Mr. Jefferson & Mr. Frist

William Jefferson, Jr, you got cold busted. Resign.

But Mr. Frist, what's your beef here? Does it bother you that the FBI taped Mr. Jefferson's activities? They had an informant, and Mr. Jefferson was under investigation. If they had probable cause, why get upset about a raid on his office? Sure, we don't want the Executive Branch intimidating Congress Critters and all - yada yada yada. Like THAT doesn't happen every hour of every day. But using surveillance equipment to gather evidence for an investigation that leads to probable cause for a warrant? You're upset about THAT but you're OK with collecting phone records of millions upon millions of Americans who are NOT under investigation for doing anything to subvert the United States of America? How do you look at yourself in the mirror? What is it about this Jefferson case that has you nervous, Bill?

Or maybe he's just dumb.

In my previous post, I suggested that maybe Bush just doesn't understand that the Presidential oath is a bit more than a literal instruction to not let the dog eat the Constitution or something like that.

I take any benefit of the doubt back. He's just stupid.

At a naturalization ceremony yesterday - a handy venue to discuss immigration issues, I suppose - Mr. Bush said, "Our Constitution does not limit citizenship by background or birth. Instead, our nation is bound together by shared love of liberty and a conviction that all people are created with dignity and value."

Well, President Idjit, it kind of does. Maybe Bush's speechwriters were trying to say that ultimately, once you get through the naturalization process, your country of origin does not matter - you are American. Idealistic, definitely, and not true hardly at all, but OK. The problem, though, is that you can't give this halfwit sentences like "Our Constitution does not limit citizenship by background or birth" and not expect people like me to point out the obvious fact that our Constitution does indeed limit citizenship by background or birth.

The 14th Amendment says, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

It even has the word "born" right there in it - citizenship is defined by birth first. DUH. Gah, why do his handlers let him read this stuff out loud?

Why why why why why why why...

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

I’m beginning to wonder if what we have here is a failure to communicate. Perhaps Mr. Bush is unclear on the specifics of this oath. Maybe he thinks that it is a literal instruction. Is it possible that he’s gotten it in his head that as long as the actual document remains intact while he’s in office, he’s done his duty? Could it be that this is all just a simple reading comprehension issue?

Here’s where part of my confusion comes from, and I’m so stymied that I can’t get past this first section of the Constitution:

Article. I.

Section. 1.

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

Really? President Bush has made a game of signing legislation and then adding signing statements that basically equate to a big “neener neener, I won’t follow this if I don’t want to.” In regards to the recent Patriot Act reauthorization and its information disclosure requirements, Mr. Bush said that ''The executive branch shall construe the provisions . . . that call for furnishing information to entities outside the executive branch . . . in a manner consistent with the president's constitutional authority to supervise the unitary executive branch and to withhold information . . . " He has said repeatedly that he doesn’t have to follow warrant laws for wiretapping because we’re at “war,” and in response to Congressional passage of an anti-torture law applying to US detainees, Mr. Bush basically said that he’ll follow the law … unless he thinks it’s really really important that a prisoner be tortured.

I guess if you want to (again) be literal, Mr. Bush isn’t taking away the ability of Congress to pass legislation. He’s just openly saying that he’s going to ignore it. Nice spin, that.

Obviously he’s getting away with this, and I’m really baffled as to why. There are certainly those who say that we should do whatever King George says right now because we’re at war, but the dolts who say that are also more likely to believe that Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11 and aren’t going to ever understand that we can’t destroy and defend the Constitution at the same time. There are others who let him slide because he’s a good Christian man, defending us from those radical Muslims, but they’ve got their eyes so firmly on the Rapture prize that they don’t understand that the violence arising from radical fundamentalists in the Middle East is no different than the medieval environment they’d like to create here.

I think there are also many who just don’t want to admit that they made a horrible mistake in voting for this mouth breathing, pretzel choking, nucular pronouncing, strategerizing moron, so they publicly (though more and more often now – quietly) support him with a resigned, “well, we may as well play this out” kind of attitude, but have stopped with the strident defenses of his moral character and strength of resolve in the face of those lily livered un-patriots who have pointed out repeatedly that Bush has destroyed almost global good will towards the US, spent more than anyone … EVER … on whims of war fancy based on fluffy intelligence, has made sure that his inner circle of good ole rich boys have profited mightily from his shoot ‘em up playtime, has openly weakened us in the name of national security (do you feel safer?),
has cut programs for the poorer and weaker in our society, has attempted repeatedly to undermine our environmental safety and sell off our national resources …

Shall I go on? Is there anything that this President has done that has been a net positive for the nation? Can you really think of one single thing that has made America better in the last six years? Safer? Stronger? More admirable? Honorable?

What would you think of your company if ...

• Even though five of the top ten richest people in the country worked for your firm, you and most of your co-workers were expected and encouraged to utilize public assistance for things like healthcare and food assistance because the average wage for employees is below the poverty level?
• Your company was the subject of the largest class action suit ever for gender discrimination?
• Your company served largely as a distribution center for imported goods produced in hellish sweatshops overseas?
• Your company forced American companies out of business and American workers out of jobs - that is, unless they want to come and work for your company for much, much less?
• You had to work overnights and your company actually locked you in the building without a manager to let you out in case of a fire, heart attack, accident, or any such emergency?
• Your company generally finds it less expensive to violate whatever laws it pleases and pay the fines rather than comply with the law?

