Thursday, April 23, 2009
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Tea & (No) Sympathy
Ugh. The extreme, rabid, right-wing nutbags are at it again with all of their "tea party" business. And while it is frustrating, annoying, laughable and deep down, really quite terrifying, all of the "teabagging" jokes have been super fun.
Here is my favorite statement about the whole mess, including the recent threats of secession, from one of the many missives I've been reading in recent days:
Extreme partisan rancor is never pretty, but in a democracy like ours probably far more common and unavoidable than we would like to think. Dressing up in revolutionary war costumes, calling for the overthrow of the government and waving teabags at the behest of wealthy right wing funders is, while a little pathetic and strange, well within the realm of constitutionally protected behavior and may even play a somewhat constructive role in our democracy. The notion that Obama is a socialist because he wants a minor tax increase for a tiny fraction of Americans and would prefer to spend our treasure on helping people rather than on conducting wars of dubious origin or intention is more than a little strange, but if a small minority of people want to assert it, that is again well within their rights.
Floating the idea of secession over this, even in a somewhat tongue in cheek manner, is a very different story. The history of secession in the US is not a pretty one. It was tried once and the seceding states were brought back into the union, but the cost was high as the country was torn apart by what was, at that time, one of the bloodiest wars in human history.
The issues dividing Republicans and Democrats today are relatively mild, mainstream partisan issues, obviously not at all comparable to those which divided our country on the eve of the Civil War. Democrats and Republicans are fighting over a few percentage points in the tax rate for the richest Americans, increased domestic spending, and greater environmental, financial and other regulation. This is, frankly, ordinary and not all that interesting partisan fare which, in many respects, was not too different during the administrations of Roosevelt, Reagan, Clinton or many other presidents. That is why these threats and rhetoric are so concerning. Nobody really threatens secession over a mild increase in the tax rate or over a spending plan. Nobody really calls for revolution because the government is trying to spend too much on infrastructure.
Why then are Republicans willing to talk about revolution, secession and other ideas that would destabilize our country and our democracy. One hopes that most of this can be simply chalked up to a party that is weak, defeated, directionless and out of ideas, but it may not be that simple. Perhaps the demonstrators and, more significantly their leaders, feel that for some existential, and undoubtedly irrational, reason the Obama presidency is a profound threat to their worldview, values and vision of the US. If that is the case we can only hope that these people remain on the margins. This is likely to occur as Obama's worldview, values and vision not only reflect those of a huge plurality of Americans, but will likely to continue to become more, not less, accepted over time.
Here is my favorite statement about the whole mess, including the recent threats of secession, from one of the many missives I've been reading in recent days:
Extreme partisan rancor is never pretty, but in a democracy like ours probably far more common and unavoidable than we would like to think. Dressing up in revolutionary war costumes, calling for the overthrow of the government and waving teabags at the behest of wealthy right wing funders is, while a little pathetic and strange, well within the realm of constitutionally protected behavior and may even play a somewhat constructive role in our democracy. The notion that Obama is a socialist because he wants a minor tax increase for a tiny fraction of Americans and would prefer to spend our treasure on helping people rather than on conducting wars of dubious origin or intention is more than a little strange, but if a small minority of people want to assert it, that is again well within their rights.
Floating the idea of secession over this, even in a somewhat tongue in cheek manner, is a very different story. The history of secession in the US is not a pretty one. It was tried once and the seceding states were brought back into the union, but the cost was high as the country was torn apart by what was, at that time, one of the bloodiest wars in human history.
The issues dividing Republicans and Democrats today are relatively mild, mainstream partisan issues, obviously not at all comparable to those which divided our country on the eve of the Civil War. Democrats and Republicans are fighting over a few percentage points in the tax rate for the richest Americans, increased domestic spending, and greater environmental, financial and other regulation. This is, frankly, ordinary and not all that interesting partisan fare which, in many respects, was not too different during the administrations of Roosevelt, Reagan, Clinton or many other presidents. That is why these threats and rhetoric are so concerning. Nobody really threatens secession over a mild increase in the tax rate or over a spending plan. Nobody really calls for revolution because the government is trying to spend too much on infrastructure.
Why then are Republicans willing to talk about revolution, secession and other ideas that would destabilize our country and our democracy. One hopes that most of this can be simply chalked up to a party that is weak, defeated, directionless and out of ideas, but it may not be that simple. Perhaps the demonstrators and, more significantly their leaders, feel that for some existential, and undoubtedly irrational, reason the Obama presidency is a profound threat to their worldview, values and vision of the US. If that is the case we can only hope that these people remain on the margins. This is likely to occur as Obama's worldview, values and vision not only reflect those of a huge plurality of Americans, but will likely to continue to become more, not less, accepted over time.
That's Lincoln Mitchell writing at Huffington Post. You can read the entire article here.
PS: in 1871 the Supreme Court declared secession unconstitutional in Texas v. White. I wonder what kind of fits the GOP would have and foaming at the mouth they'd do if a Democrat suggested secession? No, of course I don't REALLY wonder because we all know what would happen. They would label that individual a traitor and want him or her tarred and feathered in the public square. I sure do love hypocrisy.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
YES
For the Sleepwalkers
By Edward Hirsch
Tonight I want to say something wonderful
for the sleepwalkers who have so much faith
in their legs, so much faith in the invisible
arrow carved into the carpet, the worn path
that leads to the stairs instead of the window,
the gaping doorway instead of the seamless mirror.
I love the way that sleepwalkers are willing
to step out of their bodies into the night,
to raise their arms and welcome the darkness,
palming the blank spaces, touching everything.
Always they return home safely, like blind men
who know it is morning by feeling shadows.
And always they wake up as themselves again.
That's why I want to say something astonishing
like: Our hearts are leaving our bodies.
Our hearts are thirsty black handkerchiefs
flying through the trees at night, soaking up
the darkest beams of moonlight, the music
of owls, the motion of wind-torn branches.
And now our hearts are thick black fists
flying back to the glove of our chests.
We have to learn to trust our hearts like that.
We have to learn the desperate faith of sleep-
walkers who rise out of their calm beds
and walk through the skin of another life.
We have to drink the stupefying cup of darkness
and wake up to ourselves, nourished and surprised.
By Edward Hirsch
Tonight I want to say something wonderful
for the sleepwalkers who have so much faith
in their legs, so much faith in the invisible
arrow carved into the carpet, the worn path
that leads to the stairs instead of the window,
the gaping doorway instead of the seamless mirror.
I love the way that sleepwalkers are willing
to step out of their bodies into the night,
to raise their arms and welcome the darkness,
palming the blank spaces, touching everything.
Always they return home safely, like blind men
who know it is morning by feeling shadows.
And always they wake up as themselves again.
That's why I want to say something astonishing
like: Our hearts are leaving our bodies.
Our hearts are thirsty black handkerchiefs
flying through the trees at night, soaking up
the darkest beams of moonlight, the music
of owls, the motion of wind-torn branches.
And now our hearts are thick black fists
flying back to the glove of our chests.
We have to learn to trust our hearts like that.
We have to learn the desperate faith of sleep-
walkers who rise out of their calm beds
and walk through the skin of another life.
We have to drink the stupefying cup of darkness
and wake up to ourselves, nourished and surprised.
Friday, April 3, 2009
I hope you're tall
I hope you're tall.
At least taller than I --
a girl likes to wear heels.
I hope you know
that candles and flowers
do not always equal romance --
that sometimes it is as simple as
surprising me with jars of my favorite apricot jam
bought because you knew I was running out.
I hope you don't wake easily
because I twitch in my sleep
and fear rousing you
from pleasant slumber.
I hope you'll give facial hair a try
'cause I'd like to see you with a beard.
Just, please, no "soul patch"
you are over 40, you know.
I hope you realize that I will never
ever
ever
ride a roller coaster again.
I hope you have been hurt
because it can bestow grace
and
patience.
I hope you know that I have made mistakes
placed a ring on the wrong finger
and though leaving was called for
guilt leaves a film
like soap.
I hope you know
that I am afraid
and wary
and likely to mistrust your initial interest.
Mostly,
I hope you are soon
because winter keeps getting longer
and I've no one to help with the Christmas decorations
a solemn chore performed alone.
Yes, mostly
I hope you are soon.
At least taller than I --
a girl likes to wear heels.
I hope you know
that candles and flowers
do not always equal romance --
that sometimes it is as simple as
surprising me with jars of my favorite apricot jam
bought because you knew I was running out.
I hope you don't wake easily
because I twitch in my sleep
and fear rousing you
from pleasant slumber.
I hope you'll give facial hair a try
'cause I'd like to see you with a beard.
Just, please, no "soul patch"
you are over 40, you know.
I hope you realize that I will never
ever
ever
ride a roller coaster again.
I hope you have been hurt
because it can bestow grace
and
patience.
I hope you know that I have made mistakes
placed a ring on the wrong finger
and though leaving was called for
guilt leaves a film
like soap.
I hope you know
that I am afraid
and wary
and likely to mistrust your initial interest.
Mostly,
I hope you are soon
because winter keeps getting longer
and I've no one to help with the Christmas decorations
a solemn chore performed alone.
Yes, mostly
I hope you are soon.
Monday, March 30, 2009
A Word of Thanks
I have an overwhelming amount of blessings for which I am grateful. In this current precarious moment of American life, I want to take a step away from fear, anxiety and concern and share a poem that always lifts my spirits. Many of you are probably already familiar with this poem, and with good reason. It's one the great ones.
A Blessing
Just off the highway to Rochester, Minnesota,
Twilight bounds softly forth on the grass.
And the eyes of those two Indian ponies
Darken with kindness.
They have come gladly out of the willows
To welcome my friend and me.
We step over the barbed wire into the pasture
Where they have been grazing all day, alone.
They ripple tensely, they can hardly contain their happiness
That we have come.
They bow shyly as wet swans. They love each other.
There is no loneliness like theirs.
At home once more, they begin munching the young tufts of
spring in the darkness.
I would like to hold the slenderer one in my arms,
For she has walked over to me
And nuzzled my left hand.
She is black and white,
Her mane falls wild on her forehead,
And the light breeze moves me to caress her long ear
That is delicate as the skin over a girl's wrist.
Suddenly I realize
That if I stepped out of my body I would break
Into blossom.
~by James Wright
A Blessing
Just off the highway to Rochester, Minnesota,
Twilight bounds softly forth on the grass.
And the eyes of those two Indian ponies
Darken with kindness.
They have come gladly out of the willows
To welcome my friend and me.
We step over the barbed wire into the pasture
Where they have been grazing all day, alone.
They ripple tensely, they can hardly contain their happiness
That we have come.
They bow shyly as wet swans. They love each other.
There is no loneliness like theirs.
At home once more, they begin munching the young tufts of
spring in the darkness.
I would like to hold the slenderer one in my arms,
For she has walked over to me
And nuzzled my left hand.
She is black and white,
Her mane falls wild on her forehead,
And the light breeze moves me to caress her long ear
That is delicate as the skin over a girl's wrist.
Suddenly I realize
That if I stepped out of my body I would break
Into blossom.
~by James Wright
Friday, March 20, 2009
Profound Arrogance
It just keeps coming.
The arrogance from the insanely wealthy individuals responsible for creating this economic crisis, and the "reporters" who defend them, continues to astonish me. Mark Haines, a so-called reporter at CNBC recently conducted an interview with Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), during which, he, Haines, said the following:
"... you can’t really, it seems to me, expect that these Wall Street companies are going to be run well by a bunch of people who don’t make more than $250,000."
I forgot -- only super rich people are smart. That's right. Those of us making less than $250K, the "bunch of people" (as Haines so snidely put it), who make up the majority of the population of this country, are too stupid to run a Wall Street company. As the folks at Think Progress correctly point out, that means that most small business owners, those hard working individuals who manage their own companies, most of them making less than $250K, wouldn't know what to do. Not to mention someone who obtains an MBA but goes to work for a non-profit rather than simply amassing greater and greater wealth to buy more and more stuff -- that person wouldn't have a clue either.
Gee, it sure is a good thing that we have all of these whip smart millionaires running the show. They've done a great job, don't you think?
Look, there are many, many people making too much money, from sports stars, to movie stars to CEOs. In my opinion, if you find a cure for AIDS, or MS, Autism, or Parkinson's then absolutely you deserve a gajillion dollars. Hell, you deserve your own private island complete with U2, Sting or Stevie Wonder flown in whenever you want to play at your parties. Unless you do that, or make a gaggle of beauty contestants' dreams come true by ending world hunger, please, please stop complaining about the fact that some already-stinking-rich Wall Street executive won't get his or her ten million dollar bonus!
The arrogance from the insanely wealthy individuals responsible for creating this economic crisis, and the "reporters" who defend them, continues to astonish me. Mark Haines, a so-called reporter at CNBC recently conducted an interview with Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), during which, he, Haines, said the following:
"... you can’t really, it seems to me, expect that these Wall Street companies are going to be run well by a bunch of people who don’t make more than $250,000."
I forgot -- only super rich people are smart. That's right. Those of us making less than $250K, the "bunch of people" (as Haines so snidely put it), who make up the majority of the population of this country, are too stupid to run a Wall Street company. As the folks at Think Progress correctly point out, that means that most small business owners, those hard working individuals who manage their own companies, most of them making less than $250K, wouldn't know what to do. Not to mention someone who obtains an MBA but goes to work for a non-profit rather than simply amassing greater and greater wealth to buy more and more stuff -- that person wouldn't have a clue either.
Gee, it sure is a good thing that we have all of these whip smart millionaires running the show. They've done a great job, don't you think?
Look, there are many, many people making too much money, from sports stars, to movie stars to CEOs. In my opinion, if you find a cure for AIDS, or MS, Autism, or Parkinson's then absolutely you deserve a gajillion dollars. Hell, you deserve your own private island complete with U2, Sting or Stevie Wonder flown in whenever you want to play at your parties. Unless you do that, or make a gaggle of beauty contestants' dreams come true by ending world hunger, please, please stop complaining about the fact that some already-stinking-rich Wall Street executive won't get his or her ten million dollar bonus!
Thursday, March 19, 2009
My Secret Shame
Okay, I admit it. I watch American Idol.
