed to take the good will and compassion into all pervading space. I've been saving it to put out on this particular morning. I'm rather in the mood for some positive forces in this world. Wisdom is a good thing, as are peace, compassion and strength. We need it all.
So on that note, does anyone want to take a guess on who I might vote for in the presidential election today? Seriously. Any takers?
Well, OK. You're right - actually, I have known for a while. To be exact, I've known since July 27, 2004 that I would one day be voting for Barack Obama for my president. My family was in Baltimore, MD to watch the Red Sox play the Orioles that evening, and we had rented a hotel room near Camden Yards. I believe the Red Sox lost that night, and we had walked back to our room afterwards, totally exhausted. Once back and showered and pajama-ed up, we cozied up beneath the blankets and had the TV tuned to the Democratic Convention. John Kerry was being nominated that year. I liked the man, and still believe he would have been a good president. Whatever. (gasp and shake your heads all you want. He was swift-boated!!!) Since we were all so tired, we fell asleep quickly with the TV still on. I woke up a bit later and sat up sleepily to see what was going on at the convention. It happened to be just in time for the keynote speaker for that night - an unknown guy from Illinois that I'd never heard of named Barack Obama. I listened for a couple of minutes and ended up absolutely transfixed. In fact, I started crying. Bawling. The next morning I told DH that Barack Obama was going to be our president one day. I absolutely knew that it was inevitable. I told my parents. I told anyone who would listen to me. I wrote about it in my blog. I hope I was right, and will find out in several hours if I was.
I absolutely admit that my support for Barack Obama at that point was visceral. He is a young, good looking man with an overwhelming aura of control about him. He is an electrifying and eloquent speaker. Visceral, perhaps, but the ability to inspire and persuade are not traits to dismiss when you are talking about the president of a large and powerful and influential country. Since that night, my support for him has remained.
In the very long (f*cking LONG) four years since that night, well... things have certainly played out on the world stage, haven't they? We are still sending our future, our young men and women, to Iraq into what I believe is a misplaced war (wrong place, wrong people). Many of these young people aren't coming home. Ever. We are in the middle of a global financial crisis that, I daresay, most of us don't understand. What I do understand is that within the past month no less than 6 friends have told me that they or their spouse have lost their jobs. The climate is changing with increasing speed as a result of global warming and folks? If you think these other issues are difficult to deal with, they will pale in comparison to this.
We have some very difficult times ahead of us and it is going to be a painful time for so many people. That's not going to change regardless of who we elect as president. In the short term, it's going to hurt. But it is crucial that we pick someone who is going to move this giant elephant back into the right direction. We need someone who is wise enough to listen to experts and discuss options. We need someone who will move beyond politics and be honest with the public. We'll need the cooperation of the world to do this - this country cannot continue to exist in such isolation as it has for the last decade. We've got to put that arrogance aside and realize we are part of the global community. The opinion of the rest of the world about this election is obvious. My friend in England just yesterday sent me an email to wish me luck with "our revolution." It's an important election for them, too.
I could continue for days on individual policy points and why I believe Barack Obama is on the right track, but I won't. This post is a personal one for me, a visceral one. I have been waiting for this day for a long time. I don't know what the outcome will be. I do know that there will be tears tonight, no matter what it is. I'll have my champaign handy, in case I need it. I'll be at the computer with my cell phone handy so I can enjoy this night with my personal gang (Mare, J, Polli, Jamie, Kath, Carrie...) who feel as strongly about this as I do. Ladies, if the world was made out of people like you, we'd be unstoppable. Maybe...just maybe today, we'll start moving in that direction.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
from the mouths of babes
I received a call from E's 4th grade teacher while I was at work today. Those are lovely calls to get, aren't they? "Hello! This is Mrs. L. Is this a good time for you to talk? I need to talk to you about an incident with E today."
I should point out that I'm good friends with E's teacher. She didn't sound overly upset or anything, so I didn't freak and simply said yes, this was a good time and please tell me what happened.
The 4th graders put on a Veteran's Day program every year at our school. It's very nice and usually brings a few tears to every eye in the auditorium. Anyway, they were practicing the song "God Bless the USA" today, and Mrs. L told me she noticed that E and her good friend were just sobbing and sobbing. She pulled them aside, very concerned, and asked them what was wrong. My dear, sweet E told her this: "Next week is the election and if John McCain is elected, he's really old and has cancer and if he dies, that means Sarah Palin will be president and then we're going to have to move to CANADAAAAAA!!!!!" (sob sob sob) E's friend was sobbing because she was going to miss E. E was afraid she wasn't even going to get to perform the Veteran's Day program with her class because she would be moving either to Canada or somewhere else overseas.
Oh geez.
I started to apologize profusely to Mrs. L, but had to stop because she couldn't hold back her laughter any longer. "I'm sorry - I don't mean to laugh but. BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH" etc., etc., etc. "I think you might ..." hahahahahah" etc.,e etc., etc., ...need to reassure E"....bwahahahah..."tonight. Unless you're really going to move to Canada."
"I think I need to stop shooting my mouth off in front of my kids" I said.
I should point out that I'm good friends with E's teacher. She didn't sound overly upset or anything, so I didn't freak and simply said yes, this was a good time and please tell me what happened.
The 4th graders put on a Veteran's Day program every year at our school. It's very nice and usually brings a few tears to every eye in the auditorium. Anyway, they were practicing the song "God Bless the USA" today, and Mrs. L told me she noticed that E and her good friend were just sobbing and sobbing. She pulled them aside, very concerned, and asked them what was wrong. My dear, sweet E told her this: "Next week is the election and if John McCain is elected, he's really old and has cancer and if he dies, that means Sarah Palin will be president and then we're going to have to move to CANADAAAAAA!!!!!" (sob sob sob) E's friend was sobbing because she was going to miss E. E was afraid she wasn't even going to get to perform the Veteran's Day program with her class because she would be moving either to Canada or somewhere else overseas.
Oh geez.
I started to apologize profusely to Mrs. L, but had to stop because she couldn't hold back her laughter any longer. "I'm sorry - I don't mean to laugh but. BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH" etc., etc., etc. "I think you might ..." hahahahahah" etc.,e etc., etc., ...need to reassure E"....bwahahahah..."tonight. Unless you're really going to move to Canada."
"I think I need to stop shooting my mouth off in front of my kids" I said.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
turning point
My husband made me cry tonight. He did. (and I will continue to remind him of that).
