Or, at least this one.
Jay Rosehill, twenty-two-year-old defenseman for the Norfolk Admirals (he's #8 and shoots left) was charged with third-degree grand larceny for stealing a car early this morning. In town to play the Binghamton Senators this evening, Mr. Rosehill decided to patronize a local adult entertainment club late last night. An employee of this club had turned her car on in the parking lot to warm it up, leaving it running and unattended. With the sense of entitlement semipro hockey players garner, Mr. Rosehill assumed this meant she was giving him her car. He hopped in and drove it to another adult entertainment club up the road.
However, this employee was in fact not giving her car to him, and quickly told the cops so. At 1:25 a.m. cops found the car at the other adult entertainment club, and saw the adroit defenseman running away from the car. He's currently being held without bail and waiting for further action in Broome County Court.
I wonder if this is a 15 minute penalty.
Friday, December 21, 2007
Monday, December 17, 2007
Monday, December 10, 2007
In this edition of Why the World Needs Copy Editors:
The following is a section head in the book I’m editing:
Is there a place for psycho education?
Interesting question. I’m sure many psychos utilize the public school system. Prisons have libraries and education classes, so incarcerated psychos have a place to be educated. Magazine subscriptions are available to psychos, as are bookstores, libraries, and the Internet, so, actually, many places exist for psycho education. Or do you mean “should psychos be educated?” Well, I think everybody should be educated, perhaps especially psychos. It may help them with their psychoness. That’s not what you mean either?
Let’s see. “Is there” is quite vague, which led to my confusion. And since the paragraph that followed did not talk about where psychos can be educated or whether psychos should be educated, I’m led to believe that “psycho education” should be “psychoeducation.” So, after a brief review of the section, I took my magic pencil (or magic electronic tracked changes) and changed this heading to: “Is Psychoeducation Useful?”
This heading did not involve your typical, everyday typo or misspelled/misused words. In fact, you may not have even known anything was wrong with the heading until I enlightened you. (You’re welcome.) However, had I not changed this heading, others may have been as confused as I was, or, even worse, some readers may have gone on to write “psycho education” on a paper or exam and perpetuate the error. Even though it would have been so, so funny to leave it as it was, I, for the betterment of everything in the world, changed the heading.
Is there a place for psycho education?
Interesting question. I’m sure many psychos utilize the public school system. Prisons have libraries and education classes, so incarcerated psychos have a place to be educated. Magazine subscriptions are available to psychos, as are bookstores, libraries, and the Internet, so, actually, many places exist for psycho education. Or do you mean “should psychos be educated?” Well, I think everybody should be educated, perhaps especially psychos. It may help them with their psychoness. That’s not what you mean either?
Let’s see. “Is there” is quite vague, which led to my confusion. And since the paragraph that followed did not talk about where psychos can be educated or whether psychos should be educated, I’m led to believe that “psycho education” should be “psychoeducation.” So, after a brief review of the section, I took my magic pencil (or magic electronic tracked changes) and changed this heading to: “Is Psychoeducation Useful?”
This heading did not involve your typical, everyday typo or misspelled/misused words. In fact, you may not have even known anything was wrong with the heading until I enlightened you. (You’re welcome.) However, had I not changed this heading, others may have been as confused as I was, or, even worse, some readers may have gone on to write “psycho education” on a paper or exam and perpetuate the error. Even though it would have been so, so funny to leave it as it was, I, for the betterment of everything in the world, changed the heading.
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
Want even more of me?
If you enjoy reading my blog (or even if you don't), please visit my new Associated Content page here. Make a shortcut on your desktop and check it every five minutes . . . not because it will have new stuff every five minutes, but because I will get paid incrementally by page hits. I need at least one thousand hits to receive a performance payment, but what the heck, I'm ambitious, and poor. For some content I will receive upfront payments, but for other articles I will be paid by visitor count only.
This won't make me rich, but it may let me get an extra shot or two in my latte, movie admission, maybe a tank of gas if what I write is awesome. I like writing, I do it all of the time, so it makes sense to me, especially with the hubby in college and my company's pending closing, to make a little money from it if I can.