So glad I got that off my chest!
I didn't start watching on a regular basis until the Melinda Doolittle season. (When was that, even? Seems like 5 years ago). The first season I refused to watch because I thought the entire thing looked ridiculous and tacky. And, um, it IS ridiculous and tacky but if you let go of that judgment, you can sit back, laugh at the spectacle Ryan and the judges make of themselves, and every so often hear some remarkable singing.
The first season my roommate Bjorn (hi, Bjorn!), insisted on watching the finale. My other roommate and I sat down with him prepared to cringe when the strangest thing happened. I sat up and said "Who the hell is THAT?" after hearing Kelly Clarkson sing. Yes, the production values were (and remain), over the top in a 13-year-old-girl-high-from-sniffing-glue-gone-crazy-with-her-glitter-pen way, but I did not care! Kelly Clarkson simply had amazing pipes and buckets of charisma, AND an emotional investment in what she was singing. I thought I was hooked.
And then I didn't watch the show again until the Melinda/Blake/Jordan season which was, what, 5 or 6 seasons later? While it's difficult to recall what brought me back to the show, I became invested in the outcome that season. Melinda Doolittle was clearly the most talented of the finalists and should have won, but as is regrettably the case on Idol, the best artist often doesn't win. Kelly Clarkson was an exception. (I can't comment on Carrie Underwood 'cause I wasn't watching that season).
Which brings me to perhaps the most frustrating thing about the show -- aside from the inane comments from Paula and Randy, the snarky, cold-eyed critique of Simon (who is usually right), it being over-produced to within an inch of its life, the blatant manipulation of the audience through pimping out any contestant's sad/difficult/handicapped backstory -- the fact that America often gets it wrong. [Insert your favorite George W. Bush joke here] Rewarding flashy emptiness, pandering, and cuddly looking 16 year olds who may sound good but don't have much going on underneath that sound, the ones who are truly artists often get the shaft. Not always, mind you, but often.
Case in point -- last night's results episode. Alexis -- the diminutive blond pixie with a powerful, soulful voice one doesn't expect to come out of that tiny frame -- was booted off, and Michael Sarver -- so, so boring -- was kept. But Sarver is from Texas and works on an oil rig and has a pretty blonde wife and a pretty blonde daughter, while Alexis is a single 21 year old mother, so clearly, he HAS to stay! It's beyond me.
Where was I? Oh, right, I actually like this show for some reason and I guess you'd like me to tell you why. Well, it's a combination of things really. Because every once in a while you see a performer do something completely beautiful and authentic, like Brooke White singing "Let It Be" at the piano, or the aforementioned Melinda Doolittle doing absolutely anything, or Blake with his awesome beat boxing and unexpected sexiness, and it reminds you that even on this tacky, manipulative, hyper program, actual artistry manages to sneak in the back door.
That, and it's delicious trying to figure out what Paula's saying since she still hasn't mastered the English language despite living here for her entire life.
And here's a brief shout-out to the most original, gifted performer the show has ever seen, one Adam Lambert. Love him or hate him, you cannot deny his talent, his self-possession or his uniqueness. I can't wait to see what he does next -- and isn't that one of the reasons for watching a show like this? The chance to occasionally watch someone so jaw-droppingly excellent that for the briefest of moments one can forget his or her troubles and simply... enjoy.
So glad I got that off my chest!
I didn't start watching on a regular basis until the Melinda Doolittle season. (When was that, even? Seems like 5 years ago). The first season I refused to watch because I thought the entire thing looked ridiculous and tacky. And, um, it IS ridiculous and tacky but if you let go of that judgment, you can sit back, laugh at the spectacle Ryan and the judges make of themselves, and every so often hear some remarkable singing.
The first season my roommate Bjorn (hi, Bjorn!), insisted on watching the finale. My other roommate and I sat down with him prepared to cringe when the strangest thing happened. I sat up and said "Who the hell is THAT?" after hearing Kelly Clarkson sing. Yes, the production values were (and remain), over the top in a 13-year-old-girl-high-from-sniffing-glue-gone-crazy-with-her-glitter-pen way, but I did not care! Kelly Clarkson simply had amazing pipes and buckets of charisma, AND an emotional investment in what she was singing. I thought I was hooked.
And then I didn't watch the show again until the Melinda/Blake/Jordan season which was, what, 5 or 6 seasons later? While it's difficult to recall what brought me back to the show, I became invested in the outcome that season. Melinda Doolittle was clearly the most talented of the finalists and should have won, but as is regrettably the case on Idol, the best artist often doesn't win. Kelly Clarkson was an exception. (I can't comment on Carrie Underwood 'cause I wasn't watching that season).
Which brings me to perhaps the most frustrating thing about the show -- aside from the inane comments from Paula and Randy, the snarky, cold-eyed critique of Simon (who is usually right), it being over-produced to within an inch of its life, the blatant manipulation of the audience through pimping out any contestant's sad/difficult/handicapped backstory -- the fact that America often gets it wrong. [Insert your favorite George W. Bush joke here] Rewarding flashy emptiness, pandering, and cuddly looking 16 year olds who may sound good but don't have much going on underneath that sound, the ones who are truly artists often get the shaft. Not always, mind you, but often.
Case in point -- last night's results episode. Alexis -- the diminutive blond pixie with a powerful, soulful voice one doesn't expect to come out of that tiny frame -- was booted off, and Michael Sarver -- so, so boring -- was kept. But Sarver is from Texas and works on an oil rig and has a pretty blonde wife and a pretty blonde daughter, while Alexis is a single 21 year old mother, so clearly, he HAS to stay! It's beyond me.
Where was I? Oh, right, I actually like this show for some reason and I guess you'd like me to tell you why. Well, it's a combination of things really. Because every once in a while you see a performer do something completely beautiful and authentic, like Brooke White singing "Let It Be" at the piano, or the aforementioned Melinda Doolittle doing absolutely anything, or Blake with his awesome beat boxing and unexpected sexiness, and it reminds you that even on this tacky, manipulative, hyper program, actual artistry manages to sneak in the back door.
That, and it's delicious trying to figure out what Paula's saying since she still hasn't mastered the English language despite living here for her entire life.
And here's a brief shout-out to the most original, gifted performer the show has ever seen, one Adam Lambert. Love him or hate him, you cannot deny his talent, his self-possession or his uniqueness. I can't wait to see what he does next -- and isn't that one of the reasons for watching a show like this? The chance to occasionally watch someone so jaw-droppingly excellent that for the briefest of moments one can forget his or her troubles and simply... enjoy.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Happy St. Patrick's Day!
I am Welsh, German and Dutch, so I cannot claim this holiday as my own. Nevertheless, I wish each and every one of you a Happy St. Pat's Day. Here in New York City, where I currently reside, this is the day of the enormous St. Patty's Day parade down Fifth Avenue; a parade I avoid, due to it being watched by thousands upon thousands of drunken tourists.
(Brief side note on parades: um... why? Why are they so interesting? I ask not because I'm attempting to be snarky but out of genuine curiosity. It seems to me that going to a parade means agreeing to stand on a sidewalk in order to watch other people walk past you. Sure, some of those people might be playing an instrument or twirling a baton, but most of them? Just walking. I've never quite understood why so many folks seem to not only enjoy this activity, they freak out and scream like banshees. Just another one of life's mysteries like: where DO blue whales go to mate?)
Anywho...
I'm taking an online course on monetizing blogs and let me tell you! -- there is so much information to absorb. RSS feeds, pings, tags, SEO, title-tags, pillar articles, feedburners and stats and ping-your-thing and tag-your-flag and whew! Getting traffic to one's website is no small accomplishment. Which leads me to...
A thank you. To those of you who have become regular readers, my appreciation knows no bounds. Thank you for stopping by, leaving comments and supporting me in this adventure.
(And a small favor to ask:
If each of you tells one other person about this site, I will ... um ... buy you a new car!
Okay. That is a lie.
However, I will be extremely happy and you will feel good knowing that you've contributed to my delight! A win-win, really).
One last thing! An enormous, huge, gigantic cyber-kiss to Jon Stewart for his interview with Jim Cramer. (Be sure to scroll down and watch the entire interview). While Mr. Cramer is certainly far from the only individual deserving of a lecture and a share of blame, Stewart's larger point about irresponsible journalism is one that desperately needed to be made. Do you think his wife would mind if Jon became a polygamist and married me too? No, you don't think she'd go for it? Damn.
(Brief side note on parades: um... why? Why are they so interesting? I ask not because I'm attempting to be snarky but out of genuine curiosity. It seems to me that going to a parade means agreeing to stand on a sidewalk in order to watch other people walk past you. Sure, some of those people might be playing an instrument or twirling a baton, but most of them? Just walking. I've never quite understood why so many folks seem to not only enjoy this activity, they freak out and scream like banshees. Just another one of life's mysteries like: where DO blue whales go to mate?)
Anywho...
I'm taking an online course on monetizing blogs and let me tell you! -- there is so much information to absorb. RSS feeds, pings, tags, SEO, title-tags, pillar articles, feedburners and stats and ping-your-thing and tag-your-flag and whew! Getting traffic to one's website is no small accomplishment. Which leads me to...
A thank you. To those of you who have become regular readers, my appreciation knows no bounds. Thank you for stopping by, leaving comments and supporting me in this adventure.
(And a small favor to ask:
If each of you tells one other person about this site, I will ... um ... buy you a new car!
Okay. That is a lie.
However, I will be extremely happy and you will feel good knowing that you've contributed to my delight! A win-win, really).
One last thing! An enormous, huge, gigantic cyber-kiss to Jon Stewart for his interview with Jim Cramer. (Be sure to scroll down and watch the entire interview). While Mr. Cramer is certainly far from the only individual deserving of a lecture and a share of blame, Stewart's larger point about irresponsible journalism is one that desperately needed to be made. Do you think his wife would mind if Jon became a polygamist and married me too? No, you don't think she'd go for it? Damn.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Roger Cohen says "Tsk, tsk"
In today's NY Times, Roger Cohen has an Op-Ed in which he chides Obama for lecturing when he should be inspiring. He writes that "...Obama has not yet found his presidential voice." I couldn't disagree more.
Cohen's column centers on England's Prime Minister Gordon Brown, his recent speech to Congress and his appearance on The Daily Show. He commends Brown on a rousing speech, saying he felt "stirred" by it. He takes Obama to task for what he sees as telling Americans "unpleasant truths" rather than "...galvanize[ing] through the optimism of his message." This begs the question -- did Cohen listen to Obama's recent address to Congress? Yes, it was laced throughout with hard truths, truths that we in this country have needed to face for a long, long time. But we have been far too busy playing Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak No Evil. A little "lecturing" as Cohen puts it seems quite appropriate to me.
As for inspiration, I found Obama's address quite inspiring. A clear, palpable love for this country, a determination to gather us all together in shared sacrifice in order to make America strong and proud again, his confidence that we can free ourselves from the current crisis -- this practically rang out in his speech like church bells on Sunday.
During the campaign, many people tried to paint Obama as being long on inspiration but short on substance. Now here is Cohen arguing the opposite. "He has been detailing tax and other polices to narrow the gap between the haves and have-nots, but in a cool, brisk top-down language that hardly seems right to overcome division", writes Cohen. So let's see -- during the campaign, not enough details. Now, too many details.
It is awfully easy to criticize when you are not the one responsible for fixing an enormous, frightening economic mess while at the same time reassuring an anxious, terrified populace. Hasn't found his Presidential voice? I already stated that I find that appraisal thoroughly wrong. But here's something else -- he has been President for what, 50 some days? The former occupant of the White House (he who shall not be named), had eight YEARS and couldn't locate a Presidential voice even with the help of a GPS machine!
I'm willing to be patient and cut Obama a lot of slack considering all that he inherited.
Cohen's column centers on England's Prime Minister Gordon Brown, his recent speech to Congress and his appearance on The Daily Show. He commends Brown on a rousing speech, saying he felt "stirred" by it. He takes Obama to task for what he sees as telling Americans "unpleasant truths" rather than "...galvanize[ing] through the optimism of his message." This begs the question -- did Cohen listen to Obama's recent address to Congress? Yes, it was laced throughout with hard truths, truths that we in this country have needed to face for a long, long time. But we have been far too busy playing Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak No Evil. A little "lecturing" as Cohen puts it seems quite appropriate to me.
As for inspiration, I found Obama's address quite inspiring. A clear, palpable love for this country, a determination to gather us all together in shared sacrifice in order to make America strong and proud again, his confidence that we can free ourselves from the current crisis -- this practically rang out in his speech like church bells on Sunday.
During the campaign, many people tried to paint Obama as being long on inspiration but short on substance. Now here is Cohen arguing the opposite. "He has been detailing tax and other polices to narrow the gap between the haves and have-nots, but in a cool, brisk top-down language that hardly seems right to overcome division", writes Cohen. So let's see -- during the campaign, not enough details. Now, too many details.
It is awfully easy to criticize when you are not the one responsible for fixing an enormous, frightening economic mess while at the same time reassuring an anxious, terrified populace. Hasn't found his Presidential voice? I already stated that I find that appraisal thoroughly wrong. But here's something else -- he has been President for what, 50 some days? The former occupant of the White House (he who shall not be named), had eight YEARS and couldn't locate a Presidential voice even with the help of a GPS machine!
I'm willing to be patient and cut Obama a lot of slack considering all that he inherited.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
I'm at a loss for words
Really.
I want to jump up and down about the whole Rush Limbaugh nonsense, the CNBC/Rick Santelli nonsense, the ridiculous socialism debate that seems to be raging among the political set (I say ridiculous because to charge Obama with socialism is patent, well, nonsense!), and the "feud" that Jim Cramer thinks he's in with Jon Stewart. And yet... I'm just tired. Tired of the noise. The yelling, the name-calling, the bile, the utter lack of civility, manners or judgment. But when I start to write down my feelings about all of this, I begin to rage. I seethe. And all I want to do is call Rush Limbaugh, Rick Santelli and Jim Cramer names. The sandbox is big and I jump right in ready to throw sand in the faces of those I dislike and disagree with, just as they do to the folks whom THEY dislike and with whom THEY disagree.
