WordSmith At Play

So You Think You Can Dance? As a matter of fact, I do!

2011-08-05T14:55:00.002-04:00

Next week is the SYTYCD season finale and let’s face it – the winner will either be Sasha or Melanie. As a former dancer myself, I want to share a few thoughts about these two superlative creatures.

I’ll state outright that I’m Team Melanie. Here’s why:

Melanie combines perfect technique with an artistry that is un-matched in this competition. Each and every movement is completed to its absolute limit – she dances through to the end of her very fingertips and then out beyond them. There is a fullness of movement that is glorious to watch. Each step is given such integrity, even a "mere” plié – and by using quotation marks my pointe (ha!) is that there is no such thing as a “mere” plié and this is something that I think Melanie inherently understands. There is an articulation to her dancing that makes me cry, so stunning is it to watch.

Sasha is incredibly talented, there is no doubt about that. But over the past few weeks, I’ve noticed something that bothers me. Yes, she is a generous performer, giving herself fully to her partner(s) and each piece. As the judges have commented many times, she dances with terrific abandon. But I’m often left with the feeling that I’m watching someone perform a series of steps rather than a cohesive assemblage of those steps. (The exception to this was her routine with Twitch which was extremely exciting and in my opinion her most successful). I often feel her rushing – that in her obvious love to dance she gets caught up in a whirlwind and doesn’t settle into the piece. This is especially true (for me, at any rate) in her solos which seem hurried and distracted – they strike me as more a collection of unconnected steps, unlike Melanie’s which have a throughline, a story that she is telling. (This criticism of the solos – these disjointed leaps and tricks that leave me cold – can be applied to many dancers on this show, both of the current season and of seasons past. The desire to show off and the ridiculous 30 second rule mean that few of them risk stillness, even a moment of it. Nor do many of them seem to construct their solos in a thoughtful manner – again there is a lack of storytelling that irritates me. And by storytelling I don’t mean the oftentimes cheesy narratives that the choreographers give to the routines on this show. I’m speaking of storytelling in a more abstract way).

When it comes to Melanie, I can think of several routines that standout – naturally her first one with Marko, the Travis Wall choreographed “Statues” piece, the lyrical hip-hop with Marko, the Mandy Moore routine with Neil (and I cannot believe I’m complimenting a MM piece), the recent Spencer Liff routine with the mirror, her solo this past week (the one Lil’ C called “beefy”), and the Sonya Tyah piece with Sasha, during which, try as I might, I couldn’t take my eyes off Melanie. I re-watched it in order to focus solely on Sasha and my attention kept getting pulled to Melanie.

Now, dance, like all art, is subjective. Whichever of them wins this competition, they will both be just fine and go on to highly successful careers, I’ve no doubt. I like Sasha a great deal and am thrilled to see her in the top 4. It seems highly likely that the top 2 dancers will both be women, a first for this series (correct me if I’m wrong on that) and that is tremendously exciting.

Enough.

2011-08-01T15:48:00.000-04:00

If you vote Republican, you are supporting a party willing to throw the global economy into turmoil for the sake of its cherished ideology. The Congressional Republicans, held hostage by extreme Tea Party shenanigans, were willing to throw the global economy into a tailspin because they don't want taxes raised ever, not by any amount, not even a measly 3% on those who can most afford it! These people, these irresponsible, cynical, cowardly, unreasonable people, told America that they were more than happy to continue their temper tantrum even if that meant bringing on an economic crisis greater than the one we're already going through and barely recovering from. They care nothing for shared sacrifice, for the common good, nor for their fellow citizens. They care about power.

You can tell me all the things that are wrong with the Democrats - and I'll likely agree with you on some of those complaints (not the least of which is that the Dems need to learn how to stand up against the blatant blackmail practiced by the Repubs). But the basic problem is this -- Republicans do not see ANY Democratic president as having legitimacy. They wanted us to default because they saw that as a path to gaining back the White House in 2012. For these individuals, compromise is a dirty word. How dare they behave in such a reckless manner and how dare anyone support them?

The Republican Party of the 21st Century does not care about governing. They care about power and that is all. If you vote Republican, you are supporting a party that cares more about naked power than they do about this country's well being. Full stop.

WHAT is going on????

2011-05-05T14:26:00.000-04:00

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/05/opinion/05collins.html?ref=opinion&pagewanted=print

I’m not sure which part of this op-ed is the most dispiriting. A strong, strong contender for first place has to be the fact that a state legislator was reprimanded for saying the word “uterus.” Are you kidding me? How do people like this get elected? It is a part of the human body! Was the person doing the reprimanding (I am going to go ahead and assume said person was male; yes, I’m assuming facts not in evidence and I don’t care), offended because a uterus is part of the FEMALE body? Someone please tell me what is so icky about the word uterus. This is appalling. (And I haven’t even touched on the rest of the piece regarding the horrifying, hypocritical, backward, punitive, nasty bills and amendments to laws being pushed through statehouses all over the country, not just in Indiana and Florida).