I've continued and will continue to offer writing tips on the AC site (you know you love them), and I'll also be writing social commentary, opinion pieces, maybe some reviews. I will be contributing often. I'm still keeping this blog, which now may become even more self-indulgent, so don't worry about not being informed about my rants, musings, and weirdoness.
This won't make me rich, but it may let me get an extra shot or two in my latte, movie admission, maybe a tank of gas if what I write is awesome. I like writing, I do it all of the time, so it makes sense to me, especially with the hubby in college and my company's pending closing, to make a little money from it if I can.
I've continued and will continue to offer writing tips on the AC site (you know you love them), and I'll also be writing social commentary, opinion pieces, maybe some reviews. I will be contributing often. I'm still keeping this blog, which now may become even more self-indulgent, so don't worry about not being informed about my rants, musings, and weirdoness.
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
The Capitalist Christian
Executive director of the National Labor Committee Charles Kernaghan has reported that crucifixes sold by the Singer Company, a member of the Association for Christian Retail (CBA), were manufactured under horrific conditions in a Chinese sweatshop. The “Christian” retail association’s response: “Nuh uh. Liar liar pants on fire.”
Bill Anderson, president of the Association for Christian Retail, a trade group, said in a statement yesterday that Mr. Kernaghan’s claims about manufacture of religious items overseas were “unfounded and irresponsible.” He said the group has never received concrete proof that items sold by its members were manufactured in sweatshops. In fact, he said, the organization’s members make regular trips to overseas factories to “ensure quality control as well as inspect working conditions.”
The CBA is most likely right. I mean, Kernaghan’s track record includes outing only Disney, Fruit of the Loom, Gap, JCPenney, Kmart, Kohl’s, Levi’s, Nike, Puff Daddy/P Diddy/Diddy, and Target, among others. Like Kathy Lee Gifford. Kernaghan has no idea what he’s talking about. CBA members sell Christian stuff, duh. Jesus would totally manufacture merchandise as cheaply as possible and then mark it way up and sell it to his followers, especially to his followers who think it’s more important to look Christian than to act Christian. As long as his name was on their T-shirts and his method of death was hanging around their necks, Jesus wouldn’t really care if they actually followed his teachings.
But I digress.
This AP article shows pictures of the crucifixes, including model number and where they were bought. A protest was held yesterday in front of Saint Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City, one of the churches who sold Singer crucifixes. The article also includes pictures of the sweatshop, where Chinese women work one hundred hours a week, for seven days a week, for twenty-six cents an hour, with no sick time or vacation time. The young women’s living conditions are disgusting; the dorms are filthy and their food is slop. Another church selling the crucifixes was Episcopal Trinity on Wall Street. Both churches removed the crucifixes immediately when they were told of the merchandise’s origins. The crucifixes did not include the required “Made in China” sticker, and the churches believed that the crucifixes were made in Italy, as Singer had told them.
So if you are planning to buy Christian paraphernalia for Christmas, for Christ’s sake please make sure the vendor is not a member of the Association for Christian Retail.
The National Labor Committee’s report can be found here.
Evil men do not understand justice, but those who seek the LORD understand it fully.
Proverbs 28:5.
Bill Anderson, president of the Association for Christian Retail, a trade group, said in a statement yesterday that Mr. Kernaghan’s claims about manufacture of religious items overseas were “unfounded and irresponsible.” He said the group has never received concrete proof that items sold by its members were manufactured in sweatshops. In fact, he said, the organization’s members make regular trips to overseas factories to “ensure quality control as well as inspect working conditions.”
The CBA is most likely right. I mean, Kernaghan’s track record includes outing only Disney, Fruit of the Loom, Gap, JCPenney, Kmart, Kohl’s, Levi’s, Nike, Puff Daddy/P Diddy/Diddy, and Target, among others. Like Kathy Lee Gifford. Kernaghan has no idea what he’s talking about. CBA members sell Christian stuff, duh. Jesus would totally manufacture merchandise as cheaply as possible and then mark it way up and sell it to his followers, especially to his followers who think it’s more important to look Christian than to act Christian. As long as his name was on their T-shirts and his method of death was hanging around their necks, Jesus wouldn’t really care if they actually followed his teachings.