The result: I contribute to the very opera of rudeness and pettiness and mean-spiritedness that I claim to disdain.
How do I express my own anger and frustration with a sense of proportion? The past few days I've written several posts in my head that end up disappointing me. That disappointment stems not from a lack of confidence in my opinions; after all, they're simply *my* opinions and everyone out there is free to agree or disagree. My dismay results from an inability to express my anger, fear, anxiety, frustration about the state of the world, in a way that is whole, that is -- noble, I guess.
Is that even a reasonable expectation? Can anger ever be noble? Useful, yes. Necessary, sometimes. Unavoidable, absolutely. But noble?
In an effort to articulate my feelings I am left feeling empty. There seems to be no catharsis. The world is in a state of fragility I have never experienced before and never expected to experience. And the voices that are the loudest in this country are bickering, as usual. Bickering. How on earth does that help? Where is the somber, thoughtful conversation we ought to be having? Are we even capable of that? Should we even want that? Or have we gotten to the point where a full scale shouting match is all that's left?
Snarkiness and cleverness are considered an art form. I'm tired of Maureen Dowd's sarcasm. I'm baffled at David Brooks, usually so measured and reasonable (even when I find his philosophy wrong), writing recently that Michelle Obama should never bare her arms! What?! What is going on???
And when I reflect on some of my previous posts, I'm guilty of the very same snarky remarks. Don't I have anything more considered to contribute? True, not every op-ed column need be weighty and profound. There is more than enough time, room, and need for humor and levity. But why is it so often that humor becomes cleverness rather than wit?
I'm not terribly sure what I'm going on about in this post. Perhaps I am reacting to the fact that Obama's election did not usher in a new era of civility. I was naive to think it would. Rush Limbaugh did not, nor will he ever, wake up and think "You know what? I need to make my points in a way that does not demonize or insult. I need to find a new way to express my ideas and concerns." Because Rush Limbaugh, more than anything else, is a carnival barker. And he is attached to his money, his fame and his power. The ability to conduct oneself with grace is not valued any more, if it ever really was.
Sigh.
I'm sad today.
Given all that, I *do* feel that, in the long run, everything will be okay. Is it possible to be an optimist and a pessimist at the same time?
I want to jump up and down about the whole Rush Limbaugh nonsense, the CNBC/Rick Santelli nonsense, the ridiculous socialism debate that seems to be raging among the political set (I say ridiculous because to charge Obama with socialism is patent, well, nonsense!), and the "feud" that Jim Cramer thinks he's in with Jon Stewart. And yet... I'm just tired. Tired of the noise. The yelling, the name-calling, the bile, the utter lack of civility, manners or judgment. But when I start to write down my feelings about all of this, I begin to rage. I seethe. And all I want to do is call Rush Limbaugh, Rick Santelli and Jim Cramer names. The sandbox is big and I jump right in ready to throw sand in the faces of those I dislike and disagree with, just as they do to the folks whom THEY dislike and with whom THEY disagree.
The result: I contribute to the very opera of rudeness and pettiness and mean-spiritedness that I claim to disdain.
How do I express my own anger and frustration with a sense of proportion? The past few days I've written several posts in my head that end up disappointing me. That disappointment stems not from a lack of confidence in my opinions; after all, they're simply *my* opinions and everyone out there is free to agree or disagree. My dismay results from an inability to express my anger, fear, anxiety, frustration about the state of the world, in a way that is whole, that is -- noble, I guess.
Is that even a reasonable expectation? Can anger ever be noble? Useful, yes. Necessary, sometimes. Unavoidable, absolutely. But noble?
In an effort to articulate my feelings I am left feeling empty. There seems to be no catharsis. The world is in a state of fragility I have never experienced before and never expected to experience. And the voices that are the loudest in this country are bickering, as usual. Bickering. How on earth does that help? Where is the somber, thoughtful conversation we ought to be having? Are we even capable of that? Should we even want that? Or have we gotten to the point where a full scale shouting match is all that's left?
Snarkiness and cleverness are considered an art form. I'm tired of Maureen Dowd's sarcasm. I'm baffled at David Brooks, usually so measured and reasonable (even when I find his philosophy wrong), writing recently that Michelle Obama should never bare her arms! What?! What is going on???
And when I reflect on some of my previous posts, I'm guilty of the very same snarky remarks. Don't I have anything more considered to contribute? True, not every op-ed column need be weighty and profound. There is more than enough time, room, and need for humor and levity. But why is it so often that humor becomes cleverness rather than wit?
I'm not terribly sure what I'm going on about in this post. Perhaps I am reacting to the fact that Obama's election did not usher in a new era of civility. I was naive to think it would. Rush Limbaugh did not, nor will he ever, wake up and think "You know what? I need to make my points in a way that does not demonize or insult. I need to find a new way to express my ideas and concerns." Because Rush Limbaugh, more than anything else, is a carnival barker. And he is attached to his money, his fame and his power. The ability to conduct oneself with grace is not valued any more, if it ever really was.
Sigh.
I'm sad today.
Given all that, I *do* feel that, in the long run, everything will be okay. Is it possible to be an optimist and a pessimist at the same time?
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Random Thoughts
LOST. Oh, show! How I love you. Last night's episode was excellent. The way the show illustrates each character's redemption (or lack thereof) on the Island is so moving. I'm deeply invested in this show not only because the sci-fi shenanigans and the myriad mysteries are fun, but mostly due to the emotional thread running through it. Isn't that why we become invested in any story? There must be heart, characters to root for and thoughtful storytelling. This show has all of that in spades. Sawyer has never been my most favorite character; too often he is left with the snarky comment and the growl. But last night showed Sawyer blossoming (never ones to choose names willy-nilly, the writers did provide him with the new last name "LaFleur" meaning flower in French), finally unashamed of his softer side and stepping up to his responsibilities. At the start of the season, the rumors about a possible Juliet-Sawyer romance left me cold, but seeing it come to fruition last night, I'm completely sold. I adore those two together. There seems to be genuine affection and trust between them and I love it! God knows all of the characters on the show have been put through the ringer, but to see this unlikely pair so obviously happy with one another is a real treat. Thanks, show.
Other non-LOST related observations:
1. Why are all of the cable news shows giving Rush Limbaugh so much attention? Granted, it does help the Dems a great deal to remind folks that the Repubs are embracing this dangerous, racist, sexist, hate-filled clown. Nevertheless, the publicity and attention are exactly what he and his ilk (Coulter, Hannity, Malkin), are after. Why keep providing them with coverage? To seem objective? Why would anyone, or any news organization, in the name of objectivity, play into the hands of these despicable people who make fun of Parkinson's sufferers (Rush) or claim that the 9/11 widows deserved to lose their spouses (Coulter)? What on earth is "objective" or "fair" about their comments? To refuse to re-air their remarks in no way violates their First Amendment rights. They can shout all they want on their radio shows -- but don't replay their remarks over and over! That only helps them by disseminating their "message" even further. Stop giving them an additional forum. Stop focusing so relentlessly on your ratings and your bottom line and remember the effect all of this noise has on the public discourse.
2. The gossip magazines are claiming that Rihanna has taken Chris Brown back. I sincerely hope that isn't true. First of all, her safety is at issue. Second, she is looked up to by many young men and women and if it is indeed true that they are back together, this sends a signal to impressionable young people that beating up your lover is acceptable. "Oh, it was just a one-time thing" or "Oh, they're young and immature". Wrong. He BEAT her. He hit her REPEATEDLY. He will do it again. I hope both of them get help.
3. Read Wendell Berry. Be it his novels, essays or poetry -- just read his work.
4. I'm going to go eat a piece of chocolate cake. Peace out, bunny rabbits! Be back soon.
Other non-LOST related observations:
1. Why are all of the cable news shows giving Rush Limbaugh so much attention? Granted, it does help the Dems a great deal to remind folks that the Repubs are embracing this dangerous, racist, sexist, hate-filled clown. Nevertheless, the publicity and attention are exactly what he and his ilk (Coulter, Hannity, Malkin), are after. Why keep providing them with coverage? To seem objective? Why would anyone, or any news organization, in the name of objectivity, play into the hands of these despicable people who make fun of Parkinson's sufferers (Rush) or claim that the 9/11 widows deserved to lose their spouses (Coulter)? What on earth is "objective" or "fair" about their comments? To refuse to re-air their remarks in no way violates their First Amendment rights. They can shout all they want on their radio shows -- but don't replay their remarks over and over! That only helps them by disseminating their "message" even further. Stop giving them an additional forum. Stop focusing so relentlessly on your ratings and your bottom line and remember the effect all of this noise has on the public discourse.
2. The gossip magazines are claiming that Rihanna has taken Chris Brown back. I sincerely hope that isn't true. First of all, her safety is at issue. Second, she is looked up to by many young men and women and if it is indeed true that they are back together, this sends a signal to impressionable young people that beating up your lover is acceptable. "Oh, it was just a one-time thing" or "Oh, they're young and immature". Wrong. He BEAT her. He hit her REPEATEDLY. He will do it again. I hope both of them get help.
3. Read Wendell Berry. Be it his novels, essays or poetry -- just read his work.
4. I'm going to go eat a piece of chocolate cake. Peace out, bunny rabbits! Be back soon.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Gratitude
It's snowing today here on the East Coast. Snow makes me cranky. Winter makes me cranky. I know, snow is pretty and all that. It is also irritating. Go ahead and call me grumpy; I can take it.
However, rather than focus on the cold and the slush, I am going to create a list of some of the things for which I am grateful. It sure does beat kvetching about the weather.
In no particular order, my partial list --
I am grateful for/that:
~Facebook putting me back in touch with long lost friends
~my mom still calls me "punken"
~my sister-in-law videotaped my niece and nephews playing in the snow. I can watch it once I'm home this evening
~my dad likes my poetry
~dogs
~good health
~bread, cheese, wine -- the perfect meal
~the new online friends I'm making through blogging
~a warm winter coat
~the pet store near my apartment has new cats up for adoption; I get to see them every day on my walk to/from the subway
~blankets
~asparagus
~friends near and far
~my DVR
~salmon; I could eat it every day
~Jane Smiley's novel MOO. Read it if you want to laugh out loud.
~my energy healer/guru/practioner Mary Swanson
~my brother and sister and I like each other
~artists
~boots
~a mid-afternoon nap on a rainy/snowy day
~the cello
~Garrison Keillor
~Bill Moyers
~The New Yorker
~Caitlin, Scott, Flynn and Dewey
~Ann Adkinson, nee Burrows
~Shakespeare
~telescopes
~Bjorn-y-pants and Stine-a-rina
~reminders to count your blessings
~the Huntington Library and Botanical Gardens
~Meeghan, Brutus and Wolfgang
~camraderie during tech rehearsals
~looking forward to the future
~guardian angels, both seen and unseen
~hot apple cider
~probiotics
~Wales
~whales
~National Geographic
~evidence of happy marriages
~the Founding Fathers
~ice cream
God knows my list could go on and on. What are some of the things you're grateful for? Feel free to post in the comments section!
However, rather than focus on the cold and the slush, I am going to create a list of some of the things for which I am grateful. It sure does beat kvetching about the weather.
In no particular order, my partial list --
I am grateful for/that:
~Facebook putting me back in touch with long lost friends
~my mom still calls me "punken"
~my sister-in-law videotaped my niece and nephews playing in the snow. I can watch it once I'm home this evening
~my dad likes my poetry
~dogs
~good health
~bread, cheese, wine -- the perfect meal
~the new online friends I'm making through blogging
~a warm winter coat
~the pet store near my apartment has new cats up for adoption; I get to see them every day on my walk to/from the subway
~blankets
~asparagus
~friends near and far
~my DVR
~salmon; I could eat it every day
~Jane Smiley's novel MOO. Read it if you want to laugh out loud.
~my energy healer/guru/practioner Mary Swanson
~my brother and sister and I like each other
~artists
~boots
~a mid-afternoon nap on a rainy/snowy day
~the cello
~Garrison Keillor
~Bill Moyers
~The New Yorker
~Caitlin, Scott, Flynn and Dewey
~Ann Adkinson, nee Burrows
~Shakespeare
~telescopes
~Bjorn-y-pants and Stine-a-rina
~reminders to count your blessings
~the Huntington Library and Botanical Gardens
~Meeghan, Brutus and Wolfgang
~camraderie during tech rehearsals
~looking forward to the future
~guardian angels, both seen and unseen
~hot apple cider
~probiotics
~Wales
~whales
~National Geographic
~evidence of happy marriages
~the Founding Fathers
~ice cream
God knows my list could go on and on. What are some of the things you're grateful for? Feel free to post in the comments section!
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Now, THAT was a Presidential Address to Congress!
What a difference a day makes.
Every time I see President Obama I feel like a desert wanderer who has just been led to water.
We all know by now what an assured speaker he is. But something other than his oratory skills was present last night. He looked, sounded, spoke, behaved like a LEADER. By that I do not mean one who wears his power in an arrogant manner -- goodness knows we've seen far too many examples of that. Obama is a natural leader. He wears it with pride and humility. Strength, conviction and good humor. And that elegance! How utterly refreshing to have a sophisticated thinker and speaker at the helm. Someone who projects power without bombast. An ability to speak frankly about hard work and challenges while simultaneously lifting spirits. I have said it before and I'll say it again, I've never seen a politician like him. He is one of a kind.
Which does not make him infallible. He will make mistakes, in fact, has already done so. Most importantly, he has admitted mistakes. No false swagger for him.
Despite all the pettiness we've seen, and will see, he consistently rises above it. In my opinion, one of the most moving parts of his speech came when he said, with absolute conviction, that he knew every person in that chamber, be they Democrat, Republican or Independent, loves this country and wants it to succeed. And you know what? He's right. Even in light of the Republican political posturing with regards to the stimulus bill, and posturing it most certainly is, they do love this country. And he made it more than clear that Democrats, who for so long have been labeled as the "blame America" party, love this country just as completely.
Mention must also be made of that sweet, obviously overwhelmed girl from South Carolina who wrote to Congress asking for improvements to her school. That little girl brought tears to my eyes. As did the banker who took his $60 million dollar bonus and gave it to current and former employees! Oh, God. There is so much kindness and generosity and grace hiding underneath our bickering and failures.