Would you be proud to work at a place like this? Should any of us support a business like this?

Stupid Science

I saw a short blurb on the news this morning regarding a change in the eating habits of Americans. Apparently, we are eating fewer "risky foods" than we have in the past.

The risky foods covered in the study include the following:

* Pink hamburgers
* Pink ground beef
* Raw fresh fish
* Raw oysters
* Raw/unpasteurized milk
* Runny eggs
* Alfalfa sprouts

Apparently, 31% of us ate one or more of the above in any given work as of 1998, but by 2002 that percentage had dropped to 21%. Good news, right? Not really.

I'm not going to get into a debate about a vegan vs meat-eating diet, because that's not really what this is about. In my opinion, this is just stupid science, completely missing the point of what is "risky" or not.

This study was looking at the risk of food-borne infection, and there really isn't any arguing that the above foods run a higher risk of outbreaks than others. But the real question should be WHY the risk is greater in these foods. Should we be looking at reducing our consumption of them, or should we be demanding higher safety standards in our processing centers?

Should cattle be raised in filthy conditions, fed ground up animals as feed, dunked in pesticides, pumped full of steroids and antibiotics, and run through slaughterhouses at an impossible pace that makes sanitary conditions impossible? Should a pound of ground beef contain meat from possibly 100 different animals coming from several different farms, sometimes even from different countries? "Diversity" is not a good thing when you're trying to track the source of an outbreak and your hamburger has bits in it from Kansas, Colorado, South America, and who knows where else.

WHY are these other foods dangerous? Are our food production industries looking out for the health of the consumers, or are they looking towards their bottom lines? Do they care? Do you?

Are these foods any less risky than Cheetos? Kraft Mac & Cheese? "Juice cocktail" boxes? Spaghettio's? Super chocolate chip peanut butter caramel "granola" bars? Most cereals?

McDonald's cooks their food enough to kill any bacteria, I'd almost surely guarantee, since they don't want a lawsuit. So, if you eat a Quarter Pounder, are you making a healthy choice? Healthier than if you had a patty made from some beef from an organic, local rancher - even if it's still pink in the middle?

Who funds these stupid, stupid studies?

Things just aren't going right ...

Ever have those times, maybe a week or two at a punch, when things just don't flow? Your brain feels froggy, your thoughts don't synch, your memory is flickery, and important details of your every day responsibilities just slide away like bits of California during the rainy season?

I'm having one of those spells. It's not pleasant.

What Does My Cat Think of Me?

From his perspective,

- I get to choose from lots of foods, but only give him one option.

- I leave the house when I want, but deny him exit.

- I snuggle with other creatures in the house, but kick him away sometimes.

- I don't drink water out of toilet - why? WHY?

- I go pee & poo in his preferred water dish - why? WHY?

- I don't sleep nearly enough.

- I give way too much attention to that other four legged awkward lump of a creature named Buddy the Bulldog and really - what does he do to deserve it?

- I don't SEE nearly as much as I could, if I would just chill the fuck out.

This is going to be disjointed .. fair warning. I'm still trying to put a lot of things together in my mind.

I went over to a friend's house this past weekend. She's one of those friends that I hold dear but don't see often. I'm somewhat ashamed to say that I haven't talked to her as much lately because she is full of drama, and the reason I was there today was because of all of that. You see, she was taken to the hospital on December 23rd because her ex-husband found her with a gun in her mouth. She spent a couple of days in the hospital. I didn't know about any of this until I called to say "hey" a couple of weeks ago. That very scary and sad conversation had me on the phone with county agencies and suicide hotlines ("no really, it's not me, I'm calling for a friend") and trying to figure out what I can do for her.

In a nutshell, she lost her job about 10 years ago and hasn't had a steady job since. Her marriage went to hell (although she'd been talking about leaving him since I first met her 11 years ago), she was in a bad motorcycle accident that I think caused some brain damage, and she is now divorced and living on $300/month in child support. She is still in her home but it is on the market as part of her divorce settlement - for now, her ex is paying the mortgage and utilities, so she won't get any of the proceeds. When it sells, I don't know where she is going to live. Or how. She is on anti-depressants, is maybe 100 pounds overweight (and on blood pressure medication as well), and has bill collectors calling about her $50,000 or so in debt that she has racked up in order to support herself and in part because of just plain stupid purchases. Her car has been repossessed, her only transportation is a van her brother has lent her, and her sister - who is married to a man who molested my friend as a child - takes her to the military commissary for food.

Her son is having trouble in school, having issues with the divorce, and is going through puberty to boot. Her ex-husband (who really has been quite generous, all things considered) is living with a woman whose ex-husband is in prison for molestation and whose daughter is up on charges for a drive-by shooting.

There isn't much I can do for her except offer advice, but she is hung up on being the victim. On one hand, she knows that she has brought a lot of this on herself, but at the same time I think she needs to find something or someone to blame because she is incredibly proud and doesn't want to deal with her personal shame in bringing about her circumstances.