You know what I’d like to do? I’d like to take this particular individual who can't stand the word uterus and wave a magic wand and turn this person into a scared 19 year old girl, one born into poverty who finds herself pregnant. She already has one child that she can barely afford to clothe and feed because she gets paid minimum wage. The father of that child took off leaving her without any help. Her parents kicked her out when she got pregnant with that first child. She is desperate and alone and afraid and she decides to have an abortion. Except – ooops! – she lives in Mississippi or South Dakota or Indiana or any number of other states where abortion clinics have been closed and the closest Planned Parenthood clinic is several hours away, not that she’d be able to drive there anyway because she doesn’t own a car – she takes the bus everywhere. And let’s just go ahead and decide that she can afford the bus fare to the clinic that is several hours away from her home. What she cannot afford is the abortion itself nor can she take a day off of work and forgo that day’s wages. It’s too bad there isn’t a Planned Parenthood clinic nearby where she could get help. Where she would be able to obtain an abortion (paid for with money from PRIVATE DONATIONS not federal funding). A safe abortion, with sterilized equipment and caring doctors and nurses to remind her that she did not do anything wrong, that she IS not doing anything wrong. So she becomes even more desperate and even more afraid. She decides that she’ll perform an abortion on herself with a coat hanger, just like women used to do before abortion was made legal in this country. So she goes ahead and takes a coat hanger and unwinds it and puts it into her vagina and through her cervix into her uterus (yes, uterus, that evil word that should never be uttered), and she scrapes and scrapes and scrapes and bleeds and bleeds and bleeds. And she cries because it hurts and she cries because she is all by herself and she cries because she is terrified. And then she prays and prays and prays that she doesn’t get an infection that could kill her because she was forced to use a coat hanger on herself. And she prays that she is all right and can continue to take care of the child she already has whom she loves with all of her might.

And then, at the moment that she is lying there on her blood soaked sheets, wondering if she will be okay, hurting and cramping and crying, I will wave a magic wand again and transform that girl back into the small, pitiful legislator, with the memories of his time as that 19 year old girl completely intact. And we’ll see what happens.

The Election is Coming! The Election is Coming!

2011-04-12T14:25:00.000-04:00

Here we go again.

Politicians, pundits, journalists and news-personalities are foaming at the mouth about the 2012 presidential election. It is April, 2011. We are almost 19 months away from actual voting -- 19 months! I was watching the Today Show this morning while getting ready for work (I need my daily dose of Matt Lauer), and Meredith Viera was interviewing Tom Brokaw. I like Tom. He's smart and seems to have integrity. However...

In response to a question that I did not hear (I was drying my hair. No, I can't let it air dry 'cause it gets all poofy that way), Tom Brokaw said that the election is coming up fast!

19 months. Nineteen. That is not fast. That is not "right around the corner." The endless campaigning and jockeying for position and trying to predict the outcome - the outcome of an event 19 months in the future!!! It is exhausting. Why don't we do it the way -- you know what? Never mind. Advocating for a campaign season of six weeks (such as is found in England) is a fool's errand since everyone knows that Europe sucks and we're America and all of our ideas come in a pot of gold covered in gumdrops and rainbows, pulled by a team of evangelical Christian Unicorns and every single thing out of Europe is soaked in rat poop and Castor oil. How could I forget?

Budget Broo-ha-ha

2011-04-07T13:50:00.000-04:00

There is an important editorial in yesterday’s NY Times regarding the House budget plan. The plan (if one can call it that; indeed, even Paul Ryan himself, the Republican chair of the House Budget Committee, referred to it not as a plan but rather “… a cause.”), lays bare the misguided priorities of the current incarnation of the Republican party, especially the new Tea Party members. These newly elected members of Congress have drawn a deep line in the sand and refuse to budge a mere inch from their beloved goals. And let’s please not pretend that those goals are anything other than Grover Norquist’s long held dream of drowning the government in the bathtub (except, of course, for the part where the government gets to control my uterus). An enormous amount of lip service is paid to reining in the deficit and growing the economy – all of which sounds lovely and plays well on talk radio, but is actually horseshit.

The Republicans receive a great deal of flack from those on the left, and many in the center, about their lack of compassion for those less fortunate. In response, the GOP huffs and puffs and takes offense, shouting from the rooftops their favorite myth that tax cuts are the miracle cure for all that ails us, including getting people out of poverty. Tax cuts and spending cuts. Cuts to what you may ask? Not the bloated defense budget that’s for sure. The cuts they salivate over are those to education (Head Start, Pell grants), food stamps, food safety, consumer protection, early childhood care, environmental programs, scientific research – you know, anything that benefits society as a cohesive whole and non-millionaires.

They also mention reforming the tax code in order to simplify it and eliminate many current loopholes. That’s great. We can all get behind that. But what they truly want is to reduce the tax rates on the wealthiest and on corporations. Today’s editorial mentions that if their plan passed, tax revenues would go down by $4.2 trillion. TRILLION. Sure, spending would go down as well, by $4.3 trillion, but that is discretionary spending. It doesn’t take into account the aforementioned defense budget, nor does it take into account that we are involved in two wars.

This bill would lower taxes on the wealthy more “… than even George W. Bush imagined.” How many times does it need to be said? Lowering taxes on the rich does not stimulate the economy. The already wealthy do not spend any money they save on taxes. They do not put it back into the economy. The put it into their already large investment portfolios to make themselves even richer. Trickle-down economics does not work. Full stop. How many times do we need to learn this lesson?

The Democrats are far from blameless. President Obama has let the GOP frame too many issues. He has been far too willing to let them “move the goalpost” further and further to the right, so that when a “compromise” is reached, the so-called center has moved further rightward. And there are just as many Democrats bought and sold by corporate wealth as there are Republicans.