Thank goodness.
Every time I see President Obama I feel like a desert wanderer who has just been led to water.
We all know by now what an assured speaker he is. But something other than his oratory skills was present last night. He looked, sounded, spoke, behaved like a LEADER. By that I do not mean one who wears his power in an arrogant manner -- goodness knows we've seen far too many examples of that. Obama is a natural leader. He wears it with pride and humility. Strength, conviction and good humor. And that elegance! How utterly refreshing to have a sophisticated thinker and speaker at the helm. Someone who projects power without bombast. An ability to speak frankly about hard work and challenges while simultaneously lifting spirits. I have said it before and I'll say it again, I've never seen a politician like him. He is one of a kind.
Which does not make him infallible. He will make mistakes, in fact, has already done so. Most importantly, he has admitted mistakes. No false swagger for him.
Despite all the pettiness we've seen, and will see, he consistently rises above it. In my opinion, one of the most moving parts of his speech came when he said, with absolute conviction, that he knew every person in that chamber, be they Democrat, Republican or Independent, loves this country and wants it to succeed. And you know what? He's right. Even in light of the Republican political posturing with regards to the stimulus bill, and posturing it most certainly is, they do love this country. And he made it more than clear that Democrats, who for so long have been labeled as the "blame America" party, love this country just as completely.
Mention must also be made of that sweet, obviously overwhelmed girl from South Carolina who wrote to Congress asking for improvements to her school. That little girl brought tears to my eyes. As did the banker who took his $60 million dollar bonus and gave it to current and former employees! Oh, God. There is so much kindness and generosity and grace hiding underneath our bickering and failures.
Thank goodness.
Writer's Block (and puppies)
Oh, writer's block, you cruel savage! I have several essay ideas rolling around in my brain and each time I try to pin one of them down for more than two minutes, they up and run away again. Sneaky bastards! Arts funding, socialism, infrastructure spending, why LOST is one of the best TV shows of all time -- all of these are subjects I would like to write about in greater detail and yet, today, my brain is saying "Sorry, lass."
So guess what? Pictures of puppies! Everybody loves puppies, right? I mean, come on:
Who could ever resist that face?
Or this one:
I want a dog.
And a pony.
And inspiration to come floating down on her gossamer wings. Until then:
PUPPIES!
Monday, February 23, 2009
Calgon!
There is so much to discuss a girl hardly knows where to begin! The Oscars, the do-we-nationalize-the-banks debate, Rihanna/Chris Brown AND the leaked Rihanna photo, the continuing mystery of why someone hasn't given Miley Cyrus the spanking she deserves, Obama telling the GOP governors to behave themselves... Oh, it's all so exciting! Put it all in one post or divide and conquer? Start with the celeb stuff and then go politics or vise versa? Possums, what do I do??????
Deep breath.
Let's start with the fun stuff, shall we?
THE OSCARS! Random thoughts to follow:
Hugh Jackman = amazing. Charming, funny, so at ease in his own skin, singing, dancing! I thought he was great.
Kate Winslet = Yay!! Finally! The woman was o for 5 going in to last night. Thank goodness she won. And as an added bonus, she looked positively stunning. Stunning. Step back a moment and reflect on the fact that she is only 33 years old and already has SIX Oscar nominations to her name. That's impressive, folks.
Dresses. Oh, dresses! Though I am a woman devoted to her blue jeans, I must admit to longing for the days when women wore dresses more often. Don't you sometimes think it would be fun to get dolled up simply to go to the movies? A night out to a film or a play or a museum used to be an event. Aaaaanyway, pretty dresses! (And not so pretty dresses. I'm talking to you Beyonce. What was that black and gold monstrosity you were wearing?). Most everyone looked great; hell, I even thought Angelina Jolie looked terrific and recently she's been wearing glorified trash bags on the red carpet. But she looked splendid last night. Taraji P. Henson -- could be my pic for favorite dress. Oh, but then there's Kate's ensemble, Anne Hathaway's gorgeous creation, Evan Rachel Wood's dress was so lovely...
Some of the ladies didn't fare as well. There is the aforementioned Beyonce, a woman with a glorious set of pipes but often questionable fashion sense, in my opinion. Jessica Beal is super, super pretty but even she could not make that half bow thing look good. Sarah Jessica Parker is one of the actresses I'd most like to hang out with over a beer 'cause she seems like such a geniunely lovely person but I'm tired of the ballerina dresses (and this, coming from a former ballerina). Also, is it me or did Matthew Broderick look puffy about the face?
There should have been more Daniel Craig. There can never be enough Daniel Craig. Here's hoping that next year all the awards will be presented by Daniel Craig.
Queen Latifah singing over the dearly departed montage? Lovely. Just lovely.
On the blogosphere today reactions are mixed re: former winners in the acting categories extolling the virtues of the nominees. I really liked it. I thought it was different, moving and how great for the winner to be greeted by their respective club members upon hitting the stage? Speaking as one with fantasies of winning an Oscar, I would freakin' love it. Oscar producers, please keep this in mind when I'm nominated. Thank you.
Dustin Lance Black, winner for his screenplay for Milk gave such a touching, heartfelt speech. He made me cry.
Perhaps the funniest moment of the night? No... not Ben Stiller's mockery of Joaquin Phoenix, although that was indeed inspired. My pic for most amusing was the winner of the Best Foreign Film who actually said Domorigato Mr. Roboto. Brilliant. (Please don't chastise me for misspelling that). Or was Sean Penn's "... you commie, homo-loving sons-of-a-gun..." the funniest moment? That was pretty damn great as well. (I do wish he'd thanked Robin though).
Okay. Next.
Rihanna/Chris Brown. Not much to say here except -- that poor, poor girl. I hope she's okay and has good people looking out for her. And then to have her photo leaked like that. Kudos to those entertainment shows such as Access Hollywood that refused to air the photograph. Shame on all the "newspapers" and other programs that did publish/air the pic.
What's next? The banks? Oh, crap. I'm actually a bit pooped at the moment. Can I get back to that one? Or, can I simply direct you to Paul Krugman?
Where does that leave us? Ahhhh, Miley Cyrus. She's obnoxious. End of discussion.
And Obama and the governors. He basically told a few GOPers to quit whining about the 2 or 3 percent of the stimulus package they object to and save their campaigning for 2012. Awesome.
Well. I'm working through an essay on socialism and the debate this country seems to be having about said subject. But I'm reluctant to publish that post until I've got my thoughts in order and my ducks in a row. Stay tuned.
Oh, and do me a favor, would you, bunny rabbits? Please check out my other blog which has now moved to its very own server: http://www.calliopesdiary.com/. Thanks!
Deep breath.
Let's start with the fun stuff, shall we?
THE OSCARS! Random thoughts to follow:
Hugh Jackman = amazing. Charming, funny, so at ease in his own skin, singing, dancing! I thought he was great.
Kate Winslet = Yay!! Finally! The woman was o for 5 going in to last night. Thank goodness she won. And as an added bonus, she looked positively stunning. Stunning. Step back a moment and reflect on the fact that she is only 33 years old and already has SIX Oscar nominations to her name. That's impressive, folks.
Dresses. Oh, dresses! Though I am a woman devoted to her blue jeans, I must admit to longing for the days when women wore dresses more often. Don't you sometimes think it would be fun to get dolled up simply to go to the movies? A night out to a film or a play or a museum used to be an event. Aaaaanyway, pretty dresses! (And not so pretty dresses. I'm talking to you Beyonce. What was that black and gold monstrosity you were wearing?). Most everyone looked great; hell, I even thought Angelina Jolie looked terrific and recently she's been wearing glorified trash bags on the red carpet. But she looked splendid last night. Taraji P. Henson -- could be my pic for favorite dress. Oh, but then there's Kate's ensemble, Anne Hathaway's gorgeous creation, Evan Rachel Wood's dress was so lovely...
Some of the ladies didn't fare as well. There is the aforementioned Beyonce, a woman with a glorious set of pipes but often questionable fashion sense, in my opinion. Jessica Beal is super, super pretty but even she could not make that half bow thing look good. Sarah Jessica Parker is one of the actresses I'd most like to hang out with over a beer 'cause she seems like such a geniunely lovely person but I'm tired of the ballerina dresses (and this, coming from a former ballerina). Also, is it me or did Matthew Broderick look puffy about the face?
There should have been more Daniel Craig. There can never be enough Daniel Craig. Here's hoping that next year all the awards will be presented by Daniel Craig.
Queen Latifah singing over the dearly departed montage? Lovely. Just lovely.
On the blogosphere today reactions are mixed re: former winners in the acting categories extolling the virtues of the nominees. I really liked it. I thought it was different, moving and how great for the winner to be greeted by their respective club members upon hitting the stage? Speaking as one with fantasies of winning an Oscar, I would freakin' love it. Oscar producers, please keep this in mind when I'm nominated. Thank you.
Dustin Lance Black, winner for his screenplay for Milk gave such a touching, heartfelt speech. He made me cry.
Perhaps the funniest moment of the night? No... not Ben Stiller's mockery of Joaquin Phoenix, although that was indeed inspired. My pic for most amusing was the winner of the Best Foreign Film who actually said Domorigato Mr. Roboto. Brilliant. (Please don't chastise me for misspelling that). Or was Sean Penn's "... you commie, homo-loving sons-of-a-gun..." the funniest moment? That was pretty damn great as well. (I do wish he'd thanked Robin though).
Okay. Next.
Rihanna/Chris Brown. Not much to say here except -- that poor, poor girl. I hope she's okay and has good people looking out for her. And then to have her photo leaked like that. Kudos to those entertainment shows such as Access Hollywood that refused to air the photograph. Shame on all the "newspapers" and other programs that did publish/air the pic.
What's next? The banks? Oh, crap. I'm actually a bit pooped at the moment. Can I get back to that one? Or, can I simply direct you to Paul Krugman?
Where does that leave us? Ahhhh, Miley Cyrus. She's obnoxious. End of discussion.
And Obama and the governors. He basically told a few GOPers to quit whining about the 2 or 3 percent of the stimulus package they object to and save their campaigning for 2012. Awesome.
Well. I'm working through an essay on socialism and the debate this country seems to be having about said subject. But I'm reluctant to publish that post until I've got my thoughts in order and my ducks in a row. Stay tuned.
Oh, and do me a favor, would you, bunny rabbits? Please check out my other blog which has now moved to its very own server: http://www.calliopesdiary.com/. Thanks!
Friday, February 20, 2009
The Perfect Day
What does your perfect day look like? For the sake of this exercise let's assume that money is no object. If you want to have millions of dollars, great. If you'd like to simply be comfortable, great! But if you want to do a particular something on your perfect day, like hop on a flight to Vienna, assume that you have the means to make it happen.
My day looks like this:
I get out of bed at 10am for a session with my personal trainer.
Breakfast with my dashing screenwriter (or director, producer, DP, lighting, sound, set) husband.
Then a stop by the volunteer tutoring center for an hour's work with one of my tutees. (Is that a word?)
On the way home, I get a call from my agent telling me that I've booked the 4 episode arc on Friday Night Lights.
A quick stop at the drugstore for some strawberry cream Starbursts as a celebration.
Lunch.
Then I curl up in my favorite chair for reading time, probably something historical or political.
A quick, light snack and I'm off to the Mark Taper Forum for a performance of Much Ado About Nothing, in which I'm playing Beatrice.
Home to an after-performance meal with hubby.
Crazy hot sex with hubby.
Pleasant slumber.
Now THAT'S a good day.
What about you? Feel free to share in the comments section!
My day looks like this:
I get out of bed at 10am for a session with my personal trainer.
Breakfast with my dashing screenwriter (or director, producer, DP, lighting, sound, set) husband.
Then a stop by the volunteer tutoring center for an hour's work with one of my tutees. (Is that a word?)
On the way home, I get a call from my agent telling me that I've booked the 4 episode arc on Friday Night Lights.
A quick stop at the drugstore for some strawberry cream Starbursts as a celebration.
Lunch.
Then I curl up in my favorite chair for reading time, probably something historical or political.
A quick, light snack and I'm off to the Mark Taper Forum for a performance of Much Ado About Nothing, in which I'm playing Beatrice.
Home to an after-performance meal with hubby.
Crazy hot sex with hubby.
Pleasant slumber.
Now THAT'S a good day.
What about you? Feel free to share in the comments section!
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Another shout out!
If you're a regular reader of this blog, you know that one of my earliest posts was in praise of NY Times Op-Ed columnist Nicholas Kristof. Well, I'm at it again, this time giving props to Gail Collins and David Brooks. In a recent post I mentioned that Brooks is one of the few Republican commentators that I can stand reading and/or listening to because he is not a crazy, raving lunatic out to whip up the extremists into a frenzy. If only Brooks were the voice of the Republican party rather than Rush Limbaugh.
I digress.
Every so often, David and Gail debate a topic. These exchanges are witty and thoughtful and, gasp!, respectful. Go to the Times website, click on the Opinion link and then click on The Conversation. Or, you know, just click right here.
This particular conversation, titled The Propeller Heads' Dilemma, concerns how large a role policy intellectuals should take in any Administration. They go on to debate a bit about the stimulus plan. What I appreciate so much about the exchanges these two conduct is the clear respect each has for the other person's intellect. It is so refreshing in this age of cable news shout-fests and screaming matches. Jon Stewart managed to get that horrible show with Tucker Carlson axed a few years ago but Mr. Stewart is only one man and despite his reach and influence, he can only do so much. (By the way, Jon, um... I've got a big crush on you. Big.) Would that it were possible to lock the 24 hour news-cycle genie back in the bottle from which she sprang (although in that case Jon Stewart would have far fewer people to make fun of, so I suppose it's all for the best). Filling air time has bestowed a form of legitimacy on countless pundits, optimistically referred to as experts in most cases.
Oh, if only Bill Moyers ruled the world!
Lest you think, treasured readers, that I only read the NY Times, it's not true. I read the Huffington Post also. Hee. Little joke there. Did you like that? Really though, I check out numerous political/current events websites; it just so happens that the Times employs a few of my favorite writer/thinkers.
So... Gail, David, thank you and keep up the good work.