But I digress.
This AP article shows pictures of the crucifixes, including model number and where they were bought. A protest was held yesterday in front of Saint Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City, one of the churches who sold Singer crucifixes. The article also includes pictures of the sweatshop, where Chinese women work one hundred hours a week, for seven days a week, for twenty-six cents an hour, with no sick time or vacation time. The young women’s living conditions are disgusting; the dorms are filthy and their food is slop. Another church selling the crucifixes was Episcopal Trinity on Wall Street. Both churches removed the crucifixes immediately when they were told of the merchandise’s origins. The crucifixes did not include the required “Made in China” sticker, and the churches believed that the crucifixes were made in Italy, as Singer had told them.
So if you are planning to buy Christian paraphernalia for Christmas, for Christ’s sake please make sure the vendor is not a member of the Association for Christian Retail.
The National Labor Committee’s report can be found here.
Evil men do not understand justice, but those who seek the LORD understand it fully.
Proverbs 28:5.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Gooder writing tip #11 (supplement)
Some instances when the passive voice is *gasp* preferred:
When the object is what's important, and the actor (subject) is not important or is unknown, as in scientific text or police reports.
Examples.
Juvenile dispersal is seen in black-capped chickadees.
That juvenile dispersal occurs among black-capped chickadees is what's important. If I write, "The ornithologist witnessed juvenile dispersal in the chickadee population," I've made the ornithologist the topic, which I did not intend.
The victim was stabbed three times in the leg.
The victim having been stabbed is the important information in this sentence. Especially because the stabber is unknown, it is best to write the sentence passively. This sentence is better than writing, "Somebody stabbed the victim three times," because, as with the ornithologist, I've placed the attention on "somebody," and this is not the sentence's focus. Later, when the stabber is discovered, feel free to give him or her credit for the acccomplishment. "Jerkhead McAhole stabbed the victim three times in the leg."
When the object is what's important, and the actor (subject) is not important or is unknown, as in scientific text or police reports.
Examples.
Juvenile dispersal is seen in black-capped chickadees.
That juvenile dispersal occurs among black-capped chickadees is what's important. If I write, "The ornithologist witnessed juvenile dispersal in the chickadee population," I've made the ornithologist the topic, which I did not intend.
The victim was stabbed three times in the leg.
The victim having been stabbed is the important information in this sentence. Especially because the stabber is unknown, it is best to write the sentence passively. This sentence is better than writing, "Somebody stabbed the victim three times," because, as with the ornithologist, I've placed the attention on "somebody," and this is not the sentence's focus. Later, when the stabber is discovered, feel free to give him or her credit for the acccomplishment. "Jerkhead McAhole stabbed the victim three times in the leg."
Gooder writing tip #11
Today's lesson: Passive voice.
The Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 11th edition, definition for passive regarding voice is:
"Asserting that the grammatical subject of a verb is subjected to or affected by the action represented by that verb." Meaning, the subject of the sentence is acted on instead of acting. If the subject acts, it is called the active voice.
Chicago Manual of Style, 15th edition, offers the following explanation for active and passive voice: "Voice shows whether the subject acts (active voice) or is acted on (passive voice)--that is, whether the subject performs or receives the action of the verb."
Subject acted on = passive.
Subject acting = active.
Examples.
A Johnny Depp movie was watched by me = passive.
I watched a Johnny Depp movie = active.
A blog entry was written by me = passive.
I wrote a blog entry = active.
A good trigger for recognizing passive voice is if the sentence contains a form of "to be," such as am, are, be, been, being, had been, has been, have been, is, was, were, will be, will have been. "To be" is usually followed by a past participle.
Past participle.
To rely on Webster's again, a participle is "a word having the characteristics of both verb and adjective; esp: an English verbal form that has the function of an adjective and at the same time shows such verbal features as tense and voice and capacity to take an object." Or, more simply put, it is a verb that ends in "ing" or "ed" (or its equivalent).