The members of the Tea Party, and the entire GOP for that matter, are not serious about governing. They are serious about power. They are serious about starving the government so that essential services we all rely on disappear. In their fantasy world of “rugged individualism” they seem to forget that someone picks up their trash, paves their roads, lights their safe streets at night, monitors their food so they don’t poison their children, puts out their housefires, delivers their mail, protects the parks they like to visit on vacation and funds research into vaccines and treatments for various diseases that they and their loved ones may contract.

We are all in this together. No matter how much the far-right may hate that, we always will be.

Tea and Sympathy? No, thank you.

2010-10-19T15:45:00.000-04:00

I've been thinking a lot recently about feminism as it relates to tea party candidates (Palin, O'Donnell, Angle). According to some, I'm supposed to be proud, as a woman, that these three have obtained such status in the political arena.

As a woman, a human and a citizen I am NOT proud of these shamefully unintelligent candidates.

Their version of womanhood [no reproductive rights, gun-toting pinup girls (while also promoting sex as shameful)] is infuriating and dangerous.

To run or not to run?

2010-09-22T18:51:00.000-04:00

A few friends of mine have recently asked me if I've ever considered running for political office. In addition to being too far to the left to be elected so much as dogcatcher in this country, there are other reasons why such a career move is not in the cards for me. I do not have the stomach for it. It is commonplace to acknowledge that politics "ain't bean bag." It is brutal, bare-knuckle combat, for which I have no taste. These days, it seems an absolute requirement to check one's integrity and dignity at the door. (Just look at how Obama was received in his first few months in the White House - he offered the Republicans an olive branch and was met with scorn, outright combativeness and even catcalls at his first State of the Union address).

Nor do I possess the patience or the temperament to be an effective politician. Notice I say "effective" - all sorts of politicians have tempers and as a result are rarely able to accomplish anything other than stoking the fury of their base. The naked ambition so many display, along with blatant hypocrisy, would cause me to a) vomit and b) punch someone in the face. The following must also be said: I think an alarming number of American citizens are lazy and unthinking. Some may criticize me for saying this; after all, I do not have children to take care of and therefore have more time to read and engage with different sources of information regarding the issues of the day. I understand that argument but I find it specious. Having children does not absolve one of the responsibility to stay informed about pressing matters affecting this country. After all, those issues and their outcomes affect the younger generations and their futures just as much as they do the present. (A friend of mine recently suggested that everyone should be required to pass a basic civics exam in order to vote. I could not agree more! If you cannot name the branches of government; if you cannot identify at least 5 cabinet posts; if you cannot provide the year in which the Declaration of Independence was signed; if you cannot answer the question regarding who is third in line to the presidency then you do not deserve the right to vote. Period).

This country's political environment has always been acrimonious. Read any decent history of the pre- and post-revolutionary periods in the US and you will find that our founding fathers routinely fought with one another. Nevertheless, they were still willing to work together in order to do what they thought was best for the sake of the Union. What do we see now? Hyper, aggressive partisanship and an inability - no, an unwillingness - to get anything accomplished. Has Congress reached the apotheosis of pettiness, dysfunction and corruption? I am tempted to say yes and yet I fear that it could get even worse! I fantasize about telling off members of Congress. John Boehner, Bart Stupak, Ben Nelson, Mitch McConnell, Eric Cantor, even Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, moderates who could once be depended upon to work across the aisle and put country ahead of party. I long to tell them the following:

I believe that most current members of both houses of Congress care little, if at all, for public service. Your concern is maintaining your power, wealth, and influence. While you claim to care deeply for this country and its citizens, your actions expose the cynicism, selfishness, and disdain with which you operate. You are dogmatic, mean-spirited, hypocritical, and consistently put party ahead of your country. Political maneuvering is your raison d'etre. Had you any conscience, were you able to experience empathy, you would be ashamed of yourselves.

Hip hip hooray!

2010-09-21T13:06:00.000-04:00

A book is making news. Not just any book, mind you, a work of fiction. One that has nothing to do with muggles and magic wands and a boy named Harry. It is commonplace these days for those involved in politics to create a stir with their books, frequently written by former insiders exposing secrets and buried truths. But Jonathan Franzen’s new novel Freedom is having an impact that is all the more thrilling for being rare. This is a nakedly adult novel, not one written primarily for children but that also captures adult imaginations (although I found that phenomenon exhilarating as well because young and old were excited about reading). Freedom is naturally making an enormous splash in the literary and publishing worlds, since Mr. Franzen is already a celebrated author. But in the past few days, several Op-Ed columnists and other reporters have mentioned the novel in their columns. Having not yet read it, I cannot comment on its merits or deficits. But I can comment on the fact that it is being referenced in articles on matters political, social, and economic. It is making its way into the national conversation. That is cause for joy. A huge, 500-plus page book is getting people talking! For those of us out there who love books, who rue the fact that readers of complex, layered, challenging literature are becoming a rare breed in our fast-food culture, this is a development worthy of applause.

FALL!

2010-09-14T15:24:00.000-04:00

Ah... autumn! My favorite time of year. Now that I'm in LA it means fewer chilly temperatures and the absence of colorful foliage - which I will miss. But it includes three of my favorite things about fall:

1) A new theatre season

2) A new TV season

3) Oscar-bait arthouse movies

Yay! Rejoice! Storytelling returns!

The summer months are always difficult for me. First off, I'm not a beach gal so all the talk of sun and surf falls on deaf ears. Second, but for True Blood there's virtually nothing good on television! And do I really need to say anything about summer movies? I didn't think so.

Fringe, Modern Family, Glee, 30 Rock, Community, Parks & Rec, Boardwalk Empire... I'm so excited!