I digress.
Every so often, David and Gail debate a topic. These exchanges are witty and thoughtful and, gasp!, respectful. Go to the Times website, click on the Opinion link and then click on The Conversation. Or, you know, just click right here.
This particular conversation, titled The Propeller Heads' Dilemma, concerns how large a role policy intellectuals should take in any Administration. They go on to debate a bit about the stimulus plan. What I appreciate so much about the exchanges these two conduct is the clear respect each has for the other person's intellect. It is so refreshing in this age of cable news shout-fests and screaming matches. Jon Stewart managed to get that horrible show with Tucker Carlson axed a few years ago but Mr. Stewart is only one man and despite his reach and influence, he can only do so much. (By the way, Jon, um... I've got a big crush on you. Big.) Would that it were possible to lock the 24 hour news-cycle genie back in the bottle from which she sprang (although in that case Jon Stewart would have far fewer people to make fun of, so I suppose it's all for the best). Filling air time has bestowed a form of legitimacy on countless pundits, optimistically referred to as experts in most cases.
Oh, if only Bill Moyers ruled the world!
Lest you think, treasured readers, that I only read the NY Times, it's not true. I read the Huffington Post also. Hee. Little joke there. Did you like that? Really though, I check out numerous political/current events websites; it just so happens that the Times employs a few of my favorite writer/thinkers.
So... Gail, David, thank you and keep up the good work.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Does absence make the heart grow fonder?
I sure hope so!
Dear readers, forgive me for being away for a few days. My weekend was spent nursing some tummy troubles, feeling sorry for myself due to said tummy troubles and hiding from the world. In addition, I took a brief "news holiday." This is something I do from time to time. I give myself a few days, usually no more than three, to refrain from reading/watching/commenting on all the goings on in the world. Occasionally the cacophony gets to even yours truly and I need a rest.
At the moment I'm listening to my stomach growl and hoping that what I choose to feed it doesn't make it angry. Fingers crossed.
Rest assured, penguins, that I will have a new opinionated post tomorrow. Or perhaps later tonight.
Dear readers, forgive me for being away for a few days. My weekend was spent nursing some tummy troubles, feeling sorry for myself due to said tummy troubles and hiding from the world. In addition, I took a brief "news holiday." This is something I do from time to time. I give myself a few days, usually no more than three, to refrain from reading/watching/commenting on all the goings on in the world. Occasionally the cacophony gets to even yours truly and I need a rest.
At the moment I'm listening to my stomach growl and hoping that what I choose to feed it doesn't make it angry. Fingers crossed.
Rest assured, penguins, that I will have a new opinionated post tomorrow. Or perhaps later tonight.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Various and sundry...
Michael Phelps gets caught smoking pot and is suspended from competition for 3 months. Alex Rodriguez receives no punishment for admitting to using steroids. Phelps' pot use was purely recreational whereas A-Rod used drugs in order to cheat and enhance his performance.
Rush Limbaugh declares on his radio show that he hopes Obama fails. He outright advocates for the failure of the head of the American government and is considered a hero by the right-wing nutjobs. However, anyone having the audacity to criticize George W. Bush when he was president was labeled a traitor.
Drew Peterson, the man whose 3rd wife died under mysterious circumstances and whose 4th wife disappeared, is engaged again. He is 55 and she is 24.
I have three email accounts, am on Facebook and have two blogs but I still don't know what Twitter is. Can someone explain it to me?
Referring to the stimulus package:
" 'It's generational theft', said Senator John McCain, just a few days after voting for tax cuts that would, over the next decade, have cost about four times as much. Paul Krugman in today's NY Times.
Rush Limbaugh declares on his radio show that he hopes Obama fails. He outright advocates for the failure of the head of the American government and is considered a hero by the right-wing nutjobs. However, anyone having the audacity to criticize George W. Bush when he was president was labeled a traitor.
Drew Peterson, the man whose 3rd wife died under mysterious circumstances and whose 4th wife disappeared, is engaged again. He is 55 and she is 24.
I have three email accounts, am on Facebook and have two blogs but I still don't know what Twitter is. Can someone explain it to me?
Referring to the stimulus package:
" 'It's generational theft', said Senator John McCain, just a few days after voting for tax cuts that would, over the next decade, have cost about four times as much. Paul Krugman in today's NY Times.
This picture makes me laugh.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Like "Drink Me", only different.
Click me.
It's worth a look-see.
Oh, all right. You want more information about it? It's an essay called The Voice of American Pragmatism by Jeffrey Feldman. He must have climbed inside my head, put my assorted pebbles of thought into a bag and arranged them into a Zen garden of sense.
It's worth a look-see.
Oh, all right. You want more information about it? It's an essay called The Voice of American Pragmatism by Jeffrey Feldman. He must have climbed inside my head, put my assorted pebbles of thought into a bag and arranged them into a Zen garden of sense.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Thank Goodness
Thank goodness President Obama is going on TV tonight to advocate for the stimulus bill. It's about time. He has made the mistake that Democrats continue to make over and over and over; he let the Repubs frame the debate about the stimulus plan.
Obama's call for bipartisanship is necessary and welcome. However, you cannot be bipartisan if only one party shows up. After having his outstretched hand slapped away so completely by the Repubs in Congress, Obama should have taken to the airwaves immediately and said in no uncertain terms that if they are not willing to come to the table, fine. They can starve. However, he did not do that, and let them have the microphone for several days, days in which they spread misinformation about the stimulus package and continued their tired call for tax cuts. Why, why on earth do the Dems continue to allow these extreme conservative voices to control the debate? I am an enormous Obama supporter; however, he needs to start using the same elbows he uses when playing basketball against the Repubs.
It's true that the American people are ready for bipartisanship and an end to the dysfunctional way things have been done in Washington. However, it is profoundly clear that the Republicans in Congress, now with almost zero moderate voices, are not only digging their heels in the partisan dirt, they are PROUD of it. Putting their party's renewal above getting this country out of economic quicksand, they are once again choosing self-interest above the greater good.
And once again, to my deep, profound, unutterable dismay, the Democrats, including Obama, are letting them get away with it.
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas) actually compared (favorably!) the Repub minority in Congress to the Taliban, saying that they have learned what it means to be insurgents from the despised gang of thugs in Afghanistan. Can you IMAGINE the outrage we would be hearing if a Democrat had dared say something so outlandish? Rush Limbaugh would spontaneously combust! But a Republican member of Congress is allowed to say these despicable things and nothing happens. Nothing.
We won. The Democrats overwhelmingly won the last two elections, first Congress in 2006 and then the Presidency in 2008. Why are we bending over backwards to accommodate individuals whose policies the citizens of this country decided were bankrupt!? It baffles me.
Obama wants to turn the page and create a different tone in Washington and I admire him for that. But if the Repubs won't join him at the table, then don't feed them at all. Wasn't it Obama himself who said just a few days ago "I won."
There are many out there who capture what it is I'm so livid about in words more powerful than mine. Here are just a couple:
Paul Krugman on MSNBC on February 6th: "How much bipartisan outreach can you have when 36 out of 41 republican senators take their marching orders from Rush Limbaugh?" Later in the same interview: "At this point we have a Republican party that, except for a few members, is committed to just doing more of what we did during the last eight years. Obama has to disregard that."
Drew Westen on Huff Post: "In fact, the 2006 and 2008 Senate and Congressional elections cleared out all but a handful of moderate Republicans from Washington, leaving no one to reach across the aisle to but economic and social extremists who have had no interest in attending the President's bipartisan party. They are more interested in salvaging their own party and figuring out how to return themselves to relevance. They are precisely the politicians the American people made clear in November they do not want shaping further policy." He goes on, offering a suggestion of what Obama should say to those Repub members of Congress who are gleefully shouting the same old "tax and spend-evil Liberal" nonsense: "...Senator, you and your party are the ones whose fiscal irresponsibility and failed ideology have saddled our children and grandchildren with more debt in the last eight years than all the debt amassed in the prior 200 years combined, and your radical economic ideology has led to a financial crisis and soaring unemployment like we haven't seen since the Great Depression. If you have something constructive to offer, I'm all ears. But if all you have to offer is partisan sniping and the same tired ideas that are costing people their homes, their jobs, and their savings, neither I, nor the American people, have any interest in hearing from you further." (emphasis added).
Obama's call for bipartisanship is necessary and welcome. However, you cannot be bipartisan if only one party shows up. After having his outstretched hand slapped away so completely by the Repubs in Congress, Obama should have taken to the airwaves immediately and said in no uncertain terms that if they are not willing to come to the table, fine. They can starve. However, he did not do that, and let them have the microphone for several days, days in which they spread misinformation about the stimulus package and continued their tired call for tax cuts. Why, why on earth do the Dems continue to allow these extreme conservative voices to control the debate? I am an enormous Obama supporter; however, he needs to start using the same elbows he uses when playing basketball against the Repubs.
It's true that the American people are ready for bipartisanship and an end to the dysfunctional way things have been done in Washington. However, it is profoundly clear that the Republicans in Congress, now with almost zero moderate voices, are not only digging their heels in the partisan dirt, they are PROUD of it. Putting their party's renewal above getting this country out of economic quicksand, they are once again choosing self-interest above the greater good.
And once again, to my deep, profound, unutterable dismay, the Democrats, including Obama, are letting them get away with it.
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas) actually compared (favorably!) the Repub minority in Congress to the Taliban, saying that they have learned what it means to be insurgents from the despised gang of thugs in Afghanistan. Can you IMAGINE the outrage we would be hearing if a Democrat had dared say something so outlandish? Rush Limbaugh would spontaneously combust! But a Republican member of Congress is allowed to say these despicable things and nothing happens. Nothing.
We won. The Democrats overwhelmingly won the last two elections, first Congress in 2006 and then the Presidency in 2008. Why are we bending over backwards to accommodate individuals whose policies the citizens of this country decided were bankrupt!? It baffles me.
Obama wants to turn the page and create a different tone in Washington and I admire him for that. But if the Repubs won't join him at the table, then don't feed them at all. Wasn't it Obama himself who said just a few days ago "I won."
There are many out there who capture what it is I'm so livid about in words more powerful than mine. Here are just a couple:
Paul Krugman on MSNBC on February 6th: "How much bipartisan outreach can you have when 36 out of 41 republican senators take their marching orders from Rush Limbaugh?" Later in the same interview: "At this point we have a Republican party that, except for a few members, is committed to just doing more of what we did during the last eight years. Obama has to disregard that."
Drew Westen on Huff Post: "In fact, the 2006 and 2008 Senate and Congressional elections cleared out all but a handful of moderate Republicans from Washington, leaving no one to reach across the aisle to but economic and social extremists who have had no interest in attending the President's bipartisan party. They are more interested in salvaging their own party and figuring out how to return themselves to relevance. They are precisely the politicians the American people made clear in November they do not want shaping further policy." He goes on, offering a suggestion of what Obama should say to those Repub members of Congress who are gleefully shouting the same old "tax and spend-evil Liberal" nonsense: "...Senator, you and your party are the ones whose fiscal irresponsibility and failed ideology have saddled our children and grandchildren with more debt in the last eight years than all the debt amassed in the prior 200 years combined, and your radical economic ideology has led to a financial crisis and soaring unemployment like we haven't seen since the Great Depression. If you have something constructive to offer, I'm all ears. But if all you have to offer is partisan sniping and the same tired ideas that are costing people their homes, their jobs, and their savings, neither I, nor the American people, have any interest in hearing from you further." (emphasis added).
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
HIGHLY Recommended website
Here is a link to Robert Reich's blog. In fact, it is called Robert Reich's Blog. How clever of him. RR was the Secretary of Labor during the Clinton administration. You may have seen him on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. He has published several books, the latest being Supercapitalism.
I stumbled upon his blog by accident but am quite happy to have found it. There is this post about the Obama administration's stimulus package and what work will need to be done after the bill has passed Congress. It will pass Congress sooner or later, presumably after a lot more hand-wringing on both sides of the aisle (and no doubt with the Dems bark being worse than their bite and caving on key elements of the bill to the same folks who are largely responsible for the mess in the first place. Notice I say largely responsible, not completely. See? I can be bi-partisan.)
I have done a lot of reading about the proposed stimulus, a great deal of which has left me befuddled. (Charts and graphs make me apoplectic. They frighten me. Always have, ever since I was first asked to graph an equation in pre-algebra). Mr. Reich manages to lay out his arguments in a manner which a lay person like me, with an average understanding of economics, can understand. I particularly liked his "after the stimulus" post (please, no "le deluge" jokes), for its illustration of what he calls "structuralists" and "cyclists". (I'm a structuralist). This post is clear, concise and manages to avoid condescension. I urge you to check it out. You'll enjoy it.
I stumbled upon his blog by accident but am quite happy to have found it. There is this post about the Obama administration's stimulus package and what work will need to be done after the bill has passed Congress. It will pass Congress sooner or later, presumably after a lot more hand-wringing on both sides of the aisle (and no doubt with the Dems bark being worse than their bite and caving on key elements of the bill to the same folks who are largely responsible for the mess in the first place. Notice I say largely responsible, not completely. See? I can be bi-partisan.)
I have done a lot of reading about the proposed stimulus, a great deal of which has left me befuddled. (Charts and graphs make me apoplectic. They frighten me. Always have, ever since I was first asked to graph an equation in pre-algebra). Mr. Reich manages to lay out his arguments in a manner which a lay person like me, with an average understanding of economics, can understand. I particularly liked his "after the stimulus" post (please, no "le deluge" jokes), for its illustration of what he calls "structuralists" and "cyclists". (I'm a structuralist). This post is clear, concise and manages to avoid condescension. I urge you to check it out. You'll enjoy it.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Lobby-pop, Lobby-pop, Oh Lobby, Lobby-pop...Lobby-pop!
President Obama is coming under fire for some appointments he has made to his administration. Specifically, there are those on the right and the left criticizing him for appointing lobbyists after he declared time and time again during the campaign that he would do no such thing. Let's examine this a bit deeper.
On his first day in office, Obama declared that anyone in his administration who left, would not be allowed to lobby the administration for its duration. He also stated that he would not employ anyone who had been a registered lobbyist in the past two years. There have already been exceptions to the second rule.