He came home and told me to watch a couple of youtube videos. Remember the WHASSUP!!!?? commercials from (OMG) 8 years ago??
OK. Now watch this one:
I believe they're the same actors.
This totally took me by surprise and I burst into tears, somewhat stunning poor DH.
Sixteen years ago, I was very young. I was single and so naive and idealistic and when Bill Clinton/Al Gore were elected, I cried. I'd gone to the local Democratic Headquarters on election night and felt the love and the optimism and I ate cake in celebration with other democrats. (I also remember hiding from some guy that wanted to date me. LOL. I was pissed beyond belief at him for interjecting something so stupid and unwanted into something I felt so incredibly strongly about. This was a night about the FUTURE and the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and um, not so much about who to go out for pizza with.) No, I never went out with him and I successfully avoided him that night, though I left the festivities earlier than I would have otherwise. But he didn't ruin my fun. I went home and watched the returns and I cried and cried and felt like there was intelligence in the world again after all. Later, I drove to DC in January for the inauguration festivities and ate NY cheesecake and danced with friends. I felt more optimistic about the world than I can remember feeling since.
Next Tuesday holds the opportunity to surpass that feeling of optimism. I will either fall in love with my country all over again or I will... I don't know what I'll do. I saw announcements for work in atmospheric chemistry at York U. in Canada a few weeks ago. Maybe I should look into it. I don't know if I can bear it if John McCain and Sarah Palin are elected. I cannot understand how there is even a possibility of that happening. WTF is WRONG with people?? Seriously? I don't understand. John McCain was someone who held my respect before he nominated doo-dah know-nothing fluffy bit of meanness Palin. The thought of her holding the position of Vice President of the most powerful country on earth is in the realm of horror movies. Seriously. How can anyone that thinks not be scared as hell by the thought of her running this country? OMG.
Turning point.
He came home and told me to watch a couple of youtube videos. Remember the WHASSUP!!!?? commercials from (OMG) 8 years ago??
OK. Now watch this one:
I believe they're the same actors.
This totally took me by surprise and I burst into tears, somewhat stunning poor DH.
Sixteen years ago, I was very young. I was single and so naive and idealistic and when Bill Clinton/Al Gore were elected, I cried. I'd gone to the local Democratic Headquarters on election night and felt the love and the optimism and I ate cake in celebration with other democrats. (I also remember hiding from some guy that wanted to date me. LOL. I was pissed beyond belief at him for interjecting something so stupid and unwanted into something I felt so incredibly strongly about. This was a night about the FUTURE and the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and um, not so much about who to go out for pizza with.) No, I never went out with him and I successfully avoided him that night, though I left the festivities earlier than I would have otherwise. But he didn't ruin my fun. I went home and watched the returns and I cried and cried and felt like there was intelligence in the world again after all. Later, I drove to DC in January for the inauguration festivities and ate NY cheesecake and danced with friends. I felt more optimistic about the world than I can remember feeling since.
Next Tuesday holds the opportunity to surpass that feeling of optimism. I will either fall in love with my country all over again or I will... I don't know what I'll do. I saw announcements for work in atmospheric chemistry at York U. in Canada a few weeks ago. Maybe I should look into it. I don't know if I can bear it if John McCain and Sarah Palin are elected. I cannot understand how there is even a possibility of that happening. WTF is WRONG with people?? Seriously? I don't understand. John McCain was someone who held my respect before he nominated doo-dah know-nothing fluffy bit of meanness Palin. The thought of her holding the position of Vice President of the most powerful country on earth is in the realm of horror movies. Seriously. How can anyone that thinks not be scared as hell by the thought of her running this country? OMG.
Turning point.
It's baaaack!!
Four years ago, I was on tenterhooks over the 2004 presidential election and the chance to stop George W from having a second term. I wasn't raving over John Kerry, but I certainly liked him, and he was orders of magnitude better than the alternative. So one evening during the long, long, long election season, I found myself in front of the computer drinking a bottle of wine and watching snippets of Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 911". (I'm sure I've told this story before). Somehow, my credit card ended up in my hand and then I was at the Kerry campaign headquarters website punching in a donation between my heaving sobs at what a wreck the war in Iraq was, and at my fears for another 4 years of the Bush administration. I learned a valuable lesson that night.
I clicked "submit" on the donation page and immediately got back a "Thank you for your generous donation of $2000.00 to the Kerry campaign!"
It took a few seconds for it to compute that somehow, an extra zero had appeared in my donation. Thus ensued a stunned silence, rubbing of the eyes, disbelief, and then one of the fastest sinking feelings in the pit of my stomach that I've had to date.
To make a long story short, I was able to straighten it out with the campaign the next day, and they cheerfully removed one of the zeros, after laughing at me (not with me but at me).
I thought that was the end of that particular story.
This last weekend, I got a phone call from the Democratic candidate running for the US Congress in my local district. I mean, I got a call from the candidate himself. I thought that was surprising. We chatted for a long while, and he started telling me about his stance on the current financial crisis. He mentioned Obama's tax plan and said something to me like "You know, taxes won't be increased on families making less than a quarter million dollars a year. Now, I don't know if you're in that bracket or not - you very well may be."
(Um. OK.)
I told him I was not but that if I were, I would not waver in my support for that sort of tax increase one bit. I then told him I was an atmospheric scientist and that I was especially concerned that the current financial crisis would put the global environmental crisis down the priority list. He immediately assured me that this was the MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE in the world to him and that he'd campaigned on it for years. It was in all of his stump speeches for the last 5 or 10 years or so. (Oh, really? FWIW, I couldn't find the word mentioned on his website, though his support of alternative energy sources was quite prominent, in a vague sort of way)
Anyway, he then asked me if I would contribute $2300.00 to his campaign. I immediately burst into laughter, which I don't think was quite the response he was looking for. I recovered enough to tell him I didn't have that kind of cash sitting around and asked him for his website, which he was happy to share with me.
Today, I received a letter from him, again asking for $2300.00 for his campaign, or at least, for a smaller donation of $1000.00. What the hell?
It finally occurred to me that my erroneous extra-zero donation has returned to haunt me. It must have remained on the list of donors to the Democratic Party, and he's targeted me as a money-bags. I hope he's not counting on it.
Wine, credit cards, and the internet is a combination best avoided.
I clicked "submit" on the donation page and immediately got back a "Thank you for your generous donation of $2000.00 to the Kerry campaign!"
It took a few seconds for it to compute that somehow, an extra zero had appeared in my donation. Thus ensued a stunned silence, rubbing of the eyes, disbelief, and then one of the fastest sinking feelings in the pit of my stomach that I've had to date.