Since the scary call a couple of weeks ago when she hung up on me because she said I hadn't been there for her and she knows I don't like to hear personal problems - guilty as charged, to an extent, since I am always willing to listen until it becomes clear that the person with the issues is doing nothing to rectify their own situation - she has improved dramatically. Having a friend has made all the difference, since she has no other support group. Her brother's van is as far as he is willing to go, he doesn't know how to deal with her. Her sister doesn't know about her husband molesting my friend and is (I think) slightly "slow." Her parents are dead. Her other friends have deserted her.

I went over to help her go through a box of past due and collection notices. She's simply stopped opening her mail. Her credit cards are all at around 30% interest now because of late payments. Her phone rang twice while I was there - bill collectors. She looks like hell. She used to be quite proud of her appearance and has let it all go.

But - she was chipper. I went through everything, ultimately reducing the box to about an inch of the most recent bills and threats. It's now kind of in her court - she needs to call these companies and try to reduce her balances (often a credit card company will erase portions of your debt if they know you can't pay - you just have to ask, tell them that there's no getting blood from a stone) but I don't think that's going to be enough. She's going to have to file for bankruptcy, it is absolutely the best thing she could do. That and get a job. Unfortunately, I think her appearance might be a hindrance in that regard - fair or not, employers do look at appearance and being overweight indicates a lack of control. Don't blame me, the studies are out there.

I can't lend her money. I have my own obligations, debt from a messy divorce that I am still paying off. Besides, I have a feeling that she would use it to do something stupid like reinstate her full cable package, go buy a sports car, give a go at doubling it with online poker ... something. Frankly that would be an end to our friendship, and I don't want that. I also can't have her move in here - I can't have a near suicidal person in my home with my kids and besides, she's a "small doses" person. I couldn't listen to her go on about how unfairly her ex treated her for very long before I'd lose it.

I just don't know what else to do for her.

I guess all of this leads me here - "There but for the grace of God go I."

Theater Etiquette

To honor the great Dr. Martin Luther King Jr (or, as my 6 year old calls him, "Dr. King Luther ... uh ... Martin ... Jr?" with a look of utter confusion as to why someone would have quite so many names), my family went to the movies on Monday. Our small town theater is rarely crowded, but since it was a holiday and a kid movie, we weren't surprised to find that in order to get four seats together, some folks who were already there were going to have to squish a little. Fortunately, a man almost all the way in the back saw me doing a seating scan and beckoned us up, doing that total-strangers-sign-language thing that we all recognize to let us know that his family would move down one and we were welcome to come sit by them.

I mention him because I really appreciated that little courtesy, as it seems that people are really concerned about their movie buffer zone. I don't mind buffer zones when the theater is relatively empty, but I think if you go to a showing that you know is going to be crowded, you should gracefully accept the situation and be prepared to share an arm rest. Buying a ticket to the theater does not entitle you to an extra seat that you need in order to pile all of your coats or to just not have to touch another icky human. If it works out that way, great, but if you can't handle it, get a Netflix subscription or pick your showtimes wisely.

I also mention him because his courtesy was in stark contrast to several people who were sitting right behind us. Keep in mind that we're at Hoodwinked and being a parent, I expect a little amount of random noise from children. I'm definitely not of the expectation that children should be completely silent during movies - indeed, the sound of a kid laughing is one of my favorite noises, but throughout the movie, the people behind us - the ADULTS - spoke at normal conversational volumes. Discussions about the movie, the animation, the story line, the plot holes (it's HOODWINKED, for crying out loud), the music - it was like watching a DVD with director's commentary. There was also the seat kicking, my own personal super ultra extreme pet peeve. That came mostly from a couple of kids that looked to be perhaps 11 or 12, so way too old to not know better, but at least it wasn't the adults.

So, in light of the apparent fact that there are people out there who don't get how rude, crude and socially unacceptable our current slate of "acceptable" theater behaviors are, let me lay it out - and if you recognize yourself in any of these statements, then all I have to say is "you're welcome" because I'm sure you'll make an effort to do better in the future.

1. You're not in your living room, so be quiet. This seems so obvious, but perhaps as we progress through generations of on-demand and DVR viewing options it's gotten more conf. If you're confused on this point, I would offer this little test - if you had to pay money to go into a big dark room full of chairs, you don't have a remote control in your hand, and you didn't get your popcorn for free, it's not your house. You are in a movie theater, and you are in there with a lot of other people who did not pay to hear your comments. A few years ago my theater viewing of Fellowship of the Ring was practically ruined by a guy one row back who felt a need to explain every difference between book and film to his daughter. Just shut up. Talk later, after you've left the movie. If you can't remember what you wanted to say, that's just extra proof that your ramblings were unnecessary.

2. The seat in front of you is not an ottoman. This is an ottoman. If that's not a pretty reasonable facsimile of the fabric covered piece of furniture in front of you, don't put your feet on it. It's also not a wall, so when you need to adjust yourself, don't push against it with your feet. It should go without saying that you shouldn't be kicking it, but damn - DON'T KICK IT.

3. Movie theaters are not big trash cans. If you brought a big-o-tub of popcorn into the theater, surely you can haul the empty back out, and ditto with your soda kegs. Maybe you get a thrill out of making people clean up after you - or maybe you're just a big rude slob. Those are really the only two possibilities, so you decide.