William V. Corr lobbied on behalf of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids and is now the deputy health and human services secretary. Honestly, I have no problem with that. If someone who lobbied AGAINST tobacco use is now in a prominent position with health and human services, fine by me.
William J. Lynn III has been nominated as deputy defense secretary. He is an ex-Raytheon lobbyist (Raytheon is a prominent military contractor). This is potentially troubling. I am not aware of how recently Mr. Lynn worked for Raytheon. Obama has declared that appointees would not be allowed to work on issues on which they lobbied in the past two years. We'll have to see how this one plays out.
I am also troubled by the appointment of Mark Patterson (lobbyist for Goldman Sachs), who is now chief of staff to Tim Geithner (Treasury Sec'y). Again, I do not have specific details about how long ago Mr. Patterson lobbied for Goldman, yet it does raise eyebrows since financial firms are so implicated in our current economic mess.
So yes, I understand why some folks are bent out of shape about this. Obama promised such sweeping change that people are extra-sensitive to even the slightest indication of "Washington as usual". But there is a problem with this criticism as well. Obama's rhetoric during the campaign did sometimes obscure the fact that he is, essentially, a pragmatist. He has referred to himself as such many, many times. He is a politician and politicians bend the rules in order to get things done. Ah yes, but didn't he promise to change all of that? My feeling is that he has already gone a long way towards changing the tone (and he hasn't even been in office a full month yet). Some stumbles along the way are inevitable.
And in comparison to the outrageous cronyism of the Bush administration, the appointment of individuals who were egregiously unqualified for their jobs, these blips from the Obama administration pale in comparison. There will never be absolute purity in politics, Obama or no Obama. The difference I see in this situation, and it is a significant difference in my opinion, is that the few appointments coming under question right now have one thing in common -- these people are actually qualified to do their jobs. I am willing to allow Obama a little wiggle room. A little, not a lot. But I do not expect him to take advantage of that wiggle room to a large degree. Time could prove me wrong and if so, I will admit it. But for now, I am maintaining hope.
What I do feel needs to change is the way the Democrats in Congress operate. I am disappointed in Nancy Pelosi's leadership, despite being thrilled to have a woman as Speaker. She and Harry Reid strike me as ineffectual leaders. This does not make them bad Congresspeople; it means that perhaps other individuals would be better at leading the party in Congress.
I am extremely curious to know how others feel about all of this. I welcome any and all comments!
On his first day in office, Obama declared that anyone in his administration who left, would not be allowed to lobby the administration for its duration. He also stated that he would not employ anyone who had been a registered lobbyist in the past two years. There have already been exceptions to the second rule.
William V. Corr lobbied on behalf of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids and is now the deputy health and human services secretary. Honestly, I have no problem with that. If someone who lobbied AGAINST tobacco use is now in a prominent position with health and human services, fine by me.
William J. Lynn III has been nominated as deputy defense secretary. He is an ex-Raytheon lobbyist (Raytheon is a prominent military contractor). This is potentially troubling. I am not aware of how recently Mr. Lynn worked for Raytheon. Obama has declared that appointees would not be allowed to work on issues on which they lobbied in the past two years. We'll have to see how this one plays out.
I am also troubled by the appointment of Mark Patterson (lobbyist for Goldman Sachs), who is now chief of staff to Tim Geithner (Treasury Sec'y). Again, I do not have specific details about how long ago Mr. Patterson lobbied for Goldman, yet it does raise eyebrows since financial firms are so implicated in our current economic mess.
So yes, I understand why some folks are bent out of shape about this. Obama promised such sweeping change that people are extra-sensitive to even the slightest indication of "Washington as usual". But there is a problem with this criticism as well. Obama's rhetoric during the campaign did sometimes obscure the fact that he is, essentially, a pragmatist. He has referred to himself as such many, many times. He is a politician and politicians bend the rules in order to get things done. Ah yes, but didn't he promise to change all of that? My feeling is that he has already gone a long way towards changing the tone (and he hasn't even been in office a full month yet). Some stumbles along the way are inevitable.
And in comparison to the outrageous cronyism of the Bush administration, the appointment of individuals who were egregiously unqualified for their jobs, these blips from the Obama administration pale in comparison. There will never be absolute purity in politics, Obama or no Obama. The difference I see in this situation, and it is a significant difference in my opinion, is that the few appointments coming under question right now have one thing in common -- these people are actually qualified to do their jobs. I am willing to allow Obama a little wiggle room. A little, not a lot. But I do not expect him to take advantage of that wiggle room to a large degree. Time could prove me wrong and if so, I will admit it. But for now, I am maintaining hope.
What I do feel needs to change is the way the Democrats in Congress operate. I am disappointed in Nancy Pelosi's leadership, despite being thrilled to have a woman as Speaker. She and Harry Reid strike me as ineffectual leaders. This does not make them bad Congresspeople; it means that perhaps other individuals would be better at leading the party in Congress.
I am extremely curious to know how others feel about all of this. I welcome any and all comments!
Sunday, February 1, 2009
With six kids already, do you really need more?
By now most of you have probably heard about the California woman who gave birth to eight babies this past week. What you may not have heard is that this woman is a single mother who already has 6 children. The eight babies just born (none weighing more than 3 pounds at birth), are the result of a fertility treatment, as you may have guessed.
This brings me to a question, one of many that I have about this situation. What doctor in his/her right mind would allow a woman already raising 6 children to go through a fertility treatment, especially when those treatments frequently result in multiple births? She now has FOURTEEN children to care for. 14 children to support not only financially, but emotionally as well. So often in the cases of multiple births that gain national or worldwide attention, people wonder how the parent(s) will afford all the diapers, food, clothing, etc. necessary for child rearing. But a question that rarely gets asked is how will those parents provide adequate emotional support to each child?
Not only that, but there are medical issues that demand debate. The human female body was not designed to carry 8 babies at one time. This is a woman having a baby, not a cat having a litter of kittens. Forgive me for being crass, but honestly! What is going on here? The babies just born are all severely underweight. They will remain in the hospital for many weeks in order to determine if their lungs are functioning properly, if their hearing or sight have been damaged, if their brain function is normal.
Then there is the issue of over-population. I am not advocating a one-child only rule such as exists in China. However we need to seriously examine the ethics involved in keeping all eight embryos if all eight implant in the womb. I realize this is a thorny topic, especially in this country with the culture wars around abortion still raging. At what point does someone simply have too many children? After a certain number, should people be forbidden to have more?
In my opinion, this woman is selfish beyond description. Calling her selfish will undoubtedly ruffle some feathers. But think about her children. How much attention can she give to each child? How will she have the energy to care for all 14 kids? I understand wanting a child. I also understand that some people want a large family. But there is large and then there is irresponsible.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Dear Angelina Jolie
It is okay to smile. Really. It won't hurt you.
I realize that going to awards shows means dealing with inane interviews where you are asked the same questions over and over. However...
THIS IS PART OF YOUR JOB. Please remember that there are countless actors out there who would give their eye teeth to endure those interviews if it meant having the opportunities and kudos you have received.
The sour expression that seems permanently attached to your face causes you to appear smug and ungrateful. No doubt, having the paparazzi follow you and your family wherever you go is frustrating and sometimes, I imagine, frightening. Quite honestly, I feel for you and other celebrities whose every move is documented. Trying to get in your car, take your kids to school, go to a restaurant while a crowd of aggressive photographers shout and grab at you would drive anyone insane. However...
When you go to an awards show, when you voluntarily put on a pretty (or not-so-pretty) dress and walk the red carpet, you know photographers will be there. You know that E! and Access Hollywood and Ryan Seacrest will be there with their microphones and obsequiousness and hyperactivity.
You lead a remarkably privileged life. Yes, you have done a great deal of charitable giving and outreach (although all the publicity about it is a bit unseemly, you know? George Clooney is quite the philanthropist but mostly he does it anonymously because he feels it's something he should do regardless of recognition, a la "To whom much has been given, much is expected").
But really, the least you could do at an awards show is try and look like you are enjoying yourself. A bit. Usually you look as though you think everyone else is beneath you and you'd rather be home or hopping to another continent to pick out a seventh baby.
I realize that going to awards shows means dealing with inane interviews where you are asked the same questions over and over. However...
THIS IS PART OF YOUR JOB. Please remember that there are countless actors out there who would give their eye teeth to endure those interviews if it meant having the opportunities and kudos you have received.
The sour expression that seems permanently attached to your face causes you to appear smug and ungrateful. No doubt, having the paparazzi follow you and your family wherever you go is frustrating and sometimes, I imagine, frightening. Quite honestly, I feel for you and other celebrities whose every move is documented. Trying to get in your car, take your kids to school, go to a restaurant while a crowd of aggressive photographers shout and grab at you would drive anyone insane. However...
When you go to an awards show, when you voluntarily put on a pretty (or not-so-pretty) dress and walk the red carpet, you know photographers will be there. You know that E! and Access Hollywood and Ryan Seacrest will be there with their microphones and obsequiousness and hyperactivity.
You lead a remarkably privileged life. Yes, you have done a great deal of charitable giving and outreach (although all the publicity about it is a bit unseemly, you know? George Clooney is quite the philanthropist but mostly he does it anonymously because he feels it's something he should do regardless of recognition, a la "To whom much has been given, much is expected").
But really, the least you could do at an awards show is try and look like you are enjoying yourself. A bit. Usually you look as though you think everyone else is beneath you and you'd rather be home or hopping to another continent to pick out a seventh baby.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Bob Herbert is smart. That must mean I am, too.
I posted earlier today in reaction to a column by William Kristol in yesterday's NY Times. In this post, I took the Republicans to task. I had yet to read today's column by Bob Herbert, but apparently, he and I think alike (hee! I *heart* Bob) because he said exactly the same things in his column that I said in my post, albeit more artfully. And he takes the Democrats to task as well. (Lest anyone think that I maintain the idea that the Dems can do no wrong, let me state for the record that the Dems have their own set of problems. I'm a proud, die-hard member of the Democratic party, but it does not follow that they are above criticism. I'll get around to them later.)
Anyway...
I urge you to read Mr. Herbert's column. While you're at it, check out David Brook's column as well. He's a Republican that I can deal with, and he's quite intelligent. Certainly I disagree with him about some matters, but often I find myself appreciating his perspective. In any case, his column published today is one that I like so much I printed it out. I maintain a folder of editorials that I particularly enjoy. Go forth and read!
Anyway...
I urge you to read Mr. Herbert's column. While you're at it, check out David Brook's column as well. He's a Republican that I can deal with, and he's quite intelligent. Certainly I disagree with him about some matters, but often I find myself appreciating his perspective. In any case, his column published today is one that I like so much I printed it out. I maintain a folder of editorials that I particularly enjoy. Go forth and read!
William Kristol is a blathering idiot.
Yesterday was William Kristol's last column for the NY Times. Hallelujah, hooray, huzzah and all other celebratory words beginning with "H". Of course, he's moving to the Washington Post so he'll still have a platform for spewing his delusional ideas.
The gist of yesterday's column was that conservatives have a lot to be proud of. Really? Starting an unnecessary war under false pretenses; condoning torture; shredding the Constitution; eviserating the economy; increasing the animosity towards the United States throughout the entire world, including among our allies; claiming unprecedented executive powers; using fear and propaganda to manipulate voters; stealing elections; creating an atmosphere in which greed and duplicity are not only tolerated, but rewarded; shameless, criminal lying and deception (Iran/Contra, the US Attorney firings, creating a 9/11-Saddam Hussein link, ignoring FISA and spying on Americans); sending women ever closer to a return to the Dark Ages; ignoring the peril that the environment is in; making a fetish of anti-intellectualism; allowing plainly-crazy, fantasists such as Creationists a place at the table once known as Science...
I could go on and on and on.
Yet this is the record that Kristol and friends celebrate. Do they honestly believe the bullshit that comes out of their mouths and their pens? Can they possibly be THAT misguided, that blind to reality? On what planet do they live?
And at the same time, the current Republicans in Congress--who like to think of themselves as the best-ever hall monitors in the school-of-fiscal-sanity but are in fact one of the main reasons we're in this economic mess due to their fealty to free-markets and deregulation--these people are making a gigantic fuss over President Obama's stimulus plan because it doesn't include enough tax cuts.
TAX CUTS!!!! Do they know any other words? Let's suppose they get all of their precious tax cuts. Do they honestly believe that that money would be put back into the economy? People are not going to use the $600 they'd get back to start a small business or invest it. People are scared, with good reason, and they will SAVE IT. Either that, or they'll use it to pay off a medical bill. Tax cuts are not going to create a single desperately needed job. They jump up and down and scream "government spending" and "tax and spend Democrats" because it is their mantra and it has always worked for them in the past.
Things are different. Yes, Obama plans to spend a lot of money. Guess what? We have to. We have to put that money into re-building our infrastructure, which would--hey!--actually create jobs!
No one enjoys paying taxes. But without them, we would not have roads, public schools, bridges, clean water, job safety standards, public health programs such as the CDC and NIH (Center for Disease Control and National Institute of Health), Social Security, Medicare, the GI Bill, the MILITARY (you know, the organization that Repubs love to talk about during elections and then promptly forget about once in office--thanks for fighting for us boys and girls but once you get back home you're on your own), hell, the NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE.
Guess what Republicans. You've had the past three decades, minus a couple of years (years in which the country gained a surplus, by the by) to run this country. And you've run it into the ground. President Obama's call for bipartisanship and coming together is wonderful and I'm glad he's saying it because it reminds me to cool my jets; it reminds me that we won't get anything done unless we work together. It (sometimes) makes me take a breath when I want to shout at the top of my lungs "SHUT UP REPUBLICANS. SHUT THE HELL UP."
p.s. Ronald Reagan did not end the cold war all by his little lonesome. Communism in the Soviet Union was already failing from within.