To make a long story short, I was able to straighten it out with the campaign the next day, and they cheerfully removed one of the zeros, after laughing at me (not with me but at me).
I thought that was the end of that particular story.
This last weekend, I got a phone call from the Democratic candidate running for the US Congress in my local district. I mean, I got a call from the candidate himself. I thought that was surprising. We chatted for a long while, and he started telling me about his stance on the current financial crisis. He mentioned Obama's tax plan and said something to me like "You know, taxes won't be increased on families making less than a quarter million dollars a year. Now, I don't know if you're in that bracket or not - you very well may be."
(Um. OK.)
I told him I was not but that if I were, I would not waver in my support for that sort of tax increase one bit. I then told him I was an atmospheric scientist and that I was especially concerned that the current financial crisis would put the global environmental crisis down the priority list. He immediately assured me that this was the MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE in the world to him and that he'd campaigned on it for years. It was in all of his stump speeches for the last 5 or 10 years or so. (Oh, really? FWIW, I couldn't find the word mentioned on his website, though his support of alternative energy sources was quite prominent, in a vague sort of way)
Anyway, he then asked me if I would contribute $2300.00 to his campaign. I immediately burst into laughter, which I don't think was quite the response he was looking for. I recovered enough to tell him I didn't have that kind of cash sitting around and asked him for his website, which he was happy to share with me.
Today, I received a letter from him, again asking for $2300.00 for his campaign, or at least, for a smaller donation of $1000.00. What the hell?
It finally occurred to me that my erroneous extra-zero donation has returned to haunt me. It must have remained on the list of donors to the Democratic Party, and he's targeted me as a money-bags. I hope he's not counting on it.
Friday, October 24, 2008
polling website
Here's a site someone showed me yesterday, that has more information on polling and statistics and projections than you could possibly need to know.
I swear I'll try to stop with the negative political posts now. It's just so hard to stop when there is so much material showing up daily.
I swear I'll try to stop with the negative political posts now. It's just so hard to stop when there is so much material showing up daily.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
more
But wait!!! More hypocrisy!!!
Another popular RNC smear of Obama: "That one" is associated with ACORN, that evil no-good group associated with the most massive perp of voter fraud E.V.E.R.
No politician worth anything would associate with them would they?? Since Senator Obama represented them in their attempt to carry out the motor-voter law in Michigan, that proves that he's BAD BAD BAD. Right?
McCain, on the other hand MUST be lily-white pure as snow, since he's the one spreading this wealth of information, right?
Oh look! Here's a video of the KEYNOTE SPEAKER at an ACORN meeting just two years
ago!! Hmmm. I wonder who it might be?
"What makes America special is what's in this room tonight."
Was he speaking in code?
Another popular RNC smear of Obama: "That one" is associated with ACORN, that evil no-good group associated with the most massive perp of voter fraud E.V.E.R.
No politician worth anything would associate with them would they?? Since Senator Obama represented them in their attempt to carry out the motor-voter law in Michigan, that proves that he's BAD BAD BAD. Right?
McCain, on the other hand MUST be lily-white pure as snow, since he's the one spreading this wealth of information, right?
Oh look! Here's a video of the KEYNOTE SPEAKER at an ACORN meeting just two years
ago!! Hmmm. I wonder who it might be?
"What makes America special is what's in this room tonight."
Was he speaking in code?
lies lies, dirty lies
How is it that my 12 year old son so clearly sees the hypocrisy of John McCain and that 40-something percent of Americans don't (or won't) see it?
Let's look at his latest charge. Barack Obama is a (gasp) socialist because he wants the wealthiest what - 5%?- of Americans to pay a little more tax. Socialist!!! Socialist!!!
Senator McCain. How about this - before you start with the pre-programmed political soundbites, you should probably make damn sure that whatever it is that you're railing against is something that you yourself don't support. You don't want to come across as hypocritical or anything, you know.
Here's John McCain in HIS OWN WORDS.
This one is even more fun. It's from the Daily Show and Q and I just watched it together. (The sheep-thing was a little uncomfortable, but he's nearly a teenager. I was good. I managed.)
O.M.G.
Stop! Stop! Your lack of ethics is showing!!
Watch to the end.
John McCain (during 2000):
"Here's what I..I really believe. That when you are ... reach a certain level of comfort, that there's nothing wrong with paying somewhat more."
And what is it again, honorable senator, that you are bashing Barack Obama for? I forget. Something you totally disagree with, SURELY.
Bah. No.Respect.Left.At.All.
Let's look at his latest charge. Barack Obama is a (gasp) socialist because he wants the wealthiest what - 5%?- of Americans to pay a little more tax. Socialist!!! Socialist!!!
Senator McCain. How about this - before you start with the pre-programmed political soundbites, you should probably make damn sure that whatever it is that you're railing against is something that you yourself don't support. You don't want to come across as hypocritical or anything, you know.
Here's John McCain in HIS OWN WORDS.
This one is even more fun. It's from the Daily Show and Q and I just watched it together. (The sheep-thing was a little uncomfortable, but he's nearly a teenager. I was good. I managed.)
O.M.G.
Stop! Stop! Your lack of ethics is showing!!
Watch to the end.
John McCain (during 2000):
"Here's what I..I really believe. That when you are ... reach a certain level of comfort, that there's nothing wrong with paying somewhat more."
And what is it again, honorable senator, that you are bashing Barack Obama for? I forget. Something you totally disagree with, SURELY.
Bah. No.Respect.Left.At.All.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
I can't stand it
My political posts these last few months have focused almost exclusively on the travesty that is otherwise known as Sarah Palin. I figured enough was enough, and I've tried to lay off. But I cannot stand it anymore. You may (or may not) remember something I posted last month about Governor Palin's answer to a question posed at a stop for cheesesteaks in Philadelphia. The question dealt with whether the US military should cross the border from Afghanistan into Pakistan to hunt down terrorists. She responded (I'm quoting): "If that's what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should." I used that as an example of her utter lack of preparation and knowledge about this campaign (not to mention foreign policy) because her answer was in line with what Senator Barack Obama believes, and not what Senator McCain believes.
OK, keep that little episode in mind and consider the following from CNN news today:
Edited to add: I just checked out a friend's blog who is discussing and comparing the RNC's (and McCain's very vocal) stance on earmarks versus the incredibly honorable Governor Palin's actual actions. Check this and this if you're interested.