The falling leaves are dead.
The dead leaves are falling.
"Falling" is present participle.
He drank the stirred martini.
He stirred the martini then drank it.
"Stirred" is a past participle.
According to Owl at Purdue, "past participles end in -ed, -en, -d, -t, or -n, as in the words asked, eaten, saved, dealt, and seen."
You are more likely to encounter the verb version of the participle when seeking or writing passive voice.
"To be" + past participle = passive voice.
Hint: Make sure "been" is included with "had," has," or "have." For example, "Tara will have watched ten Johnny Depp movies by Monday" is not passive. Tara is the subject, who is doing the acting. Also make sure the participle is a past participle. For example, "Tara has been watching Johnny Depp movies all day" is still active because the participle is present. "Ten Johnny Depp movies will have been watched by Tara" is passive voice.
Another way to recognize passive voice is sentence structure.
Subject, verb, object = active.
Object, verb, subject = passive.
In case anyone tries to tell you otherwise, the passive voice is not grammatically incorrect. It is okay to use the passive voice in moderation (or less). However, passive voice can be vague and often annoying, especially when it is overused. If you want to write a bad essay/paper/thesis/book, begin most of your sentences with "There is" or "There are." If I had been paid by all of the instances of "there is" and "there are" I've had to change instead of by the hour, I could have comfortably retired long ago. Authors use these all the time. Also watch out for "it is." (In the second sentence of this paragraph I said that it is okay to use the passive voice in moderation. A more active sentence would have been "You can use passive voice in moderation.")
My advice? Be more bold, more authoritative. Tell the reader who established those laws, not just that they were established. Tell me who discriminated against the indigenous people, not just that they were discriminated against. Tell me who thinks Johnny Depp is handsome, not just that Johnny Depp is considered handsome. This requires more guts, more research, and will garner you more respect.
This passage from Capital Community College in Hartford, CT, says it well:
We find an overabundance of the passive voice in sentences created by self-protective business interests, magniloquent educators, and bombastic military writers (who must get weary of this accusation), who use the passive voice to avoid responsibility for actions taken. Thus "Cigarette ads were designed to appeal especially to children" places the burden on the ads — as opposed to "We designed the cigarette ads to appeal especially to children," in which "we" accepts responsibility. At a White House press briefing we might hear that "The president was advised that certain members of Congress were being audited" rather than "The Head of the Internal Revenue service advised the president that her agency was auditing certain members of Congress" because the passive construction avoids responsibility for advising and for auditing.
The Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 11th edition, definition for passive regarding voice is:
"Asserting that the grammatical subject of a verb is subjected to or affected by the action represented by that verb." Meaning, the subject of the sentence is acted on instead of acting. If the subject acts, it is called the active voice.
Chicago Manual of Style, 15th edition, offers the following explanation for active and passive voice: "Voice shows whether the subject acts (active voice) or is acted on (passive voice)--that is, whether the subject performs or receives the action of the verb."
Subject acted on = passive.
Subject acting = active.
Examples.
A Johnny Depp movie was watched by me = passive.
I watched a Johnny Depp movie = active.
A blog entry was written by me = passive.
I wrote a blog entry = active.
A good trigger for recognizing passive voice is if the sentence contains a form of "to be," such as am, are, be, been, being, had been, has been, have been, is, was, were, will be, will have been. "To be" is usually followed by a past participle.
Past participle.
To rely on Webster's again, a participle is "a word having the characteristics of both verb and adjective; esp: an English verbal form that has the function of an adjective and at the same time shows such verbal features as tense and voice and capacity to take an object." Or, more simply put, it is a verb that ends in "ing" or "ed" (or its equivalent).
The falling leaves are dead.
The dead leaves are falling.
"Falling" is present participle.
He drank the stirred martini.
He stirred the martini then drank it.
"Stirred" is a past participle.
According to Owl at Purdue, "past participles end in -ed, -en, -d, -t, or -n, as in the words asked, eaten, saved, dealt, and seen."