The gist of yesterday's column was that conservatives have a lot to be proud of. Really? Starting an unnecessary war under false pretenses; condoning torture; shredding the Constitution; eviserating the economy; increasing the animosity towards the United States throughout the entire world, including among our allies; claiming unprecedented executive powers; using fear and propaganda to manipulate voters; stealing elections; creating an atmosphere in which greed and duplicity are not only tolerated, but rewarded; shameless, criminal lying and deception (Iran/Contra, the US Attorney firings, creating a 9/11-Saddam Hussein link, ignoring FISA and spying on Americans); sending women ever closer to a return to the Dark Ages; ignoring the peril that the environment is in; making a fetish of anti-intellectualism; allowing plainly-crazy, fantasists such as Creationists a place at the table once known as Science...
I could go on and on and on.
Yet this is the record that Kristol and friends celebrate. Do they honestly believe the bullshit that comes out of their mouths and their pens? Can they possibly be THAT misguided, that blind to reality? On what planet do they live?
And at the same time, the current Republicans in Congress--who like to think of themselves as the best-ever hall monitors in the school-of-fiscal-sanity but are in fact one of the main reasons we're in this economic mess due to their fealty to free-markets and deregulation--these people are making a gigantic fuss over President Obama's stimulus plan because it doesn't include enough tax cuts.
TAX CUTS!!!! Do they know any other words? Let's suppose they get all of their precious tax cuts. Do they honestly believe that that money would be put back into the economy? People are not going to use the $600 they'd get back to start a small business or invest it. People are scared, with good reason, and they will SAVE IT. Either that, or they'll use it to pay off a medical bill. Tax cuts are not going to create a single desperately needed job. They jump up and down and scream "government spending" and "tax and spend Democrats" because it is their mantra and it has always worked for them in the past.
Things are different. Yes, Obama plans to spend a lot of money. Guess what? We have to. We have to put that money into re-building our infrastructure, which would--hey!--actually create jobs!
No one enjoys paying taxes. But without them, we would not have roads, public schools, bridges, clean water, job safety standards, public health programs such as the CDC and NIH (Center for Disease Control and National Institute of Health), Social Security, Medicare, the GI Bill, the MILITARY (you know, the organization that Repubs love to talk about during elections and then promptly forget about once in office--thanks for fighting for us boys and girls but once you get back home you're on your own), hell, the NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE.
Guess what Republicans. You've had the past three decades, minus a couple of years (years in which the country gained a surplus, by the by) to run this country. And you've run it into the ground. President Obama's call for bipartisanship and coming together is wonderful and I'm glad he's saying it because it reminds me to cool my jets; it reminds me that we won't get anything done unless we work together. It (sometimes) makes me take a breath when I want to shout at the top of my lungs "SHUT UP REPUBLICANS. SHUT THE HELL UP."
p.s. Ronald Reagan did not end the cold war all by his little lonesome. Communism in the Soviet Union was already failing from within.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Three Cheers for the Comments Crew!
I would like to take a moment to thank those of you who have stopped by and left a comment. It's delightful to hear from you and I greatly appreciate your responses as I birth this blog.
Jonas, Steamie, Kate, Elizabeth, Laura, Eleanor, Claudia, East Coast Vinsons and a man named Tim Fleming (hi, Tim. Nice to meet you). Thank you for the encouragement.
And to those of you who have not left comments on the site but have emailed me or sent me word via Facebook -- thank you to you all as well.
Upcoming:
Stay tuned for a post where William Kristol is on the receiving end of my wrath! Seriously, is that man nuts? I think he might be clinically deranged. Thank goodness he published his last column in the NY Times today.
Jonas, Steamie, Kate, Elizabeth, Laura, Eleanor, Claudia, East Coast Vinsons and a man named Tim Fleming (hi, Tim. Nice to meet you). Thank you for the encouragement.
And to those of you who have not left comments on the site but have emailed me or sent me word via Facebook -- thank you to you all as well.
Upcoming:
Stay tuned for a post where William Kristol is on the receiving end of my wrath! Seriously, is that man nuts? I think he might be clinically deranged. Thank goodness he published his last column in the NY Times today.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Left-handed People Are Better
It's true! Don't argue with me -- you all know it.
In fact, President Barack Obama (still so thrilling to type/say/hear/read), is a leftie. (Any conservative readers may make appropriate jokes now. I'll wait).
We lefties are a proud bunch. Despite the ink seen staining our hands, despite our inability to use eraseable pens (so much smudging!), despite the odd shapes we contort our bodies into in order to scribble, despite our often hideous handwriting -- we hold our heads high and our pencils aloft. The few. The Proud. The Left-Handed.
Have you hugged a leftie today?
In fact, President Barack Obama (still so thrilling to type/say/hear/read), is a leftie. (Any conservative readers may make appropriate jokes now. I'll wait).
We lefties are a proud bunch. Despite the ink seen staining our hands, despite our inability to use eraseable pens (so much smudging!), despite the odd shapes we contort our bodies into in order to scribble, despite our often hideous handwriting -- we hold our heads high and our pencils aloft. The few. The Proud. The Left-Handed.
Have you hugged a leftie today?
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
President Barack Obama
Those three words - President Barack Obama - are ones that give me unfathomable joy and pride to say, to write, to read. What an amazing, awe-inspiring, magnificent day.
I watched the inaguration from a conference room at the law office I'm temping at today. While I wish I could have been in DC, it was no less incredible to view the events on television. What I want most right now is to gather with my friends and family and hug, cry, scream with delight, laugh and raise a glass in honor of not only Barack Obama, but the millions of people who chose hope over cynicism.
Go visit the New York Times online. They have uploaded hundreds of photos submitted from readers around the world. What got me crying today, even more than the swearing in ceremony and President Obama's speech itself, were the pictures of ordinary people exhibiting unbridled joy. People AROUND THE WORLD are sharing their hope and optimism about an American President in a way that is unprecedented in my lifetime. If only I were a poet and could express what I feel in words more suitable to the size of my gratitude and awe.
And a shout out to one of my favorite pix in the NY Times online display -- a close-up on a bar of soap with Obama's face on it that reads "The Audacity of Soap". Points for comedy.
What a great, great day.
I watched the inaguration from a conference room at the law office I'm temping at today. While I wish I could have been in DC, it was no less incredible to view the events on television. What I want most right now is to gather with my friends and family and hug, cry, scream with delight, laugh and raise a glass in honor of not only Barack Obama, but the millions of people who chose hope over cynicism.
Go visit the New York Times online. They have uploaded hundreds of photos submitted from readers around the world. What got me crying today, even more than the swearing in ceremony and President Obama's speech itself, were the pictures of ordinary people exhibiting unbridled joy. People AROUND THE WORLD are sharing their hope and optimism about an American President in a way that is unprecedented in my lifetime. If only I were a poet and could express what I feel in words more suitable to the size of my gratitude and awe.
And a shout out to one of my favorite pix in the NY Times online display -- a close-up on a bar of soap with Obama's face on it that reads "The Audacity of Soap". Points for comedy.
What a great, great day.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Anticipating tomorrow
I just got off the phone with my mom, and much of our conversation focused on tomorrow's inauguration. The excitement I feel, and that so many others feel, is such that I struggle to put it into words. Frustrating, that -- my inability to articulate just how momentous this occasion feels to me. I will be temping tomorrow at the law office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. Although I would prefer to stay home, glued to my television all day, mama's got to pay the bills. Luckily, GDC has set aside conference rooms with TVs and snacks so that those in the office can indeed watch the proceedings. Hallelujah. I hope I won't be the only one crying.
Politics is my favorite subject to talk about other than acting. Most of my reading is centered around politics and policy. The palpable sense of hope, forward momentum, possibility and common sense of purpose that is alive in this country right now is extraordinary. Certainly I have never known its equal in my lifetime.
For decades now, this country has been under the spell of cynicism. It seemed in some quarters that even muttering the word "hope" one was met with derision and suspicion. But cynicism is the easy way out. It relieves one of responsibility. It requires nothing -- not energy, not hard work, not diligence. It merely requires surrender. A shrug of the shoulders, a clever remark, a chortle at those still trying to create positive change. That's it. As I wrote in an earlier post, it is one hundred times more difficult to remain plugged in to hope and promise. Don't get me wrong, I do not mean to advocate a Pollyanna quality. The despair and horror that exist in the world need acknowledgment if we are ever to make progress against them. But the strength required to keep moving forward in the face of that despair and in the face of those horrors -- THAT is bravery.
And now, for the first time that I can recall in my 36 years, it is okay to declare oneself hopeful.
The pain of JFK's assassination, of MLK and RFK's assassinations, of the Vietnam war, of Watergate -- they ripped such huge, gaping wounds in the heart of this country, that only now are we BEGINNING to heal. It will take a lot more than the election of Barack Obama to complete that process. But finally, finally, there is energy in this country that seems to shout for community and connection over discord and divisiveness. As dismal as the last eight years have been -- the apotheosis of cynicism and corruption -- the current moment is vital and full and loud with uplift. I am profoundly grateful to be alive and to be witness to it.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Pens
There's a blog with a URL similar to mine, http://www.weekendwordsmith.blogspot.com/. Each weekend, one of the bloggers suggests a word as a writing prompt. Readers of the blog, if inspired by the particular word, are encouraged to write a post in their own blog and then submit it to weekend wordsmith. I just discovered this blog yesterday. The word for the week was "pens". Below is what I wrote.
The first time he stole he was eight.
The challenge of an older sibling.
The first time he stole it was from his father.
His brother taunted and teased
until it became a double-dog dare
which he never could resist.
The first time he stole, it was a pen.
And so began his hobby.
The first time he stole he was eight.
The challenge of an older sibling.
The first time he stole it was from his father.
His brother taunted and teased
until it became a double-dog dare
which he never could resist.
The first time he stole, it was a pen.
Blue ink. Fat and heavy in his hand.
Dad's favorite.
Dad's favorite.
And so began his hobby.
His small rebellion inside an orderly, uneventful life.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Names (Or, An Open Letter to Sean P. Combs)
Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner have named their newborn daughter Seraphina. That's beautiful. Unusual, but lovely. Unlike Moxie Crimefighter (Penn Jillette) and Pilot Inspektor (not only hideous, but misspelled. I'm sure your son will thank you, Jason Lee). And let's not forget Apple and Moses (Gwyneth Paltrow and Chris Martin, giving both children complexes for very different reasons), and Suri Cruise (you know). So Ben, Jennifer... I applaud you. You managed to choose a unique name without saddling your child with horrid playground memories of insults and taunts.
Which (sort of) brings me to Sean P. Combs, better known as --
wait, what's he calling himself these days? Puff Daddy, P Diddy, Diddy, Doopy, Bloopy McGee, Dagwaddle...? Enough already! Pick a name. ONE NAME. Then... stop! You're done. Changing your moniker every two years is juvenille and annoying. As is the name of your new frangrance -- I AM KING. Really? You are? Wow, I didn't get that memo. You're king, huh? Um... okay... Is that why you have so many scantily clad women in the tv ad? You're king so you get your own harem?
You are clearly a smart businessman. And apparently you want to improve as an actor and so are studying and surrounding yourself with remarkable talents (Audra McDonald, Philicia Rashad, etc.), so good for you. Now be a grown up and stop calling yourself Diddy.
Thanks.
Which (sort of) brings me to Sean P. Combs, better known as --
wait, what's he calling himself these days? Puff Daddy, P Diddy, Diddy, Doopy, Bloopy McGee, Dagwaddle...? Enough already! Pick a name. ONE NAME. Then... stop! You're done. Changing your moniker every two years is juvenille and annoying. As is the name of your new frangrance -- I AM KING. Really? You are? Wow, I didn't get that memo. You're king, huh? Um... okay... Is that why you have so many scantily clad women in the tv ad? You're king so you get your own harem?
You are clearly a smart businessman. And apparently you want to improve as an actor and so are studying and surrounding yourself with remarkable talents (Audra McDonald, Philicia Rashad, etc.), so good for you. Now be a grown up and stop calling yourself Diddy.
Thanks.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
At long last! Friday Night Lights!!!
This Friday marks the return of one of the best television programs, ever. That is not an exaggeration. Yes, I'm given to hyperbole, but with respect to this show, calling it one of the greats is just plain true.
Friday Night Lights.
If you are among those who haven't seen it -- which, unfortunately, includes most people -- you are missing out. RUN and get the Season 1 and Season 2 DVD's right now.
I'll admit that when the show first aired I was not among those watching. Yes, I was aware of the critical praise it received but I didn't want to get involved in another TV show. However, after two very dear friends of mine went on and on about how wonderful it was, I decided to check it out. I watched the very last episode of the first season and was hooked.
My friend David (one of the aforementioned dear pals who loves the show as fervently as I), and I were singing the series' praises one day when I described it this way:
"It's a miracle of storytelling".
Where do I even begin? The show concerns the citizens of the fictional town of Dillon, Texas and their devotion to their high-school football team. (But it's really about so much more). I can hear some of you already complaining that you don't like football. Fear not! You don't have to. Football -- the game -- is beside the point. (Although if you DO like football, as I do, the games are exciting and shot brilliantly). The point is the town and the people in it. It is an achingly beautiful portrait of family, teenagers, sex, (yes, football), marriage (both good and bad), struggle, faith, small triumphs, big wins, disappointment, small town life, and so much more.
Written with an honesty and grace that are remarkably refreshing for American tv shows, it boasts a pitch-perfect cast, assured direction and the palpable love of its executive producer/creator Peter Berg. For the hour that you watch, it feels as though you are IN Dillon, Texas. The characters' circumstances may be far removed from your own, but you will recognize all too easily their hopes, fears, pettiness, failings, strengths, humour...
I'm not doing it justice. I'm not even coming close.
Please watch it. It has always been on the chopping block as it doesn't get the ratings it deserves. This past year there was a HUGE campaign to save the show, and the network listened. But it still isn't clear that this lovely program will receive a fourth season.
Watch. You'll thank me.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Globes Galore!
Random thoughts re: last night's ceremony:
Gee, how wonderful that Jeremy Piven could be there since he's SO SICK he had to drop out of his Broadway show.
Megan Fox is super pretty. Please shut up about Brian Austin Green and his "ego". Ick. We don't want to know how troubled your relationship is.
Sally Hawkins' arms are scary looking.
Rumer Willis, why is your hair purple?