Edited again because I posted the wrong link up there under the "something I posted" line. (See how frazzled I am??!!)
OK, keep that little episode in mind and consider the following from CNN news today:
Sarah Palin’s pointed criticism of Barack Obama’s foreign policy agenda Tuesday morning included a swipe at Obama’s stated commitment to strike at terrorists inside Pakistan’s borders if they are in the sights of the American military.Oh, the hypocricy, the ignorance, the ridiculousness of it all simply boggles the mind. I wrote about a dozen posts in my head during my drive home from work today, all in response to similar ridiculousness on the "honorable" (dripping sarcasm) Governor Palin's part. I'll limit it to just this for now, since my original intent was, after all, to try to lay off. But gracious. What boggles my mind even MORE is that there are actually people out there who intend to vote for her. She could be running this country. Are these people, in fact, actually ok with that idea? (faint)“Senator Obama has also advocated sending our U.S. military into Pakistan without the approval of the Pakistani government,” Palin said. “Invading the sovereign territory of a troubled partner in the war against terrorism.”
Edited to add: I just checked out a friend's blog who is discussing and comparing the RNC's (and McCain's very vocal) stance on earmarks versus the incredibly honorable Governor Palin's actual actions. Check this and this if you're interested.
Edited again because I posted the wrong link up there under the "something I posted" line. (See how frazzled I am??!!)
Sunday, October 19, 2008
random things from my weekend
Look what I did:
Applesauce! ...made from the apples I brought home from the Apple Festival last weekend. I also made an apple crisp (which, apparently, only Q and I like, and like it we do, especially with a dollop of vanilla ice cream melting on the top). I made apple pancakes this morning, and I'll be making a butternut squash/apple soup this evening. There will still be some left over, but I picked up a caramel dip at the store this afternoon, so I'm guessing the kids will be able to handle the rest.
Oh - lesson learned. I tried canning with none of the specialized canning equipment. As a result, I discovered all these special items have been invented for a reason and will be well worth the purchase. I also learned that it hurts like h*ll to put a finger in a pot of water that is at a "rolling boil."
I had a nightmare last night that Barack Obama pulled just 35% of the vote in the election. It was terrible. I had knots in my stomach at the vision of Sarah Palin being sworn in as "my" elected leader and was therefore in a pissy mood all morning long.
On that note, thank you Colin Powell, for turning my mood back again by telling it like it is, for calling out John McCain on his fear-mongering campaign tactics. The "terrorist" thing? The "socialist" word? Give me a f*cking break. If you cannot articulate the reasons we should vote for you and instead resort to attempts to scare votes out of the public, you have lost even the last shreds of respect I had left for you. Act like a grown-up. I'm done with the middle-school name calling thing, thankyouverymuch.
I'm not going to say anything about the game tonight. No jinxing allowed. I will say that Jason Varitek picked a helluvagood time to rediscover his bat.
Applesauce! ...made from the apples I brought home from the Apple Festival last weekend. I also made an apple crisp (which, apparently, only Q and I like, and like it we do, especially with a dollop of vanilla ice cream melting on the top). I made apple pancakes this morning, and I'll be making a butternut squash/apple soup this evening. There will still be some left over, but I picked up a caramel dip at the store this afternoon, so I'm guessing the kids will be able to handle the rest.
Oh - lesson learned. I tried canning with none of the specialized canning equipment. As a result, I discovered all these special items have been invented for a reason and will be well worth the purchase. I also learned that it hurts like h*ll to put a finger in a pot of water that is at a "rolling boil."
I had a nightmare last night that Barack Obama pulled just 35% of the vote in the election. It was terrible. I had knots in my stomach at the vision of Sarah Palin being sworn in as "my" elected leader and was therefore in a pissy mood all morning long.
On that note, thank you Colin Powell, for turning my mood back again by telling it like it is, for calling out John McCain on his fear-mongering campaign tactics. The "terrorist" thing? The "socialist" word? Give me a f*cking break. If you cannot articulate the reasons we should vote for you and instead resort to attempts to scare votes out of the public, you have lost even the last shreds of respect I had left for you. Act like a grown-up. I'm done with the middle-school name calling thing, thankyouverymuch.
I'm not going to say anything about the game tonight. No jinxing allowed. I will say that Jason Varitek picked a helluvagood time to rediscover his bat.
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
ouch ouch ouch
(this drawing is from Plognark)
"It's time that normal Joe six-pack American is finally represented in the position of vice presidency..."
Governor Sarah Palin in radio interview with Hugh Hewitt.
Let's play a word-association game. What or who comes to your mind when I say
"JOE SIX-PACK?"
Here are some of my answers:
Bubba.
Redneck.
The guy down the street with a beer belly who walks around showing his butt crack.
"King of the Hill"
"Family Guy"
Homer.
I've gotta say. "Vice President of the United States" doesn't spring to mind for me.
The media has been reporting this as Sarah Palin trying to appeal to Joe Six-Pack. I don't read her answer that way (I listened to it too, and I'm sticking to my interpretation).
"...finally represented IN the position of vice presidency..."
I am offended that she thinks we're stupid enough to want "Joe SixPack" as our leader. You want a leader to be the best of the general public in order to best serve it. You do not necessarily want a leader to be representative OF the general public, particularly if you characterize the general public as "Joe Sixpack". Or at least those are my ideals. (I'm not the only one.)
The stupid, it burns...
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Like, OMG!!!
The more I think and read, the more the nomination of Sarah Palin scares the CRAP out of me.
The simple fact of her nomination is an indication of how deep US politics has sunk into to the quagmire of dumbed-down political games and all that is wrong in politics. She is perhaps the WORST candidate ever put forward for command of this country.
Here are a handful of some of the reasons that I think her nomination is a travesty.
1) Here is one response to her "cheesesteak" interview in Philadelphia. So what happened here is that a rare opportunity for the media to speak to Sarah Palin was granted during a campaign stop for cheesesteaks. (She has not had many opportunities to talk candidly with the media. The RNC is scared to death of what she will say, and apparently, for good reason. She doesn't have a clue. She is so out of her league that I would feel sorry for her if I didn't despise her so much.)
A grad-student journalist at the stop asked her whether the US should cross the border from Afghanistan into Pakistan. Her response? "If that's what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should," Palin said.
WHOOPS!!!!! See, that's Barack Obama's position, and not John McCain's. John McCain's explanation of her response?
2) Kathleen Parker is heavily pro-Republican columnist. Her response to the few interviews that Sarah Palin has had?