You are more likely to encounter the verb version of the participle when seeking or writing passive voice.
"To be" + past participle = passive voice.
Hint: Make sure "been" is included with "had," has," or "have." For example, "Tara will have watched ten Johnny Depp movies by Monday" is not passive. Tara is the subject, who is doing the acting. Also make sure the participle is a past participle. For example, "Tara has been watching Johnny Depp movies all day" is still active because the participle is present. "Ten Johnny Depp movies will have been watched by Tara" is passive voice.
Another way to recognize passive voice is sentence structure.
Subject, verb, object = active.
Object, verb, subject = passive.
In case anyone tries to tell you otherwise, the passive voice is not grammatically incorrect. It is okay to use the passive voice in moderation (or less). However, passive voice can be vague and often annoying, especially when it is overused. If you want to write a bad essay/paper/thesis/book, begin most of your sentences with "There is" or "There are." If I had been paid by all of the instances of "there is" and "there are" I've had to change instead of by the hour, I could have comfortably retired long ago. Authors use these all the time. Also watch out for "it is." (In the second sentence of this paragraph I said that it is okay to use the passive voice in moderation. A more active sentence would have been "You can use passive voice in moderation.")
My advice? Be more bold, more authoritative. Tell the reader who established those laws, not just that they were established. Tell me who discriminated against the indigenous people, not just that they were discriminated against. Tell me who thinks Johnny Depp is handsome, not just that Johnny Depp is considered handsome. This requires more guts, more research, and will garner you more respect.
This passage from Capital Community College in Hartford, CT, says it well:
We find an overabundance of the passive voice in sentences created by self-protective business interests, magniloquent educators, and bombastic military writers (who must get weary of this accusation), who use the passive voice to avoid responsibility for actions taken. Thus "Cigarette ads were designed to appeal especially to children" places the burden on the ads — as opposed to "We designed the cigarette ads to appeal especially to children," in which "we" accepts responsibility. At a White House press briefing we might hear that "The president was advised that certain members of Congress were being audited" rather than "The Head of the Internal Revenue service advised the president that her agency was auditing certain members of Congress" because the passive construction avoids responsibility for advising and for auditing.
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
And the winner is:
The most important election day results are in. The new Capital of the Pierogy Pocket of America is....Binghamton!! Good job, voters! And the $10,000 prize money is going to CHOW. The announcement is here.
You know how to celebrate.
You know how to celebrate.
Monday, November 05, 2007
Happy birthday, Ida
Today is the birthday of fellow Allegheny alumnus and muckraker extraordinaire, Ida Tarbell, class of 1880. If you listened to the Writer's Almanac this morning, you heard from Garrison that today is Ida's birthday, that her superb journalism exposed the corruption of the Standard Oil Company, that her accomplishment was the first instance an American corporation was brought down by a journalist. Mr. Keillor, though, failed to mention the most important fact of her life--that she went to Allegheny College, of course--so I felt it important to enlighten you. Happy birthday, Ida.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Gooder writing tip #10
The correct use of only
I spend a lot of time during my workday moving the word "only" to the correct spot. "Only" is a modifier; it modifies the word that follows it. Here is my advice: when you write the word "only," take a second to read the word after it. Is it the word you want modified? I bet it's not. This is one of the most common mistakes I find.
Let's analyze.
1. I only love Hugh Jackman.
2. I love only Hugh Jackman.
1. Only love = I've belittled love! I only love Hugh, nothing more.
2. Only Hugh = Ah, this is what the writer meant. His or her love belongs solely to Hugh. (I am not the writer, of course; I love only my husband.)
The correct use of "only" is easy to achieve. It takes only awareness and a few seconds of thought. For this previous sentence most people would have written "It only takes awareness...." Luckily, the intended meaning would have still been clear, but why not just write it correctly to begin with?