General note to all men everywhere: no more earrings! Please. Please, stop it. You look ridiculous. Besides, you should let us women have earrings. You get just about everything else and we get our periods once a month so really, you should just let us have the earrings. It's not that much to ask.
Kate Winslet! Kate Winslet! Kate Winslet! One of my all time favorite actresses. Good for her!
Cameron Diaz -- PLEASE. GO. AWAY.
Emma Thompson, will you please be my friend? I think we would get along fabulously.
Hugh Laurie, I've never been a huge fan of HOUSE, but I have a mad crush on you.
Drew Barrymore looked drunk with that hairdo. Seriously. How did that happen? Great dress though.
Tina Fey can really do no wrong. Love her.
John Krasinski looks great in a tux.
Seriously guys, the earrings look stupid.
Gee, how wonderful that Jeremy Piven could be there since he's SO SICK he had to drop out of his Broadway show.
Megan Fox is super pretty. Please shut up about Brian Austin Green and his "ego". Ick. We don't want to know how troubled your relationship is.
Sally Hawkins' arms are scary looking.
Rumer Willis, why is your hair purple?
General note to all men everywhere: no more earrings! Please. Please, stop it. You look ridiculous. Besides, you should let us women have earrings. You get just about everything else and we get our periods once a month so really, you should just let us have the earrings. It's not that much to ask.
Kate Winslet! Kate Winslet! Kate Winslet! One of my all time favorite actresses. Good for her!
Cameron Diaz -- PLEASE. GO. AWAY.
Emma Thompson, will you please be my friend? I think we would get along fabulously.
Hugh Laurie, I've never been a huge fan of HOUSE, but I have a mad crush on you.
Drew Barrymore looked drunk with that hairdo. Seriously. How did that happen? Great dress though.
Tina Fey can really do no wrong. Love her.
John Krasinski looks great in a tux.
Seriously guys, the earrings look stupid.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Recommended Reading
Are you looking for a good book to read? A new feature from yours truly is "Recommended Reading". Every week I will post about a particular book that I enjoyed a great deal. If it seems likely to strike your fancy, by all means check it out.
Today's suggestion is Lionel Shriver's We Need To Talk About Kevin. This is a book that I simply could not put down. I know -- people say that about a lot of books. I mean it. Simply riveting. What's it about, you say? Well...
Ostensibly, it is about a young boy who commits murder at his high school. Ugh, you're probably thinking, I don't want to read about a Columbine-like incident. But this book is really about so much more. It is written by the mother of this boy as a letter to her estranged husband and recounts the years leading up to their son's horrific crime. What it truly concerns is motherhood -- whether desired or not -- parent/child relationships, the nature of evil, how parenthood changes a marriage, for both good and bad, and how do you continue loving someone who conceives of and goes through with a unimaginable crime. It is gorgeous. No, it is not an easy read. Layered, provocative, challenging, it also contains insights about human nature that are profound, beautiful and disturbing.
When reading I frequently keep a pen or pencil with me to underline sentences I particularly love. I want to underline this entire novel! It is on my top ten list of all time favorite reads. Sublime. Go buy it.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Remember Elaine Boosler?
She was a fairly popular stand-up comedienne in the 80's.
"When women are depressed they eat or go shopping. Men invade another country. It's a whole different way of thinking."
Makes me chuckle.
As does this:
"Do you ever walk into a room and forget why you walked in? I think that's how dogs spend their lives."
"When women are depressed they eat or go shopping. Men invade another country. It's a whole different way of thinking."
Makes me chuckle.
As does this:
"Do you ever walk into a room and forget why you walked in? I think that's how dogs spend their lives."
Various and sundry...
First, a poem. One of my all time favorites by Mary Oliver:
Wild Geese
You do not have to be good.
You do not have to walk on your knees
for a hundred miles through the desert repenting.
You only have to let the soft animal of your body
love what it loves.
Tell me about despair, yours, and I will tell you mine.
Meanwhile the world goes on.
Meanwhile the sun and the clear pebbles of the rain
are moving across the landscapes,
over the prairies and the deep trees,
the mountains and the rivers.
Meanwhile the wild geese, high in the clean blue air,
are heading home again.
Whoever you are, no matter how lonely,
the world offers itself to your imagination,
calls to you like the wild geese, harsh and exciting —
over and over announcing your place
in the family of things.
Beautiful, no?
Next, a discovery:
Omphalokepsis. Know what it is?
Contemplation of one's navel as an aid to meditation.
How great is that? Who on earth came up with that one? Someone was contemplating his or her belly-button one day and decided said action needed its own word! Hilarious.
Wild Geese
You do not have to be good.
You do not have to walk on your knees
for a hundred miles through the desert repenting.
You only have to let the soft animal of your body
love what it loves.
Tell me about despair, yours, and I will tell you mine.
Meanwhile the world goes on.
Meanwhile the sun and the clear pebbles of the rain
are moving across the landscapes,
over the prairies and the deep trees,
the mountains and the rivers.
Meanwhile the wild geese, high in the clean blue air,
are heading home again.
Whoever you are, no matter how lonely,
the world offers itself to your imagination,
calls to you like the wild geese, harsh and exciting —
over and over announcing your place
in the family of things.
Beautiful, no?
Next, a discovery:
Omphalokepsis. Know what it is?
Contemplation of one's navel as an aid to meditation.
How great is that? Who on earth came up with that one? Someone was contemplating his or her belly-button one day and decided said action needed its own word! Hilarious.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
The waters are pressing mightily
The following is a poem by Yehuda Amachai that I first read in The New Yorker a few years ago. It has been on my mind lately, mostly due to the latest Israel/Gaza mess.
Now, when the waters are pressing mightily
on the walls of the dams,
now, when the white storks, returning,
are transformed in the middle of the firmament
into fleets of jet planes,
we will feel again how strong are the ribs
and how vigorous is the warm air in the lungs
and how much daring is needed to love on the exposed plain,
when the great dangers are arched above,
and how much love is required
to fill all the empty vessels
and the watches that stopped telling time,
and how much breath,
a whirlwind of breath,
to sing the small song of spring.
One line in particular "... and how much daring is needed to love on the exposed plain..." takes my breath away. I realize it is trite, and an oversimplification of the events surrounding this latest battle in the seemingly never-ending war between the Israelis and the Palestinians, but how I wish that both sides would dare to remember their common humanity.
It is all too easy lay blame, to take refuge in outrage. Forgiveness, compassion, love -- these are infinitely harder to sustain. Love - that word that gets tossed around and abused with stunning frequency - is a radical and indeed "daring" action in our fractured, dangerous, anxious world. I forget all the time. Forget to love my enemies, practice compassion, see the humanity in those whom I either dislike or simply feel indifferent towards. And then, I recall this poem, and remind myself again to dare.
Now, when the waters are pressing mightily
on the walls of the dams,
now, when the white storks, returning,
are transformed in the middle of the firmament
into fleets of jet planes,
we will feel again how strong are the ribs
and how vigorous is the warm air in the lungs
and how much daring is needed to love on the exposed plain,
when the great dangers are arched above,
and how much love is required
to fill all the empty vessels
and the watches that stopped telling time,
and how much breath,
a whirlwind of breath,
to sing the small song of spring.
One line in particular "... and how much daring is needed to love on the exposed plain..." takes my breath away. I realize it is trite, and an oversimplification of the events surrounding this latest battle in the seemingly never-ending war between the Israelis and the Palestinians, but how I wish that both sides would dare to remember their common humanity.
It is all too easy lay blame, to take refuge in outrage. Forgiveness, compassion, love -- these are infinitely harder to sustain. Love - that word that gets tossed around and abused with stunning frequency - is a radical and indeed "daring" action in our fractured, dangerous, anxious world. I forget all the time. Forget to love my enemies, practice compassion, see the humanity in those whom I either dislike or simply feel indifferent towards. And then, I recall this poem, and remind myself again to dare.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Shout Out to Nicholas D. Kristof
A couple of months ago, as I was walking to the subway, I passed Nicholas Kristof on the street. I thought of this moment again due to his recent op-eds in the New York Times. For those of you who don't know, Nicholas Kristof is one of the Op-Ed columnists for the Times. He frequently travels to war-torn countries in an effort to shed light on situations most of us would rather not dwell upon. He has drawn much needed attention to the plight of women around the world, many of whom suffer unimaginable indignities. From reporting mass rape in war zones, to young girls being sold into sexual slavery the world over, he refuses to be silent about crimes against women, which can all too easily be ignored out of shame, ignorance and discomfort.
As far as I'm concerned, he's a rock star.
And there he was, strolling unnoticed towards Grand Central station. I gasped and turned my head in order to catch another glimpse. No one else on the street paid any attention. This all goes to prove one thing -- I am a dork.
But wouldn't it be amazing if op-ed writers, journalists and intellectuals were greeted with the same fanfare as movie stars? The Jonas Brothers have hordes of screaming fans (why, exactly?) and Mr. Kristof had only me that day, and I was too shy to approach him. Now, don't get me wrong, if I saw George Clooney walking down the street I would be just as starstruck (and indeed was the day I saw Paul McCartney with Captain Insane-O herself and their baby). But is it wrong to long for a world in which an average looking newspaper columnist turns heads?
I think not.
As far as I'm concerned, he's a rock star.
And there he was, strolling unnoticed towards Grand Central station. I gasped and turned my head in order to catch another glimpse. No one else on the street paid any attention. This all goes to prove one thing -- I am a dork.
But wouldn't it be amazing if op-ed writers, journalists and intellectuals were greeted with the same fanfare as movie stars? The Jonas Brothers have hordes of screaming fans (why, exactly?) and Mr. Kristof had only me that day, and I was too shy to approach him. Now, don't get me wrong, if I saw George Clooney walking down the street I would be just as starstruck (and indeed was the day I saw Paul McCartney with Captain Insane-O herself and their baby). But is it wrong to long for a world in which an average looking newspaper columnist turns heads?
I think not.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Day One
Welcome!
Are you a geek for words? Do you thrill upon entering a bookstore -- all the possibility before you? Do you smell the pages of a new (or old) book and underline sentences that take your breath away?
If so, you're like me, an avowed word lover and avid reader, actress, mad-for-Obama, 30-something gal making her way in the world.
I decided to start a blog exploring words, books, articles, other blogs, basically anything and everything that gets printed on paper or typed on a website. Recommended reading, musings, opinions, rants, thoughtful considerations, dirty jokes -- all can be found on this blog. I encourage comments, suggestions, debate. It's all good.
But first, a word or two about the word "blog". I'm not a fan. Can't we all agree on something better? There is no poetry, no jazz, no style to this word. It sounds like something you cough up in the middle of flu season. Either that, or a euphemism for dog poo. "Oh, gross, Tuffy just took a blog on the carpet". See?
I wanted to use the word "zarf", which is scandalously close to "barf" but is also fun to say. However, zarf is a real word meaning an ornamental holder for a coffee cup. Who knew?
So why, exactly, am I creating my own blog? Aren't there enough self-absorbed people in the world, documenting their every thought, whim, longing, idea, hunger, fart, triumph, invasive medical procedure, prejudice...? Yes. It is with no small amount of shame that I add my voice to the online cacophony. My reasons? In all honesty, it's because I have far too much time on my hands at my temp job. That, and I have strong opinions that need expressing! Aaaand... I have long harbored a secret desire to be a writer. My admiration for and awe of writers knows no bounds. Along with sounding off on books, politics, art, what constitutes a perfect vegetable lasagna and whatever else strikes my fancy, this bl-- is a chance for me to hone my writing skills. My hope is that somewhere along the line the fear of making my written work available for public consumption will lessen. Fingers crossed.
Right. Now I have a blog. So what the hell do I want to say?
p.s. Tuffy was the name of the first dog I ever had. I was four. My brother and sister and I all wanted to choose the name so my mother decided that we should put our suggestions in a hat, etc. My contribution was chosen to the great dismay of my siblings. Looking back, I get it. Sorry Wendy, sorry Mike. In any case, we had to give the dog - a collie - away. Some lovely folks who owned a farm took her. We loved this creature so much that her new owners let us come visit!
Are you a geek for words? Do you thrill upon entering a bookstore -- all the possibility before you? Do you smell the pages of a new (or old) book and underline sentences that take your breath away?
If so, you're like me, an avowed word lover and avid reader, actress, mad-for-Obama, 30-something gal making her way in the world.
I decided to start a blog exploring words, books, articles, other blogs, basically anything and everything that gets printed on paper or typed on a website. Recommended reading, musings, opinions, rants, thoughtful considerations, dirty jokes -- all can be found on this blog. I encourage comments, suggestions, debate. It's all good.
But first, a word or two about the word "blog". I'm not a fan. Can't we all agree on something better? There is no poetry, no jazz, no style to this word. It sounds like something you cough up in the middle of flu season. Either that, or a euphemism for dog poo. "Oh, gross, Tuffy just took a blog on the carpet". See?
I wanted to use the word "zarf", which is scandalously close to "barf" but is also fun to say. However, zarf is a real word meaning an ornamental holder for a coffee cup. Who knew?
So why, exactly, am I creating my own blog? Aren't there enough self-absorbed people in the world, documenting their every thought, whim, longing, idea, hunger, fart, triumph, invasive medical procedure, prejudice...? Yes. It is with no small amount of shame that I add my voice to the online cacophony. My reasons? In all honesty, it's because I have far too much time on my hands at my temp job. That, and I have strong opinions that need expressing! Aaaand... I have long harbored a secret desire to be a writer. My admiration for and awe of writers knows no bounds. Along with sounding off on books, politics, art, what constitutes a perfect vegetable lasagna and whatever else strikes my fancy, this bl-- is a chance for me to hone my writing skills. My hope is that somewhere along the line the fear of making my written work available for public consumption will lessen. Fingers crossed.
Right. Now I have a blog. So what the hell do I want to say?
p.s. Tuffy was the name of the first dog I ever had. I was four. My brother and sister and I all wanted to choose the name so my mother decided that we should put our suggestions in a hat, etc. My contribution was chosen to the great dismay of my siblings. Looking back, I get it. Sorry Wendy, sorry Mike. In any case, we had to give the dog - a collie - away. Some lovely folks who owned a farm took her. We loved this creature so much that her new owners let us come visit!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