"Palin's recent interviews with Charles Gibson (ABC News), Sean Hannity (Fox News) and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League," Parker said.
Here's her plea to Sarah Palin to step aside for the good of the Republican party.
3) We've all heard the ridiculousness of her foreign policy "expertise":
4) Judge for yourselves. (parts of interview with Katie Couric.)
I agree with Kathleen Parker. She is clueless. She is out of her league. She is an embarrassment.
By the way, her comment that the recent financial crisis may lead to another Great Depression is directly at odds with John McCain's stance. She's obviously not as quick of a study as the RNC hoped. Her response to Katie Couric's repeated request for ANY examples of the claim that John McCain has supported more regulation of financial institutions over the last 25 years: "I'll....try to find you some and I'll bring 'em to ya." (smile)
Sorry, Sarah. This isn't a beauty pageant. You're expected to know the answers in advance.
Quite simply, the thought of her running my country makes me ill. She infuriates me. She is an example of our "fast food" society. No experience, no deep understanding, no knowledge - she's a media farce.
The simple fact of her nomination is an indication of how deep US politics has sunk into to the quagmire of dumbed-down political games and all that is wrong in politics. She is perhaps the WORST candidate ever put forward for command of this country.
Here are a handful of some of the reasons that I think her nomination is a travesty.
1) Here is one response to her "cheesesteak" interview in Philadelphia. So what happened here is that a rare opportunity for the media to speak to Sarah Palin was granted during a campaign stop for cheesesteaks. (She has not had many opportunities to talk candidly with the media. The RNC is scared to death of what she will say, and apparently, for good reason. She doesn't have a clue. She is so out of her league that I would feel sorry for her if I didn't despise her so much.)
A grad-student journalist at the stop asked her whether the US should cross the border from Afghanistan into Pakistan. Her response? "If that's what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should," Palin said.
WHOOPS!!!!! See, that's Barack Obama's position, and not John McCain's. John McCain's explanation of her response?
"She would not…she understands and has stated repeatedly that we're not going to do anything except in America's national security interest," McCain told ABC's George Stephanopoulos of Palin. "In all due respect, people going around and… sticking a microphone while conversations are being held, and then all of a sudden that's—that's a person's position… This is a free country, but I don't think most Americans think that that's a definitve policy statement made by Governor Palin."Uh. Ok. I understand that the RNC has been trying to keep her interview exposure at zero, but "sticking a microphone while conversations are being held.." during a campaign stop, are normally interpreted as, umm, interviews. Welcome to a campaign!!!! (boggle) And with all due respect, I think that "most Americans" will think that she believes pretty much what she says, John McCain. Huh. A mere few weeks of rushed indoctrination wasn't quite enough, was it, to make this trophy candidate into interview-quality material? Mmm. Maybe you'd have been better off picking someone more, um, QUALIFIED??
2) Kathleen Parker is heavily pro-Republican columnist. Her response to the few interviews that Sarah Palin has had?
"Palin's recent interviews with Charles Gibson (ABC News), Sean Hannity (Fox News) and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League," Parker said.
Here's her plea to Sarah Palin to step aside for the good of the Republican party.
3) We've all heard the ridiculousness of her foreign policy "expertise":
Pressed on why Alaska's geographic location enhanced her world knowledge, Palin said: "Well, it certainly does, because our, our next-door neighbors are foreign countries, there in the state that I am the executive of."
She actually said this, folks. Not making this up. OMG. She believes she's an expert because she lives next to Russia. (faint)She said that when Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin "rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America, where do they go? It's Alaska."
"It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right next to, they are right next to our state," Palin added.
4) Judge for yourselves. (parts of interview with Katie Couric.)
I agree with Kathleen Parker. She is clueless. She is out of her league. She is an embarrassment.
By the way, her comment that the recent financial crisis may lead to another Great Depression is directly at odds with John McCain's stance. She's obviously not as quick of a study as the RNC hoped. Her response to Katie Couric's repeated request for ANY examples of the claim that John McCain has supported more regulation of financial institutions over the last 25 years: "I'll....try to find you some and I'll bring 'em to ya." (smile)
Sorry, Sarah. This isn't a beauty pageant. You're expected to know the answers in advance.
Quite simply, the thought of her running my country makes me ill. She infuriates me. She is an example of our "fast food" society. No experience, no deep understanding, no knowledge - she's a media farce.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
my comments on being pro-science
edit: I came in this morning with the intent of taking this post off since it's so awfully fluffy, but Mare had already commented on it so I'm leaving it. Take this as it is - written after a few glasses of wine and after seeing a lovely rainbow.
In hindsight, I suppose it is really no surprise that I ended up as a scientist.
There is one incident from second grade that I clearly remember, and it was certainly suggestive of the fact that I'd end up where I am now. We were learning multiplication and our teacher, Mrs. England, was using flash cards to drill the class. She was sitting in front of the class on her wooden stool and was rapidly flipping through the fact cards, her thin lips pressed into the persistent grimace that was her teacher face. I was not a happy girl. You see, Mrs. England never explained the concept of multiplication to us. We had been asked to simply memorize the facts and the class was collectively reciting them back to her. I felt like a fish out of water. While the rest of the class was dutifully, if more than an little monotonously chanting multiplication facts in unison, I was determined to figure out HOW this new math was working. Unfortunately she and the rest of the class were zipping through the rote memorization too quickly for me to work it out. I was so frustrated that I started to cry. When Mrs. England asked me what was wrong, I told her I was sick, so I was sent down to the nurse's office. I can acutely remember the combined medicinal and musty smell of that primary school's nurse's room as I lay there on the little white cot waiting for my mom to come pick me up. The sick feeling in my stomach was a combination of frustration at not being able to figure out why multiplication worked like it did, and the abject worry about what my mom would say to me when she realized I was faking it. In fact, my mom did immediately know that I wasn't sick. Her response was to give me a big hug and take me home.
At that point in my life, I was only just beginning to realize that beneath every action, there lay a series of logical steps. Cracking the code of logic beneath something magical like why the stars twinkled or why the sunsets are so beautiful only heightens the sense of awe for me. It is what makes me gaze at a rainbow (I saw a 4/5 full one tonight!) and is what makes me hold my breath in reverence at the simple movement of the wind.
I am not an excellent scientist. I'm merely an adequate one, but I do know enough to understand that explanations - logical explanations - exist if you know where to look for them.