So many movies to see: Never Let Me Go, The Town, 127 Hours, Buried, Casino Jack, The King's Speech... I'm so excited, part two!

As for theatre, I will miss the latest and greatest to open Off B'way and on B'way, but there's plenty of wonderful regional theatre around: South Coast Rep, The Old Globe, La Jolla Playhouse, Colony Theatre, A Noise Within... I'm so exci -- you get it.

And we haven't even talked book releases!!

Twitter is evil.

2010-09-14T14:43:00.000-04:00

I think Twitter is ruining us, or hastening the ruin already well under way. Politicians have twitter accounts! News organizations tweet all day long! Appalling. It is a profound example of our shamefully short attention spans, our lack of curiosity, our refusal to embrace complex thought, our impatience and our fast-food drive-thru way of seeing the world. 140 characters. That's all. That is one of the methods that politicians and their staffs are now enthusiastically using to communicate with their constituents. Who cares about clearly articulating the specifics of a complicated issue when you can tweet a pithy soundbite intended to foment rage? Who cares about intellectual honesty? Why bother with shades of gray when you can send a quick 140 characters (not words, characters!) into the universe and demonize your opponent? Granted, twitter did not birth the sound-bite atmosphere we find ourselves in. But it is a particularly egregious tool when used by anyone other than a 12-year old snickering about attending a Miley Cyrus concert.

IMPORTANT. PLEASE, PLEASE READ.

2010-08-20T15:08:00.002-04:00

Robert Creamer has an excellent article on Huff Po today and I’d like to highlight a few of his comments. They are (as usual) presented in a logical, reasonable manner, largely free from name-calling and incendiary rhetoric. Ideally, I would like those of my friends and family who consider themselves Republican to respond to this blog post. First and foremost, I would like them to tell me why, in the face of the evidence and examples mentioned below, they continue to support the current Republican agenda. Please note that I say “current” agenda. My purpose in asking this question is not to demonize all Republicans, past and present. There is nothing to be gained from painting all individuals in any group with the same brush (and goodness knows we could discuss at length the attempt by members of the extreme right-wing of the Republican party to do just that to American Muslims re: the controversy surrounding the community center and mosque being built two blocks from Ground Zero – a building, by the way, that you cannot see from Ground Zero and a mosque that will join other mosques already located 4 and 12 blocks from the WTC site. But I digress).

I sincerely believe there are people in this country - reasonable, sane people - who consider themselves Republican and believe in the GOP’s stated political philosophy. My profound disappointment and anger stems from the fact that the current leadership of the GOP, those in Congress and those who do not hold office yet have enormous influence in this country (we all know who the players are), continue to display a cynicism and disregard for facts that are breathtaking in the extreme. It is my belief that the current GOP members of the House and Senate are not actually interested in working with the Democrats to boost the economy, despite lip-service to the contrary. I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Creamer that the goal is to prevent the Democrats from achieving anything in order to stoke the cynicism and fear running rampant in America these days. Reasonable people are free to disagree on policy matters but it is my belief that Republicans are concerned more with political gain than the well-being of the country. Mr. Creamer puts this better than I hence my reason for quoting him.

So… here we go. (Bold text = emphasis added).

Re: my statement that the GOP is simply operating out of cynicism and a desire to thwart the Democrats, here is the first quote from Creamer’s article:

Of course some will say that no, the Republicans just have a different view of what will create jobs than Democrats… They implemented their program of tax cuts for the rich and allowing the reckless Wall Street banks to do whatever they pleased for eight long years. The result was a $2,000 decrease in real income for most Americans, a massive increase in incomes for the top two percent of the population, zero net private sector job creation, and the collapse of our economy… They believe that their political fortunes will rise if the fortunes of the rest of us decline.

The most striking case in point is the small business jobs bill that will hit the Senate immediately after the recess. The bill provides financial incentives to small business to create new jobs. You'd think that any bill that infuses money into a key Republican constituency like small business would be met with open arms by the Republican minority. No such luck. They plan to filibuster the bill even though many of its provisions were lifted directly from measures authored by Republicans.

Creamer goes on to describe what occurs during a recession. I include it here because it describes basic economic theory in a clear, concise manner:

In a recession, the problem is not a sudden decline of the ability of the economy to produce goods and services. The problem is that the web of economic relationships is disrupted and creates an artificial decline of demand for products and services -- a demand deficit. Without adequate demand to buy their products, businesses lay off workers who have even less money to buy products, and the economy spirals into recession.

Recessions result in incredible waste. All of the products and services that idle workers, plants and equipment could have created are simply not produced -- meaning that the society as a whole is poorer with fewer goods and services to go around.

The solution to this problem is to create the economic demand to put people back to work and jump start the economy. But the only source of that demand is the government.

He then explains what occurred during the debate surrounding the stimulus that the Obama Administration championed:

The White House economic team -- and many progressive economists -- believed that a large stimulus was necessary to push the economy out of the economic ditch and get it going again. But the Republicans said no. Many opposed any stimulus at all. In the end, the price for the three Republicans who ultimately voted yes was a scaled-back stimulus that turned out to be enormously effective -- just not big enough to do the job.

And now…

Even today, Republicans are campaigning against the stimulus, claiming it didn't work, even though the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office analysis finds that it created or saved 2.8 million jobs by the end of July and will probably have created or saved 3.5 million by the end of September. Without it, instead of the eight million jobs lost as a result of the Republican recession, we would have lost 11.5 million jobs.