4. If you know you have a bladder the size of a Tic Tac and have some control over your seat choice (I do realize this is sometimes difficult), please sit near an aisle. I promise the picture is not THAT much better if you sit in the middle of the theater and besides, the movie probably isn't that great anyway. Your enjoyment is not going to be ruined by sitting off to one side and the people you would otherwise have to crawl over will mentally thank you as they watch you head off for your fifth bathroom break.

Only four major rules. It's really not that difficult, right?

By the way - about Hoodwinked. Unless you have a Red Riding Hood fanatic in your house, my suggestion is to wait for the DVD. I've seen Shrek, I know Shrek by heart - this is no Shrek. It's not even a Shrek 2. The animation is amateurish, the humor is spotty, and it just doesn't have the wit of other recent animated offerings. It also has way too many musical numbers for my tastes. I'm sure my kids enjoyed it, but they didn't shell out the almost $50 for tickets and treats, know what I mean?

Sundaes and Science

"Sundaes and Science" - that was the name of the school function I went to tonight with my fourth and first graders, two little boys. Oh my, oh my.

I'm not a huge kid person. I love my kids more than life itself but there are only a few "other people's kids" that I care to be around much. When people bring in their babies to the office, I'm never among the cooing, touching, "let me hold the baaaaaaaaaybee" crowd. Our house is not the one where the whole neighborhood kid population congregates - we don't have a Playstation anymore, don't have the latest crazy toys, and our back yard sucks for kids because it's steep and xeriscaped, although not nearly as beautifully as the picture in that link. Bottom line, I can handle one or two extra kids sometimes but am never going to go out of my way to invite the marauding hordes that some other parents seem to enjoy.

So, it is with some amount of dread that I go to these school functions. The idea of a hundred elemtary school kids running around a gym (do the people who design school gymnasiums deliberately make them as loud as possible?) makes me want to crawl in a hole. But - I go, I have to, they want to go and that's what's important.

Tonight was a twofold event - first, give the kids a bunch of sugar in the form of ice cream sundaes, and then tell them to sit down, be quiet and watch a presentation. People who go to school to educate and manage children's activities thought this was a good idea, right? OK.

So, ice cream first. My 6 year old was literally shaking as he ate his ice cream. He was THAT wired - but I'll admit that a lot of it was excitement about the program coming later.

The Science portion of the evening was an hour long commercial for an after school program the school is selling. Six weeks, an hour each session, for kids to learn science stuff - it looks like a bunch of fun but it's $75 per kid so we won't be doing it but the presentation was fun nonetheless. The "Mad Scientist" was a goofy woman, her props were good, and she managed to get a couple of Newton's Laws into the program in a fun manner. All of which is well and good except that the 100 or so sugar buzzing kids sitting on the floor (mine included!) were just nuts. I never did figure out who it was, but there was one little guy who kept doing an almost ululating "om" chant the entire time, there were pockets of kids who never stopped roiling (my take on what I would call a mosh pit for 7 year olds who are technically sitting but never stop moving), and every so often the whole group would start yelling and SQUEALING at the top of their lungs.

It was all kind of interesting to watch at times - the times that I was able to disconnect enough from my own urges to squeal and run - because I'm sure there are some neat child mob psychology analyses that could be made if I had more time and less of a headache. As it is, the boys are in bed and I think a very stiff drink is in order. Can't wait for the spring dance in a couple of weeks...

Flashlight Scare

In case you missed it, a Starbucks in San Francisco had a bit of a scare on Monday. It seems that a homemade bomb was found by an employee in a bathroom. The store and immediate area were evacuated, police came in, the bomb was removed from the bathroom (a unisex bathroom, one story pointed out for no apparent reason), detonated, and the search was on for the nefarious schemer with a grudge against, I guess, overpriced and ridiculously complicated "coffee."

One accounting of the event had this to say about the bomb:

Gittens would not describe the device or its size other than to say it "would have caused damage if it exploded.''

Don Henschke, sales manager at Ellis Brooks Auto Center across the street from the coffee house, said a police officer had described the bomb to him as "a portion of a flashlight and a fuse."

Sounds pretty cut and dry, doesn't it? No speculation there, this was definitely a bomb, a person of interest was found, and for most of us the whole incident blipped right out of conscious memory and we went on about our day.

As it turns out, though, it wasn't a bomb. It was just an old battery that a homeless man had accidentally dropped in the bathroom. A homeless guy who says he loves that Starbucks, no less, because they give him coffee for $.50. No grudges, no evil intent, and no bomb.

My first response when reading about the error this morning was, of course, relief. The world would not suffer - and especially not San Francisco - with one less Starbucks but bombs are bad and all.

That reaction was almost immediately replaced with a fair amount of irritation, though. Why were the police making such concrete statements about the nature of this device before they had time to actually examine and analyze it? Why did they state, before an investigation, that this device could have injured or killed someone if it had exploded? On what basis was this conclusion made? How could they be so irresponsible?

Easy. We live in a highly developed culture of fear. We need to feel like we're under attack or so many things that are going on today in our country make very little sense. We have to believe that terrorists are out to get us because without that, it harder to accept the sacrifices our Dear Leader has asked of us in the last several years. It's much easier and more comforting to think that some bad, foreign boogie men are out to get us than to consider the thought that maybe we voted some pretty shady characters into office and now we're stuck with the consequences.