I also understand that there is an amazing and wonderful variety of kinds of people in this world. There are many who are not as fascinated by science and logical explanations as I am. Many are quite willing to accept life as it is without feeling the need to search for the "why." And that's fine - that's great. No problem. Variety is the spice of life and all that.
However, I do add the caution that the fact that one does not feel the need to search out and understand the science behind our world does not eliminate the fact that it is there. With a little time and experience, most children figure out that even if they close their eyes, others can still see them. You see, science is not a religion. It is not close to anything remotely resembling a religion. It is not even mysterious. Science is the result of the collective knowledge that is the result of thousands of years of billions of thinking humans. It didn't come about by accident.
There are a couple of things that I've read about Sarah Palin's take on science that are, ehm, confusing.
1) She believes that both evolution and creationism should be taught in the classroom.
One of these is backed by the previously described years of collective knowledge and supported by factual scientific evidence and theory. The other is written in the Bible. One should be presented in the academic environment from which it was born . The other should be presented in the religious environment from which it was born. I do not understand the confusion here. If you do not believe that scientific fact is compelling enough, why on earth would you insist that your religious beliefs be presented as, um... scientific fact? Pick one or the other, and keep it in its respective home. Or, like most of the country, allow for the fact that both can co-exist, but keep each in its respective home (Personally, I do not subscribe to this latter suggestion but realize that the majority of people do.)
2) Governor Palin also seems confused on the issue of climate change.
From the Associated Press:
In case you are wondering, I did finally figure out that multiplication was only a fancy way of doing addition. I honestly don't remember if Mrs. England taught me this (doubtful) or if my parents did, or if I just figured it out on my own at last. In any case, I'm glad I did, because I use it an awful lot these days.
In hindsight, I suppose it is really no surprise that I ended up as a scientist.
There is one incident from second grade that I clearly remember, and it was certainly suggestive of the fact that I'd end up where I am now. We were learning multiplication and our teacher, Mrs. England, was using flash cards to drill the class. She was sitting in front of the class on her wooden stool and was rapidly flipping through the fact cards, her thin lips pressed into the persistent grimace that was her teacher face. I was not a happy girl. You see, Mrs. England never explained the concept of multiplication to us. We had been asked to simply memorize the facts and the class was collectively reciting them back to her. I felt like a fish out of water. While the rest of the class was dutifully, if more than an little monotonously chanting multiplication facts in unison, I was determined to figure out HOW this new math was working. Unfortunately she and the rest of the class were zipping through the rote memorization too quickly for me to work it out. I was so frustrated that I started to cry. When Mrs. England asked me what was wrong, I told her I was sick, so I was sent down to the nurse's office. I can acutely remember the combined medicinal and musty smell of that primary school's nurse's room as I lay there on the little white cot waiting for my mom to come pick me up. The sick feeling in my stomach was a combination of frustration at not being able to figure out why multiplication worked like it did, and the abject worry about what my mom would say to me when she realized I was faking it. In fact, my mom did immediately know that I wasn't sick. Her response was to give me a big hug and take me home.
At that point in my life, I was only just beginning to realize that beneath every action, there lay a series of logical steps. Cracking the code of logic beneath something magical like why the stars twinkled or why the sunsets are so beautiful only heightens the sense of awe for me. It is what makes me gaze at a rainbow (I saw a 4/5 full one tonight!) and is what makes me hold my breath in reverence at the simple movement of the wind.
I am not an excellent scientist. I'm merely an adequate one, but I do know enough to understand that explanations - logical explanations - exist if you know where to look for them.
I also understand that there is an amazing and wonderful variety of kinds of people in this world. There are many who are not as fascinated by science and logical explanations as I am. Many are quite willing to accept life as it is without feeling the need to search for the "why." And that's fine - that's great. No problem. Variety is the spice of life and all that.
However, I do add the caution that the fact that one does not feel the need to search out and understand the science behind our world does not eliminate the fact that it is there. With a little time and experience, most children figure out that even if they close their eyes, others can still see them. You see, science is not a religion. It is not close to anything remotely resembling a religion. It is not even mysterious. Science is the result of the collective knowledge that is the result of thousands of years of billions of thinking humans. It didn't come about by accident.
There are a couple of things that I've read about Sarah Palin's take on science that are, ehm, confusing.
1) She believes that both evolution and creationism should be taught in the classroom.
One of these is backed by the previously described years of collective knowledge and supported by factual scientific evidence and theory. The other is written in the Bible. One should be presented in the academic environment from which it was born . The other should be presented in the religious environment from which it was born. I do not understand the confusion here. If you do not believe that scientific fact is compelling enough, why on earth would you insist that your religious beliefs be presented as, um... scientific fact? Pick one or the other, and keep it in its respective home. Or, like most of the country, allow for the fact that both can co-exist, but keep each in its respective home (Personally, I do not subscribe to this latter suggestion but realize that the majority of people do.)
2) Governor Palin also seems confused on the issue of climate change.
From the Associated Press:
But in a recent interview with Charles Gibson, she said:She has told the Internet news site Newsmax, "A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location.... I'm not one, though, who would attribute it to being man-made."
In an interview with a Fairbanks newspaper within the last year, Palin said: "I'm not an Al Gore, doom-and-gloom environmentalist blaming the changes in our climate on human activity."
Show me where I have ever said that there's absolute proof that nothing that man has ever conducted or engaged in has had any effect or no effect on climate change. I have not said that," said Palin to Gibson.and
I believe that man's activities certainly can be contributing to the issue of global warming, climate change.While vague, and only slightly less worrisome from the persepective of a scientist, these last statements seem awfully out of line with her earlier stance. Politics, anyone?
In case you are wondering, I did finally figure out that multiplication was only a fancy way of doing addition. I honestly don't remember if Mrs. England taught me this (doubtful) or if my parents did, or if I just figured it out on my own at last. In any case, I'm glad I did, because I use it an awful lot these days.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
my comments on being manipulated
First, thank you to all who have asked about my family in Texas. They are all well, per a couple of quick cell phone calls this afternoon. None of them have electricity at the moment, and I've heard rumors that it could be as much as 3 to 4 weeks before power is restored to all of the greater Houston area. Mom and Dad are well stocked up on peanut butter and diet root beer and have an ongoing battle of Gin-Rummy, so they should be OK for the time being. In my opinion, Houston and Galveston got off lucky on this one though. But for the flap of a butterfly's wing, it could have been so much worse.