Lately, the GOP has been screaming about deficits (a subject I mentioned in a previous blog post titled “Taxing my patience,” dated August 10th). Here’s Robert:

But what about the deficit you say? First a good portion of the newly-generated, short-term deficit would have been offset by increased tax revenues generated from new wages and the new spending they created as they flowed through the economy. And over the long run, most economists agree that this kind of expenditure would have actually improved the deficit picture by jumpstarting overall economic growth.

In fact, most of the budget surplus generated by the Clinton economic program came from just that -- the big-time economic growth of the late 1990's.

Creamer then mentions GM – whom the government rescued from bankruptcy, causing overheated alarm that Washington was now going to permanently run a private enterprise and take over the entire automobile industry. This, despite Obama’s clearly articulated guarantee that he neither intended nor advocated for the government to permanently control GM. Take it away Robert:

They opposed the government rescue of GM that has proven to be one of our biggest economic bright spots. Instead of going into bankruptcy, or liquidating and costing thousands of additional jobs, GM actually turned a $2.2 billion profit in the first half of this year and is preparing a stock offering that will allow the government to sell off its stake at a potential profit. GM is now hiring new workers once again.

Also worth mentioning (as I did on August 10), is the money granted to states in order to prevent the layoffs of teacher, firefighters and police officers:

And there was the Republican filibuster of federal money for teachers, police, firefighters and other public servants. They caused hundreds of thousands of state employees to be laid off or furloughed. It finally passed the Senate with two Republican votes, but only after it was cut in half. It will prevent 300,000 layoffs. Every time a teacher is fired, it not only damages the economy in the short run, it also permanently damages our economic prospects -- and ability to compete in the world -- over the long run, by shortchanging the education of our next generation.

Okay. Now let’s talk taxes:
All the while they have been opposing these jobs initiatives, Republicans have proposed -- with a straight face -- that we spend almost three quarters of a trillion dollars over the next 10 years on tax breaks for the top two percent of the population.

And they have opposed Democratic attempts to end tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas -- one of the most profound causes of the decline of American manufacturing.

This is how Robert Creamer sums it all up (and forgive me, my Republican friends and family members but I can’t help agreeing with him):

The fact is [the GOP] want[s] to keep the economy in that ditch so they can divert attention from the fact that they were behind the wheel when it careened off the road.

They hope that if they prevent it from getting back onto the pavement, the voters will forget about who put it in the ditch in the first place and blame the guys who are trying to get it out. They're counting on the frustration caused by the delay in getting the economy out of that ditch to be enough that the voters will turn once again to the culprits who put it there, throw them the keys and say "why don't you try it again." That, of course, will require a gigantic case of national amnesia. It would also be a political and economic disaster…In particular, the Republicans hope that the frustration and the fatigue of struggling with the economic situation is just enough to make a large number of Democratic voters give up in disgust and simply stay home on Election Day.

There you have it. There’s my take (with a huge assist from Robert Creamer), on the current GOP leadership and their strategy for the midterm elections.

Again, I am keenly interested in hearing your reactions, particularly from those on the right-hand side of the aisle. My hope is that a reasonable, calm discussion can ensue but my own temper on matters political is all too often difficult for me to control, so I realize this may be a tall order.

I reserve the right to edit this later

2010-08-19T20:11:00.001-04:00

I've mentioned this blog before - Weekend Wordsmith - and today brings another installment. Each week, a word is posted and readers are encouraged to write something inspired by that particular word. Here is my latest entry, this one for the word "embellish."

***

Embellish for me (if you would) the story of my birth
Draw me frozen elevators -
A plane at thirty thousand feet -
Hurricanes, tornadoes, fierce lightning storms.
Paint my skin blue for countless anxious minutes.

Orchestrate the chorus of nurses
The humming of machines
The woodwind of my shallow breath

Sing of my heroic little lungs!

Place us in a foreign land
Soothed by women whose words are strange
So all that's left is an ancient language
Of trust and blood and flesh.

Diamond the telling of it
Drown it in sapphires
Place it on the emerald field of adventure.

Anything.
Anything but the ordinary entrance I made
The miraculous ordinary
One of millions - washed, swaddled, held
But not talked of in the doctors' lounge:

"Remember that one? That tiny girl,
So clearly marked for something special?"

***

Observation (August 16, 2010)

2010-08-17T01:57:00.001-04:00

Is there such a thing as low maintenance?

I am of the opinion that no one, male or female, is low maintenance. Human beings are complicated. The scale should really begin at medium. Medium, high and very high. Honestly, isn't "low maintenance" wishful thinking spread by men and women who don't want to make much of an effort?

Taxing my patience

2010-08-10T01:43:00.000-04:00

States are bankrupt. Communities are shutting off streetlights in an effort to save money. Schoolchildren in Hawaii now attend school only four days a week. Teachers are being laid off all over this country, as are policemen and firefighters. But Republicans in Congress are opposed to passing a measure that would provide financial relief to cash-strapped states. Roads are being UN-paved because states cannot afford to maintain them - our infrastructure is literally crumbling. But the R's want to extend Bush's tax cuts, tax cuts that go primarily to the wealthy. Tax cuts that will ADD to the deficit, the same deficit that the R's are yelling and screaming about lowering. Because roads, teachers, bridges, the electrical grid, etc. - those are things we needn't spend money on. What we really need to do is make sure that the already obscenely wealthy get to keep more of their money. Money that they will NOT put back into the economy no matter the rhetoric coming from the right. It has been proven over and over during the past 30 some years that supply side economics does not work. The trickle down theory does not work. Full stop.