The media doesn't help, of course. I'm sure they were all over that corner of San Francisco like froth on a latte. The competition for news in our internet soaked world is fierce and we shouldn't trust them very much anymore. Whether we watch CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, or whatever other outlets are currently available, we're not being given news - we're being given commentary. The talking heads are here to entertain us, not to inform us. We want to hear spins that conform to our beliefs and the news outlets know it. I wouldn't be surprised if the questions posed to the police were intense, aggressive, and probably leading. That doesn't excuse loose lips from the police department, but I can't entirely blame them.

I don't know that I ultimately have a point here, this feels more like a rant. Take it for what you will.

Overheard in the Grocery Store

Teen Bagger to Teen CheckOut Guy about "Come Sail Away" playing on the in-store tape: "Have you ever heard this song before? I really like it. I don't know who sings it though."

CheckOut Guy: "Yeah, I've heard it before too, I think it's really old. Not bad, I guess."

Wimper.

More and more often, I am feeling not young. I don't feel "old" yet, but definitely not young. For the most part, it's confined to comparisons between myself and celebrities - media, sports, music, etc. I've gotten over the inner groans when I see 20 year olds making millions and have come to appreciate the graceful aging of older celebrities, which just means that I have convinced myself that older stars are better looking than younger stars. I find myself laughing at shows like The Real World, which is currently in its eleventy-millionth season, and thinking that the cast members these last few years are getting more and more immature. Oh, and Britney is a tramp but Madonna wasn't.

In the last year or so, though, it's gone way past that. In every day life I am beginning to see the huge gap between me and "those damned kids." Now when I notice girls I'm not thinking, "I wonder where she got that top," it's more like, "Why the hell did her parents let her out of the house wearing that?" and teenage boys look like hoodlums (HOODLUMS, I tell you) with their jeans hitched up all the way to their ... knees.

All that aside, this grocery store incident was particularly painful. Why? Because only two nights before, I was listening to Napster radio and had a nostalgic moment over "Come Sail Away." It was nice. Sweet. Warm and tingly. And now - all dashed to geezer hell.

Smells like ...

I'll just say right up front that I don't like Hummers and probably don't like the people who drive them. I'm also fairly comfortable saying that I won't like someone who drives a Hummer with a "Support Our Troops" sticker on it, and I'll even go on record as guaranteeing that if the guy driving it is a large man with a shaved head and a goatee (translation, "I'm fat but if I look mean then fat just equals big strong tough guy), we are not going to be friends.

It's not just that these things are gas whores, although that definitely comes into play with the "Support Our Troops" stickers. It's not that they're ugly - there are plenty of ugly cars on the road. It's not even that they're big, because they aren't anymore. It's that Hummers are everything bad about SUV's, all wrapped up in one convenient package. They're aggressive tough guy trucks that probably don't ever leave a paved city street 99% of the time, they're overhyped and overpriced (which is a bit of genius, especially for the first ones - I'll give them that), and they're the ultimate example of a perceived need because really, nobody "needs" one of these but I'll bet that almost everyone who has one can give you a 25 words or less speech as to why they are the exception to the rule.

BUT ... in case you don't have the cash to go buy one of these monstrosities or feel like maybe 10 mpg isn't a wise choice for fuel economy, you can still be part of the Hummer Hype ... or at least smell like it. Go get your fragrance on ...

Sanitizomania

Yesterday we ran a few errands, including a stop at one of our local grocery stores for a few sale items. As we entered, I noticed a short, trim, generally well kept older lady walking in next to us. We both did that quick mental dance you do in society when you're both going for the same general destination, in this case the shopping cart bay. I slowed down a bit to let her go first and then watched with a little interest to see where she'd go because of the four carts that headed their little cart lines, only one didn't have trash in it. As a quick aside, this is another one of those "were you born in a barn?" pet peeves - random grocery store remains in the shopping carts. Almost always, it's some bakery related item, such as the little pieces of tissue you're supposed to use to get a cookie or something like that. To me, that usually says that there was a child involved and there was some appeasement going on. Besides the problems that I think come when you try to shut a kid up by giving him sugar and telling him to sit still in a cart, there's also the little lesson being taught to the kiddos that shopping carts are trash cans. But anyway ...

As expected, she did take the cart that didn't have any trash and then headed over to the newest created need in grocery stores. It's a little stand with antibacterial wipes right near the carts so that you can disinfect the cart handle before you do your shopping. Sure enough, she stopped, grabbed a wipe and gave a quick once over to her cart and to her credit, she did throw the wipe in the trash and not into the cart. That was the last I saw of her except for one moment over in the bread section where she snapped rather viciously at her husband and then caught me looking at her (really, I wasn't giving her a nasty look - I just turned to see who was having such a bad day), but I kept thinking about those little wipes.

I have no doubt that the installment of these sanitizing stations was done at the behest of the wipe manufacturers, not because of a demand from customers. I'm sure that those who are prone to germophobia are already bringing their Purel to the grocery store, know what I mean? But I also have no doubt that now that they are there, more people are thinking about germs and actually using these things, and then going over the to chemical aisle and buying some for their homes and cars.