Once I learned not to be a scared little rabbit sometime after high school, I discovered that deep down, I was actually fiercely independent. When asked to name the single most trait that I hold in the highest importance, the answer comes immediately to me: honesty. As a result of these two truths, I find that I am most comfortable when people are direct and up front with me. I detest trickery, I react violently to passive aggressive behavior, and I will walk away from games.
When I feel as if I am being manipulated, I become very angry.
Both major political parties are in the "business" with the sole intent of winning the election in November. I know that. Every word that is uttered, every appearance with children in hand, every kiss bestowed on the spouse, every sound bite repeated on the evening news has been orchestrated. Elections have become a contest of media manipulation. These are all things I realize. However, the selection of Sarah Palin as the vice presidential nominee for the Republican party has left me feeling very manipulated and very angry. Prior to being named as nominee for the second most powerful position for the most powerful nation in the world, I had not heard her name. I see the selection of this generally unknown, untested woman for VP, without any opportunity for public vetting as an essential a slap in the face to the American public. How am I to view it as otherwise? I resent that John McCain and the rest of the Republican party players believe that it is acceptable to throw an unknown into the mix with only 2 months remaining until elections.
John McCain, you are wrong - this is not acceptable. I feel manipulated and that makes me angry. I cannot imagine that you would come up with the name "Sarah Palin" as the best candidate for Vice President of the United States. Rather, you came up with her name from the equivalent of a computerized checklist. You determined she had the best shell design for playing this political game. She filled your check list for religious affiliation, to attract the conservative voters you cannot connect with. She is a lifetime member of the NRA and an avid hunter, to attract the bubba constituents you don't. She is a woman, which plays perfectly into your desire to attract the frustrated Hillary Clinton supporters. She has 5 children and is a "hockey mom" and attractive to boot, which plays into the "celebrity" bent that you and yours use have used to demean Barack Obama. I cannot see any reason that you would select this unknown and untested woman to be a heartbeat from running the most powerful nation in the world other than the fact that she fits like a glove into your political game.
For the record, I used to have a smidgen of respect for John McCain. How can you NOT respect a past POW, someone who laid his freakin' LIFE on the line for this country? I thought that perhaps he personified the best of the GOP, that he was maybe really in this because he thought he could make things better for our country. However, his selection of Sarah Palin has left me with no doubt that he is beholden to the policicos. He's playing the game.
You don't throw in a total unknown at the last minute when you respect the electorate. You don't do that.
Once I learned not to be a scared little rabbit sometime after high school, I discovered that deep down, I was actually fiercely independent. When asked to name the single most trait that I hold in the highest importance, the answer comes immediately to me: honesty. As a result of these two truths, I find that I am most comfortable when people are direct and up front with me. I detest trickery, I react violently to passive aggressive behavior, and I will walk away from games.
When I feel as if I am being manipulated, I become very angry.
Both major political parties are in the "business" with the sole intent of winning the election in November. I know that. Every word that is uttered, every appearance with children in hand, every kiss bestowed on the spouse, every sound bite repeated on the evening news has been orchestrated. Elections have become a contest of media manipulation. These are all things I realize. However, the selection of Sarah Palin as the vice presidential nominee for the Republican party has left me feeling very manipulated and very angry. Prior to being named as nominee for the second most powerful position for the most powerful nation in the world, I had not heard her name. I see the selection of this generally unknown, untested woman for VP, without any opportunity for public vetting as an essential a slap in the face to the American public. How am I to view it as otherwise? I resent that John McCain and the rest of the Republican party players believe that it is acceptable to throw an unknown into the mix with only 2 months remaining until elections.
John McCain, you are wrong - this is not acceptable. I feel manipulated and that makes me angry. I cannot imagine that you would come up with the name "Sarah Palin" as the best candidate for Vice President of the United States. Rather, you came up with her name from the equivalent of a computerized checklist. You determined she had the best shell design for playing this political game. She filled your check list for religious affiliation, to attract the conservative voters you cannot connect with. She is a lifetime member of the NRA and an avid hunter, to attract the bubba constituents you don't. She is a woman, which plays perfectly into your desire to attract the frustrated Hillary Clinton supporters. She has 5 children and is a "hockey mom" and attractive to boot, which plays into the "celebrity" bent that you and yours use have used to demean Barack Obama. I cannot see any reason that you would select this unknown and untested woman to be a heartbeat from running the most powerful nation in the world other than the fact that she fits like a glove into your political game.
For the record, I used to have a smidgen of respect for John McCain. How can you NOT respect a past POW, someone who laid his freakin' LIFE on the line for this country? I thought that perhaps he personified the best of the GOP, that he was maybe really in this because he thought he could make things better for our country. However, his selection of Sarah Palin has left me with no doubt that he is beholden to the policicos. He's playing the game.
You don't throw in a total unknown at the last minute when you respect the electorate. You don't do that.
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
my comments on being pro-choice
So how long did you really think it would be before I put up a post on Governor/VP candidate Sarah Palin? I have a whole host of thoughts and comments about the current situation. Rather than spew them all out at once, though, I'll make an effort to do it piecemeal.
First, an observation. There is One Thing about her nomination makes me very happy. The press seems to be going on and on about HOW YOUNG she is. Young and vibrant and full of energy!! Young! they say. YOUNG!!! they proclaim!!! At this point, I would like to point out that I am the identical age that she is. I also point this out frequently to my son who is fond of calling me "old lady."
This post is less about Sarah Palin herself and more about what the media and certain political pundits have been spinning. Have no fear. I have plenty to say about her, but I'll say it later.
Several years ago (13), I was pregnant with my first child. I was 31. One of the many prenatal tests I was offered was the triple-screen, which would purportedly shed some light on the probability on whether the the baby I was carrying had a genetic defect (Down's Syndrome). Mine came back elevated, with a 1 in 99 chance of the baby having the disability (normal probabilities for my age should have been more like 1 in nearly 1000). As a result of those results, my doctor recommended that I receive a high-level ultrasound and an amniocentesis, which is a direct extraction of the baby's DNA from the amniotic fluid which can then been conclusively examined for genetic abnormalities.
I was a mess. I spent hours online researching Down's Syndrome and the risks associated with amniocentesis. I discovered there was the possibility of spontaneous miscarriage associated with the procedure. I agonized endlessly over the situation. To say I was distraught is an understatement.