Fareed Zakaria said it best in his recent Newsweek column (August 9, 2010 issue):
"The idea that the average American is overtaxed is a nice piece of populist pandering. In fact, federal taxes as a percentage of the economy are at their lowest level since the presidency of Harry Truman... The simple fact is this: all the Bush tax cuts were unaffordable. They were an irresponsible act of hubris enacted during an economic boom. Conservatives thought they would force us to shrink the government. But with Republicans controlling the White House and both houses of Congress, did reduced taxes cause reduced spending? No, they led to ever-increasing borrowing and a ballooning deficit..."

Furthermore, he goes on to say:
"We have one of the smallest governments among all the rich countries in the world..."

And this from Paul Krugman's recent Op-Ed:
"We're told that we have no choice, that basic government functions - essential services that have provided for generations - are no longer affordable. And it's true that state and local governments, hit hard by the recession, are cash-strapped. But they wouldn't be quite as cash-strapped if their politicians were willing to consider at least some tax increases..."

Ah, but to advocate for "... at least some tax increases..." would require courage, something all of our politicians - even the best ones - seem to lack these days.

Southern (Dis)Comfort, or, My Adventures in Bartending School

2010-08-08T20:39:00.002-04:00

When I got to LA, I assumed I would continue pursuing my acting career (more on that later). As opposed to NYC, temping in LA is not really an option for the aspiring actor. In NYC, if I had an audition in the middle of the work day, I could usually ask my agents to schedule me around the lunch hour. Since the city is so compact (especially compared with LA), I could simply take a longer lunch hour, usually an hour and a half instead of one hour, and go to my audition. There was no need for me to take an entire day off from a day job in order to accommodate auditions.

Not so in LA. This city is vast and casting offices are spread out -- there is no central location or neighborhood(s) where most auditions take place. And with traffic being what it is (see previous post), driving even a relatively short distance can take quite a long time. The hour and a half that I would need for travel and audition time in NYC could easily be three hours, or more, in LA.

The very first week I was here, I signed up for bartending classes. I figured it was perfect - I could work nights and weekends, leaving my weekday afternoons free for auditions (forgetting that every job I'd ever had in food service left me miserable. People are cranky when hungry/thirsty). Never having bartended before, I was bit nervous, but the woman running the school (let's call her Jill), assured me that she had taught hundreds of students with no previous experience. Job placement assistance was available for graduates; Jill told me I'd have no trouble finding work in a high-end restaurant or bar, which was my goal. I left my registration meeting with a spring in my step and drink textbook in hand. Jill found me classy and outgoing and was convinced I'd make great money. Flirt a little with a rich businessman while fixing his martini? Why not?

The entire course consisted of seven classes that could be taken in any order. Class number one for me was all about cream drinks. Want to know how to make a Grasshopper or a Toasted Almond? I can tell you. Standing behind the bar making my fake drinks (no actual liquor was used on school premises, only water with food coloring added), I felt powerful. I was actually having fun! Leaving class that first night, two other students complimented me, saying that I must have tended bar in the past, yes? No! Hot damn! I said, only one class under my belt and already I look like a pro. This was going to be a cakewalk.

I took the remaining 6 classes, learning how to build a perfect martini, the proper way to pour champagne (the label always faces the customer!) and bartending slang (want your drink with 'big red balls?' Then you would like your server to top your drink with 1/2 oz of Grenadine. How about 'fit for a king?' Your drink goes in a hurricane glass, don't ya know?) With each additional class, I grew more and more anxious. I made flash cards for each drink I was required to learn -- over 300 in all. But as I studied the ingredients failed to cement themselves in my brain. Did a Kamikaze get 1/2 oz of Vodka or 3/4 oz? What were the ingredients of a Colorado Bull Dog again? Which fruit was the proper garnish for an Iguana Margartia - lime or lemon?

I watched several students take the practical test. And I watched every one of those students fail said test. 12 random drinks in 7 minutes. One of the instructors would ask for three drinks. Once those were made you'd be told the next three, and so on until all 12 cocktails were made. A drink was only considered correct if all garnishes were applied. And god help you if you couldn't remember the slang. Asked to make a Gold Driver? Easy enough (basically a Screwdriver only with Tequila rather than Vodka). But if asked for a Gold Driver Prance A Pony, you'd better remember that Prance A Pony means in addition to the main drink, putting 1 oz of the main alcohol in said drink in a 1 oz snifter, rolling that snifter on its side then placing it beside the original drink. Does the requested drink get a straw? A lemon twist or a lemon wedge? Better remember it during the test.

Most students had to take the practical test at least 3 times before passing. No matter the amount of confidence in one's drink-making abilities, every single student was nervous during that exam. The especially frustrating quirk being that the instructors would ask students for the most random drinks possible, knowing that once behind the bar in an actual establishment, those drinks were rarely requested.

Nerves growing by the day, I kept at it. I took a wine certification class, studied my flashcards and practiced making Scorpions, Long Beach Iced Teas and Alabama Slammers. I memorized the order of the liquors in the "well," and those on the "back bar." I remembered that NFL did not mean National Football League but No F**king Lime and Doggy Style did not refer to a certain sex position but meant you were to salt the rim of the glass.

And then it hit me.