I think there are several social points of interest in this. There are people who really don't care about germs, aren't particularly worried about them, but will use the wipes because they think that others will think they are somehow dirty if they don't. There are other people who already have a known compromised immune system and have to be very careful - maybe there ARE germs on these carts, but I suspect they'd have to be pretty hardy to survive a stint on a cold, dry piece of plastic. Who knows. But then there are people, and here I think we'd find big percentages, who use these wipes because they're concerned about their health, but then proceed down the aisles and buy the most unhealthy crap that the corporate food conglomerates have to offer. Filling up the cart with Lunchables, Hamburger Helper, Oreos and soda probably isn't going to get you a special mention on Willard Scott's birthday segment but hey, at least your grocery cart handle is sterile for a few minutes.

My personal belief on health when it comes to things like colds and flu is that you don't get sick because of germs, you get sick because your immune system is not up to the challenge. You can use your Purel, your Oust (my personal favorite in the "most ridiculous product" list - how do you sanitize AIR, outside of an industrial or medical clean room?), your anti-bacterial soap, your disinfectant household cleaners, etc. all you want, but if your immune system is shot, you're still going to get sick. I think this happens to people all of the time and their response is to become even more paranoid about germs, which is just nuts. I knew a girl at my previous job who kept a tissue over the mouse at her desk because she was afraid of germs. On her own mouse, at her own desk. I don't know what she thought was happening at her desk when she wasn't around, but I think therapy is in order.

Anyway, I know this is a pointless rant. People don't want to actually take care of themselves, they just want the illusion of taking care of themselves. Corporations are happy to fill that need, and there's probably not anything I can do about it because I'm sure I'm in the minority on this one. It just stayed on my mind all through yesterday and even overnight, so I figured I should get it out of my system.

MPAA

What do these movies have in common?

Spider-Man
X-Men
Pirates of the Caribbean
Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
School of Rock
Meet the Parents
Bend It Like Beckham
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
The Triplets of Belleville
Best in Show
and
The Ring Two

Nothing jumping out at you? Well, I've seen them all, for one thing, but that's no big deal. With the exception of Meet the Parents and The Ring Two, they're also all movies that my 10 year old and 6 year old have seen. The main reason they're all listed here, though, is that they're all rated PG-13.

Now, I know that PG-13 means "some material may be inappropriate for children under 13," but I don't think there is a rational basis for some of this. For example, we recently saw Goblet of Fire and unfortunately I had forgotten exactly what that year at Hogwarts was about until we were already in the theater. Had I been more prepared, I would have warned my 6 year old that Cedric was going to die. As it was, he got a little teary eyed and for a few days said he didn't want to see that one again. He's over it now and wants to buy the movie, but still - definitely a darker toned movie than the previous ones and I should have paid more attention.

Then there's Spider-Man, which is PG-13 for "stylized violence and action." Um, OK. Spider-Man is pretty darned clean - I'd let the 6 year old watch that before I'd let him watch CSI, Numb3rs, Law & Order, or any of the other cruelty and death series on prime time television.

But - The Ring Two?? Who the hell came up with the bribe money for this one? It never would have occurred to me to allow either child to watch this movie, and to be honest, I didn't want to watch this movie. I don't like being startled and in general don't like horror movies. Every so often I have to watch one, though, because my husband likes them but he won't get them if I won't watch them with him - it's not rudeness on his part, it's that he won't want to get something if we can't cuddle while watching so I deal with it so he can watch something he really wants to see. One of those little things you do in a relationship.

Anyway, we watched The Saw several months ago (hated it), Devil's Rejects a few weeks ago - more of a straight up psycho slasher flick than horror and oddly interesting - and then last week The Ring Two. It's rated PG-13 for "violence/terror, disturbing images, thematic elements, and some language." There is no way - no freaking way - that this movie could possibly be in the same rating world as any of the other movies above. Sure, it doesn't show anyone being explicity carved into pieces in a torture chamber like Hostel (rated R for "brutal scenes of torture and violence, strong sexual content, language and drug use"), but this is the stuff that months of nightmares and family bed arrangements are made of and it really pisses me off that it's only rated PG-13.

That's all I have to say about that.

The War on Christmas

This whole War on Christmas hysteria really needs to stop. Those who are caught up in it are doing nothing but make themselves look like jackasses and help John Gibson and Bill O'Reilly make more money. Why does there need to be a "war" about this, anyway? Could we please tone down the catchphrases? No, of course not, because that doesn't sell as many books or commercial time.

Yesterday, one of our reps called me to ask a question and he started out by saying, "Merry Christmas or Happy Hannukah or - well, I just don't know what to say anymore, so Happy Holidays." I told him he couldn't say that either because that would mean that he's helping in the War on Christmas. He laughed, as well he should, because it's DUMB.

And then today I opened our free local newspaper and saw this gem of a column from our resident right wing apologist. He's usually good for little more than a somewhat shrill recap of the week's talking points and this week was no exception. I won't recap it, the link's there if you want it, but I mention it because it really was the final straw. There is no war on Christmas, there is just a recognition by most everyone that there are millions of people who celebrate different winter holidays. It's that simple. Someone saying "Happy Holidays" to me suggests that they respect the possibility that I might not be Christian, and I appreciate that. Those who whine about a War on Christmas probably don't give a damn that others may not be Christian and their insistence on "Merry Christmas" being the default message is highly disrespectful. Beyond that, it's petty and stupid and I think Jesus would be ashamed of His followers for their behavior.