We drove down to the South Side for the ultrasound and the procedure. I was lying on the bed when the doctor came in with the enormous needle used for the procedure and with a sudden rush of clarity, and purely on instinct, I sat up and told him to go away because I was going home. My earlier agonizing was simply a distraction. My heart spoke so strongly to me in that moment that there was no doubt that I knew there was no reason to impose even the smallest theoretical risk on the baby I was carrying. I knew that the results of the amniocentesis were irrelevant. This baby was fiercely mine and even were I to discover a genetic abnormality, I was having the baby. Of course I was! The test was not going to result in any change in action on my part (I was not going to abort the baby), and it was entirely informational and only for my benefit. I knew that I could survive 5 or so more months not knowing the genetic fidelity of my baby. The risk, no matter how tiny, was wrong for me to take.
I am staunchly pro-choice.
My point is that for the evangelical right to latch onto the fact that Sarah Palin carried her baby with Down's Syndrome to term as "proof" of her pro-life values is not only a political game but is an insult to people like me. Pro-life versus pro-choice has virtually nothing to do with a wealthy, white, married, happy young woman deciding to carry a baby to term with a birth defect such as Down's Syndrome. I cannot think of a single contemporary of mine who would make the decision to abort in a similar situation, and nearly all of them are pro-choice.
For me personally, and for most cases, I believe abortion is wrong and it would be quite convenient and probably even more comfortable for me to say that I am pro-life because of that. However I cannot. I believe that the reality is simply not that easy. The circumstances surrounding women faced with the decision of whether or not to abort are vastly different from case to case, but are almost surely all a highly complicated web of morality, reality, and raw emotion. My decision to be pro-choice is rooted in my belief that I cannot understand the nuances of every traumatic situation that young, pregnant women are faced with. I cannot understand the emotions of someone who has been raped or someone who knows their child carries a fatal birth defect. I cannot put myself in the place of a woman who is truly destitute. I cannot say I understand how it would feel to be 14 years old and be pregnant or be the mother of a pregnant 14 year old. I believe that if abortion were illegal that many women in these situations would resort to illegal and dangerous abortions anyway. Sometimes, aborting a pregnancy may be someone's only choice.
If you want to convince me of her values, her "pro-life" values, then show me that she supports legislation to provide the means to support unwed, poor teenagers that find themselves pregnant and without family support. Show me that she supports the research that might some day provide cures for genetic defects. Show me that she cares about all segments of society.
As a wrap-up, I'll mention here that I refused the triple-screen test when I was pregnant with my daughter. Although I am a scientist and think information is power, I do realize that sometimes there are limits to its usefulness.
First, an observation. There is One Thing about her nomination makes me very happy. The press seems to be going on and on about HOW YOUNG she is. Young and vibrant and full of energy!! Young! they say. YOUNG!!! they proclaim!!! At this point, I would like to point out that I am the identical age that she is. I also point this out frequently to my son who is fond of calling me "old lady."
This post is less about Sarah Palin herself and more about what the media and certain political pundits have been spinning. Have no fear. I have plenty to say about her, but I'll say it later.
Several years ago (13), I was pregnant with my first child. I was 31. One of the many prenatal tests I was offered was the triple-screen, which would purportedly shed some light on the probability on whether the the baby I was carrying had a genetic defect (Down's Syndrome). Mine came back elevated, with a 1 in 99 chance of the baby having the disability (normal probabilities for my age should have been more like 1 in nearly 1000). As a result of those results, my doctor recommended that I receive a high-level ultrasound and an amniocentesis, which is a direct extraction of the baby's DNA from the amniotic fluid which can then been conclusively examined for genetic abnormalities.
I was a mess. I spent hours online researching Down's Syndrome and the risks associated with amniocentesis. I discovered there was the possibility of spontaneous miscarriage associated with the procedure. I agonized endlessly over the situation. To say I was distraught is an understatement.
We drove down to the South Side for the ultrasound and the procedure. I was lying on the bed when the doctor came in with the enormous needle used for the procedure and with a sudden rush of clarity, and purely on instinct, I sat up and told him to go away because I was going home. My earlier agonizing was simply a distraction. My heart spoke so strongly to me in that moment that there was no doubt that I knew there was no reason to impose even the smallest theoretical risk on the baby I was carrying. I knew that the results of the amniocentesis were irrelevant. This baby was fiercely mine and even were I to discover a genetic abnormality, I was having the baby. Of course I was! The test was not going to result in any change in action on my part (I was not going to abort the baby), and it was entirely informational and only for my benefit. I knew that I could survive 5 or so more months not knowing the genetic fidelity of my baby. The risk, no matter how tiny, was wrong for me to take.
I am staunchly pro-choice.
My point is that for the evangelical right to latch onto the fact that Sarah Palin carried her baby with Down's Syndrome to term as "proof" of her pro-life values is not only a political game but is an insult to people like me. Pro-life versus pro-choice has virtually nothing to do with a wealthy, white, married, happy young woman deciding to carry a baby to term with a birth defect such as Down's Syndrome. I cannot think of a single contemporary of mine who would make the decision to abort in a similar situation, and nearly all of them are pro-choice.
For me personally, and for most cases, I believe abortion is wrong and it would be quite convenient and probably even more comfortable for me to say that I am pro-life because of that. However I cannot. I believe that the reality is simply not that easy. The circumstances surrounding women faced with the decision of whether or not to abort are vastly different from case to case, but are almost surely all a highly complicated web of morality, reality, and raw emotion. My decision to be pro-choice is rooted in my belief that I cannot understand the nuances of every traumatic situation that young, pregnant women are faced with. I cannot understand the emotions of someone who has been raped or someone who knows their child carries a fatal birth defect. I cannot put myself in the place of a woman who is truly destitute. I cannot say I understand how it would feel to be 14 years old and be pregnant or be the mother of a pregnant 14 year old. I believe that if abortion were illegal that many women in these situations would resort to illegal and dangerous abortions anyway. Sometimes, aborting a pregnancy may be someone's only choice.
Being pro-choice does not mean that a person believes abortion is the right choice.I am insulted and offended that anyone would use Sarah Palin's baby as "evidence" of a pro-life stance. I believe it is a shallow political ploy that sheds little to no insight on how she might influence laws that actually impact the fate of unwanted children.
If you want to convince me of her values, her "pro-life" values, then show me that she supports legislation to provide the means to support unwed, poor teenagers that find themselves pregnant and without family support. Show me that she supports the research that might some day provide cures for genetic defects. Show me that she cares about all segments of society.
As a wrap-up, I'll mention here that I refused the triple-screen test when I was pregnant with my daughter. Although I am a scientist and think information is power, I do realize that sometimes there are limits to its usefulness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)