I'd be working with drunk people. Naturally, this should have occurred to me sooner. Suddenly, I saw myself dealing with belligerent customers, denied another drink because they'd already had too much. I imagined shutting down sleazy men trying to flirt with me. Unlike a temp job, any down time would be spent cutting limes, not reading my favorite websites. And, horror of horrors, I realized I'd have to make change. Math! This job required math! What was I thinking??

My experiment in tending bar was over.

********************************

~Grasshopper: 1/2 oz White Cream de Cacao, 1/2 oz Green Creme de Menthe, 2 oz Cream, Shake & Strain
~Toasted Almond: 1/2 oz Amaretto, 1/2 oz Kahlua, 2 oz Cream, Shake & Strain
~A Kamikaze gets 1/2 oz of Vodka
~Colorado Bull Dog (also called a Smith & Wesson): 1 oz Vodka, 1/2 oz Kahlua, 1 oz Cream, fill with Coke, over ice
~An Iguana Margarita is garnished with a lime
~Scorpion: 1 oz Brandy, 1 oz Rum, 1/2 oz Creme de Almond, 1/2 oz Triple Sec, fill 1/3 with Sweet & Sour mix, fill 1/3 with Orange Juice, fill 1/3 with Pineapple Juice, top with 1/2 oz Barcardi 151 Rum
~Long Beach Iced Tea: 1/2 oz Vodka, 1/2 oz Gin, 1/2 oz Tequila, 1/2 oz Triple Sec, 1/2 oz Light Rum, 1 and 1/2 oz Sweet & Sour mix, fill with Cranberry Juice, optional splash of 7 Up and garnish with lemon wedge
~Alabama Slammer: 1/2 oz Sloe Gin, 1/2 oz Jack Daniels or Amaretto, 1/2 oz Southern Comfort, fill with Orange Juice, stir

Is Traffic in Los Angeles REALLY That Bad?

2010-08-08T18:51:00.003-04:00

Yes.

Oh, my... Yes.

Observation (August 5, 2010)

2010-08-05T19:24:00.001-04:00

Man Jewelry. Why?

I ask in earnest. Are you Johnny Depp? No? Then stop wearing jewelry. Johnny Depp is the only man who can get away with it.

Earrings (especially in each ear!) do not make you look cool. They make you look like a douchebag, a rapper, or Harrison Ford. Oh, Harrison. Please stop with the earring. Calista - talk to him!

Necklaces (especially gold ones). Unless you are a surfer, wearing your faux-leather cord avec beads, skip the necklace. You look like a pimp or a Russian male figure skater.

PINKIE RINGS! Do I even need to discuss this? Apparently, I do, as I see quite a few of them out there. If you are not aware of how tacky and ridiculous a pinkie ring makes you look, then there is no hope for you. You look like a mobster.

The exception to the rule? Wedding rings. Men - WEAR YOUR WEDDING BANDS! Otherwise it is false advertising.

It's a new dawn / It's a new day / It's a new life / And I'm feeeeeelin'... good?

2010-08-05T01:37:00.005-04:00

A new day, indeed.

A new YEAR actually. My last post was over a year ago. My reasons for such a long hiatus from this blog are complicated. Renewal was in order. Suffice it to say, I'M BACK! To those of you who have supported me in this endeavor from the beginning, thank you. I hope you'll continue to stop by.

What's been going on since last I wrote? Well...

TITLE CARD
February 7, 2010

FADE IN:

JULIE, a tall, 30-ish brunette, strides through LAX. Freshly arrived in Los Angeles from New York City, she appears both excited and wary. We watch for a few seconds as she struggles to pull her heavy suitcases off the conveyor belt.

FADE OUT

That's right, puffins! I moved to Los Angeles. This former subway rider is now the proud owner of a Kia Rio; this former roommate of the fabulous Christine Marie Brown is now living by herself in a studio apartment; this actress and occasional-writer is now... what?

Now what?

That's the question I've been asking myself since moving here 6 months ago. Having been curious about LA for several years, I finally made the move. New York City, the place I once loved with my whole heart and couldn't imagine leaving, started feeling like a wet wool blanket. An expensive, smelly, wet wool blanket. Feeling hemmed in, irritated, unable to afford an apartment in any of my favorite neighborhoods (even WITH a roomie), frustrated with schlepping groceries blocks and blocks in the rain and snow, angry at fellow subway passengers who seemed to grow increasingly boorish, I left. I left dear friends and favorite bookstores, Central Park and stunning architecture for sunshine and cars, other dear friends and hiking, and mostly, adventure.

Boy, am I getting an adventure. Like all such stories, mine is filled with highs and lows. Triumphs, obstacles, mysteries and questions. It's all included.

And, oh, those questions...

Who am I in this new, odd place? Did I move out here to continue my acting career? If not, what on earth, WHO on earth am I? Is this home? How many donut shops can one city have? (Seriously, you can't swing a dead cat in this town without hitting another one).

All of these questions will be explored. But, fear not! Lest you think future posts will be nothing but soul searching and sentimentality, I can promise there will also be humour, British spelling, opinions on matters great and small, wonder, a dash of cynicism (but only a dash, as there are enough cynics in the world and they're generally not much fun to be around for extended periods of time), pop culture, politics and exclamations of terror and delight. I'd like to think that's what I provided before I hit PAUSE.

So, WordSmith At Play is PLAYING again. Onward!

LOVE, a photo essay

2009-04-23T16:20:00.011-04:00

Tea & (No) Sympathy

2009-04-16T15:17:00.011-04:00

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.

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.

YES

2009-04-08T16:14:00.003-04:00

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.