So ... now I have to go write a letter to the editor.

Cell Phone Rudeness

Last night I had an opportunity to teach my 10 year old son a valuable lesson. At first it appeared that the lesson would simply be about cell phone etiquette (timely, since he had earlier asked if he could have a cell phone with actual local access and not just the old one we gave him with 911 access to see how long he could go without losing it), but very quickly I realized that it was really about much more than that. It was about people just being completely unaware that the universe, as our mothers all told us when we were little, does NOT revolve around us.

I know that every generation feels that the next generation's values & manners are in a sad state and I hate to sound like a codger at the tender age of 36, but dang if it doesn't appear to be true. If it's any consolation, my opinion of my own generation is pretty low as well, especially out here in suburbia where the sense of entitlement is overpowering and the coddling of precious can-do-no-wrong-aren't-they-so-CUTE-when-they-screech-like-that children is almost a competition among the SAH's (Stay At Homes). But I digress.

Here's what happened: Last night, EasyE and I went to WallyWorld to try to find a Christmas present for his stepdad. We didn't find anything, but I did pick up some cough drops for a co-worker who has been battling a severe cough this week, and a 2 liter of soda. Since we only had the two items and every lane had quite a line, I figured we'd give the scan-it-yourself lanes a shot.

Now, I have to go into what might seem like a subset issue of this whole thing when it comes to the scan-it-yourself lanes, but it's really all part and parcel of the big problem. In a nutshell, if you've never tried using one of these lanes, the time to NOT do it is when there is a line. If it's really on your list as one of life's must-try's, give it a go on a Monday afternoon at the grocery or something - not on the weekend, and not during the holiday season after work hours. Ditto for letting your kid work the scanner. It's fine to do so if there is nobody waiting in line, but the minute people are going to have to wait for your child to drag that can of soup across the scanner for the fifth time, it's time to take over and wrap up that transaction.

So - back to last night. There were only four stations open for self-serve, which kind of baffled me until I remembered that Wally's self-serve stations don't really work and there is an attendant constantly in motion voiding this, overriding that, and looking vacantly at the monitor with no idea what to do the rest of the time. There was only one woman so I suppose more than four stations would have been difficult.

At one station I pondered going to, there was a woman with at least 25-30 items (limit 20!), having a lot of trouble and getting flustered by her inability to scan. I chose to get in line behind one couple who were finishing up, a cute blonde girl in riding attire (horse, not bike), and another young hippie-ish girl. No problem, we'd be out of there in a flash!

Wrong. As Equestigirl stepped up to start scanning her items, she took her cell phone out and CALLED someone. She didn't answer a call, she dialed and started talking. The other girl in line looked at me with the ever readable facial "what the hell?" look, and then we both settled in to watch this completely unaware person check out her stuff. Unfortunately, she had a bunch of bags of candy, which meant that she didn't have clear, flat surfaces to run over the scanner. This wouldn't be a problem with two hands but she didn't HAVE two hands. She had to struggle with trying to do all of this with her free hand, and of course it didn't work well.

On her second bag, the machine wigged out and went into "call attendant" mode, which took a few minutes because of the aforementioned worker chick's other lane obligations. OK. Try again. One bag scanned, next bag - not so much. Call attendant. This time she had the good grace to at least take the phone away from her ear while she talked to the attendant with the obligatory looks of innocence and bewilderment as to why this wasn't working, she didn't know what happened, etc. Next. At this point, I did say to the girl ahead of me, in a voice that I hoped was audible but not obnoxious, "bet this would be easier with two hands." She snorted.

Time to pay for the purchase. This prompts her to end her call, which I will be doubly grateful for in a moment. Oh, would this be a good time to get out your card? Apparently so. Now me, I have it out before I even get to the scanner but I'm starting to think I'm in the minority with this. She opens her purse, gets out her dayplanner, gets out her card, and swipes. She then extracts her checkbook reconciliation book. She writes in the date ... and "WalMart" (I assume) ... and the amount ... and then does her subtraction ... and puts her card back in her dayplanner, puts it back into her near bursting purse, zips it up, and then looks at the screen which has been waiting for her all this time so that she could - enter her PIN. She gives a bit of a look of surprise, which is completely baffling since I find it hard to believe she's never used her debit card given how many pages of transactions were in her checkbook, enters her PIN, waits for the signature prompt, gets her receipt and bags and turns to us and says, "sorry."

Girl in front of me gets her transaction done in warp time, and we get ours done at similar speed. The guy behind me waited probably half the time for two people to do their stuff as we all did for her.

So, several points of rudeness here. Her cell phone call starts everything off on a bad note and while there is actually a part of me that gives her some benefit of the doubt that she is unsure of the technology and would prefer to look rude over looking slow and stupid, I just don't think that's the case. Cutting her call short as soon as her scanner started acting up would have helped the situation but she chose not to do that - point two. And again, who knows, maybe she was checking in on her terminally ill mother at some predetermined time to make sure that Mom took her medication and was doing OK. Or maybe not. Taking the time to write down her transaction instead of waiting until she was done and out of line? Totally rude. I'm pretty sure that in the time she walked to her car she would not have forgotten the date, the place of the transaction, or how to subtract. She even had a handy dandy receipt that would have reminded her of two of those variables, plus the amount of the transaction. And finally, the lame "sorry" that she gave when she finally left. She didn't give a rat's patootie about her behavior up until then, so the "sorry" rang a little hollow.