I hope you're tall

2009-04-03T13:47:00.004-04:00

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.

A Word of Thanks

2009-03-30T16:42:00.002-04:00

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

Profound Arrogance

2009-03-20T12:28:00.011-04:00

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!

My Secret Shame

2009-03-19T15:08:00.016-04:00

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.

Happy St. Patrick's Day!

2009-03-17T15:12:00.009-04:00

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.

Roger Cohen says "Tsk, tsk"

2009-03-12T10:59:00.013-04:00

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.

I'm at a loss for words

2009-03-10T15:41:00.010-04:00

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?

Random Thoughts

2009-03-05T14:17:00.009-05:00

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.

Gratitude

2009-03-02T14:08:00.008-05:00

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!

Now, THAT was a Presidential Address to Congress!

2009-02-24T23:28:00.008-05:00

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.

Writer's Block (and puppies)

2009-02-24T11:48:00.010-05:00

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!

Calgon!

2009-02-23T15:15:00.017-05:00

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!

The Perfect Day

2009-02-20T12:20:00.005-05:00

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!

Another shout out!

2009-02-19T11:34:00.012-05:00

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.

Does absence make the heart grow fonder?

2009-02-17T16:52:00.004-05:00

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.

Various and sundry...

2009-02-13T12:21:00.010-05:00

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.

This picture makes me laugh.

Like "Drink Me", only different.

2009-02-11T14:22:00.007-05:00

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.

Thank Goodness

2009-02-09T16:55:00.015-05:00

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).

HIGHLY Recommended website

2009-02-04T16:21:00.008-05:00

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.

Lobby-pop, Lobby-pop, Oh Lobby, Lobby-pop...Lobby-pop!

2009-02-03T11:38:00.009-05:00

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!

With six kids already, do you really need more?

2009-02-01T21:18:00.010-05:00

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.

Dear Angelina Jolie

2009-01-29T14:07:00.006-05:00

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.

Bob Herbert is smart. That must mean I am, too.

2009-01-27T14:26:00.006-05:00

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!

William Kristol is a blathering idiot.

2009-01-27T12:27:00.005-05:00

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.

Three Cheers for the Comments Crew!

2009-01-26T14:35:00.003-05:00

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.

My head might explode from the cuteness!

2009-01-23T10:50:00.008-05:00

My favorite picture from Inauguration Day.

Left-handed People Are Better

2009-01-21T16:49:00.005-05:00

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?

President Barack Obama

2009-01-20T14:42:00.004-05:00

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.

Anticipating tomorrow

2009-01-19T16:28:00.017-05:00

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.

Pens

2009-01-16T13:10:00.010-05:00

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.

Blue ink. Fat and heavy in his hand.
Dad's favorite.

And so began his hobby.

His small rebellion inside an orderly, uneventful life.

Names (Or, An Open Letter to Sean P. Combs)

2009-01-15T11:49:00.005-05:00

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.

At long last! Friday Night Lights!!!

2009-01-13T12:12:00.014-05:00

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.

http://www.nbc.com/Friday_Night_Lights/

Globes Galore!

2009-01-12T11:37:00.006-05:00

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.

Remember Elaine Boosler?

2009-01-09T12:36:00.003-05:00

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."

Various and sundry...

2009-01-09T11:54:00.009-05:00

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.

The waters are pressing mightily

2009-01-08T12:26:00.007-05:00

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.

Shout Out to Nicholas D. Kristof

2009-01-07T16:00:00.009-05:00

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.

Day One

2009-01-05T12:50:00.004-05:00

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!

WordSmith At Play

So You Think You Can Dance? As a matter of fact, I do!

Enough.

WHAT is going on????

The Election is Coming! The Election is Coming!

Budget Broo-ha-ha

Tea and Sympathy? No, thank you.

To run or not to run?

Hip hip hooray!

FALL!

Twitter is evil.

IMPORTANT. PLEASE, PLEASE READ.

I reserve the right to edit this later

Observation (August 16, 2010)

Taxing my patience

Southern (Dis)Comfort, or, My Adventures in Bartending School

Is Traffic in Los Angeles REALLY That Bad?

Observation (August 5, 2010)

It's a new dawn / It's a new day / It's a new life / And I'm feeeeeelin'... good?

LOVE, a photo essay

Tea & (No) Sympathy

YES

I hope you're tall

A Word of Thanks

Profound Arrogance

My Secret Shame

Happy St. Patrick's Day!

Roger Cohen says "Tsk, tsk"

I'm at a loss for words

Random Thoughts

Gratitude

Now, THAT was a Presidential Address to Congress!

Writer's Block (and puppies)

Calgon!

The Perfect Day

Another shout out!

Does absence make the heart grow fonder?

Various and sundry...

Like "Drink Me", only different.

Thank Goodness

HIGHLY Recommended website

Lobby-pop, Lobby-pop, Oh Lobby, Lobby-pop...Lobby-pop!

With six kids already, do you really need more?

Dear Angelina Jolie

Bob Herbert is smart. That must mean I am, too.

William Kristol is a blathering idiot.

Three Cheers for the Comments Crew!

My head might explode from the cuteness!

Left-handed People Are Better

President Barack Obama

Anticipating tomorrow

Pens

Names (Or, An Open Letter to Sean P. Combs)

At long last! Friday Night Lights!!!

Globes Galore!

Recommended Reading

Remember Elaine Boosler?

Various and sundry...

The waters are pressing mightily

Shout Out to Nicholas D. Kristof

Day One