In the grand scheme of things, this is not a big deal. It's not earth shattering, and I get that. This one experience is not the issue, it's the aggregate impact of millions of people doing this that causes the problem. Whether it's a matter of truly and consciously feeling that nobody else matters or it's completely oblivious behavior, it's still rude and points to a lack of proper upbringing. And worse, the next generation will be brought up with an even lower expectation bar.

On the other hand, I started this post with the note that I had a chance to teach my son a lesson, so maybe she did me a little favor. And so it goes...

Customer Service

Honestly. I'm so sick of dealing with customer service folks. It's getting to the point where I'm beginning to wonder if I have offended the karmic customer service gods or something. Maybe this is my life test - to learn how to go through an hour of phone transfers, reps, disconnections, "enter your phone number" instructions, hold messages, neckaches, smooshed ears, etc., without just completely losing it on the poor person who eventually ends up with me on the line.

Today's adventure was the culmination of a six month hate affair with Packet8, a VOIP provider. It also involves Comcast and Verizon, to some extent, which means I'm a broad phone spectrum hater, I guess.

More later..

Quiet month?

Wow, it's been over a month since I've visited here. Odd, considering how often I think about something that I want to mention. There are plenty of events that have made me simmer, but I don't feel like getting into those today. Instead, I think I'll ponder my son's 10th birthday.

I'm sure every mother feels and says this but wow - ten years sure went by quickly.

There are so many things I wish I could have done differently for him, and I'm constantly amazed at what a wonderful kid he is in spite of me. He's healthy, intelligent, polite and (generally) kind. He's the only child in his fourth grade class who goes to the fifth grade room for both reading and math, he has a good circle of friends who are generally "cool" - from a Mom's perspective, that means polite, articulate, and generally not trying to hard to impress.

As he gets older, I've noticed that he's getting a lot more affectionate. It's almost like he's got some understanding that soon he'll be out of that time in his life where he will be able to cuddle on the couch and he'd better get what he can now. I also think he realizes that he missed out on a lot of snuggle time when he was younger - back in the days when I was in a marriage that was unhappy and I was emotionally unavailable a lot of the time, and also just because he was never an overly touchy/feely kid.

There's so much more I could go on about here, but I won't because it'd turn into a big mess. I'm practically crying as it is, and that's just thinking about the past. If I start pondering too much about how the next ten years will likely whip by just as quickly and then he'll be gone and out of the house ... well, I just can't have that happening while I'm at work, so maybe I'll add more later. In the meantime, I'm looking forward to leaving here in an hour and a half so I can go home and give him a huge hug.

Snnnnnnnnlush! And Corn, and W&G ...

The first slush of the season has arrived. We knew it was coming, there's been a winter storm warning out for a few days already. Saturday was gorgeous, one of our usual unreal blue sky days, high of about 80, then yesterday it started to cloud over. It started to rain as we were driving over to the
Corn Maze, but that was OK since gloomy fall weather is what you SHOULD have when you're walking through dried up corn fields, right? Unfortunately, the lowest common denominator factored in and the Maze was closed down about 20 minutes after we went in - turns out that someone in the past has fallen in the mud and gotten hurt, so of course if there is any sign of slipperiness, everything must shut down. Stupid logic as I'm guessing that lots of unsafe activities have gone on in the maze - mostly after dark, if you catch my drift - but oh well. They were cool enough to give us our money back, so I was happy.

With some time on our hands, we decided to go check out Wallace & Gromit. At 95% on the Tomatometer, I figured it was a slam dunk. Plus, I didn't want to see Corpse Bride, after being underwhelmed by Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. I wasn't about to get away from Helena Bonham Carter, though - she's in W&G too, doing the voice of Lady Tottington. Anyhoo, it occurred to me as we were walking into the theater that reviewers might favor W&G simply because it's supposed to be more intelligent, and that might mean that it's really just dull. The first half of the movie served well as proof of this theory, offering up only a few chuckles. After that, though, it tipped to the funny side and I woke up (literally - I leaned over on Bill's shoulders and closed my eyes a couple of times). There were quite a few roars of laughter from the adults during the second half of the movie, accompanied by looks of confusion from the kids who didn't know what had gotten into the parents. Bottom line - funny, but doesn't need a big screen, especially if you don't have kids.

So then about this snow. It's a messy sort of snow, not something that gives over to visions of sleigh bells and hot chocolate - more like dreams of car washes and mud room additions. One of our apple trees is now a goner, split down the middle from the weight of snow on branches that haven't lost their leaves yet, and our front yard tree (no idea what it is) will suffer some damage but will make it through. Most of the other trees in the cul de sac look like they got hit a lot harder than ours. Usually the snow would have stopped and even melted by now, but this front is stalled. There's none of our usual Rocky Mountain sun and dry air to suck it back up into the atmosphere until tomorrow, so the drive home will be a mess. Still, it's the kind of weather that makes you want to curl up on the couch with a blanket and a kid, so it's not all bad, right?