For all of you future copy editors: Exceptions can be made with dialogue. Since the incorrect use often sounds more natural, it's okay to let a character use "only" incorrectly. Dialogue allows for many exceptions since it is a character speaking, not the author, so it is the character using incorrect grammar. Sometimes the incorrect grammar is intentional, and it's best to assume this (and this assumption will benefit your relationship with your author). If the character's grammar error glaringly changes the intended meaning, ask the author before you change it. You're welcome.
I spend a lot of time during my workday moving the word "only" to the correct spot. "Only" is a modifier; it modifies the word that follows it. Here is my advice: when you write the word "only," take a second to read the word after it. Is it the word you want modified? I bet it's not. This is one of the most common mistakes I find.
Let's analyze.
1. I only love Hugh Jackman.
2. I love only Hugh Jackman.
1. Only love = I've belittled love! I only love Hugh, nothing more.
2. Only Hugh = Ah, this is what the writer meant. His or her love belongs solely to Hugh. (I am not the writer, of course; I love only my husband.)
The correct use of "only" is easy to achieve. It takes only awareness and a few seconds of thought. For this previous sentence most people would have written "It only takes awareness...." Luckily, the intended meaning would have still been clear, but why not just write it correctly to begin with?
For all of you future copy editors: Exceptions can be made with dialogue. Since the incorrect use often sounds more natural, it's okay to let a character use "only" incorrectly. Dialogue allows for many exceptions since it is a character speaking, not the author, so it is the character using incorrect grammar. Sometimes the incorrect grammar is intentional, and it's best to assume this (and this assumption will benefit your relationship with your author). If the character's grammar error glaringly changes the intended meaning, ask the author before you change it. You're welcome.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Gooder writing tip #9
Punctuation and quotation marks
First tip: When in doubt, put the punctuation INSIDE the quotation marks. Inside is where those oft-used periods and commas go. Not-so-oft-used semicolons and colons go outside. Question marks and exclamation points go inside or out depending on context; with these buggers you’re going to have to make a decision—but don’t worry, I’m here to help.
Examples
Correct: The book editor said, “Johnny Depp is attractive.”
Incorrect: The book editor said, “Johnny Depp is unattractive”.
Correct: Johnny Depp has been described as “smart, funny, and handsome”; “dark and mysterious”; and “hot.”
Incorrect: Johnny Depp has been described as “dumb, dull, and ugly;” “light and fluffy;” and “fugly”.
Now onto question marks and exclamation points. These depend on whether they belong with the quoted material. Inside if the quote is a question or exclamation, outside if not.
Examples
When I asked her if I could have her Captain Jack Sparrow poster she said, “No you can’t!”
Why would she say “no you can’t”?
She asked me, “why would you want to take him away from me?”
She looked at me as if I’d said “give me your first born”!
Tell all of your friends. You're welcome.
First tip: When in doubt, put the punctuation INSIDE the quotation marks. Inside is where those oft-used periods and commas go. Not-so-oft-used semicolons and colons go outside. Question marks and exclamation points go inside or out depending on context; with these buggers you’re going to have to make a decision—but don’t worry, I’m here to help.
Examples
Correct: The book editor said, “Johnny Depp is attractive.”
Incorrect: The book editor said, “Johnny Depp is unattractive”.
Correct: Johnny Depp has been described as “smart, funny, and handsome”; “dark and mysterious”; and “hot.”
Incorrect: Johnny Depp has been described as “dumb, dull, and ugly;” “light and fluffy;” and “fugly”.
Now onto question marks and exclamation points. These depend on whether they belong with the quoted material. Inside if the quote is a question or exclamation, outside if not.
Examples
When I asked her if I could have her Captain Jack Sparrow poster she said, “No you can’t!”
Why would she say “no you can’t”?
She asked me, “why would you want to take him away from me?”
She looked at me as if I’d said “give me your first born”!
Tell all of your friends. You're welcome.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Monday, October 22, 2007
Attention church girls:
The lovely Rev. Sara Baron is hosting a workshop this Saturday for young adult women of the Methodist church (and friends) on the topic of sexuality and the church. It is from 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. at Centenary-Chenango UMC in Binghamton. No doubt it will be informative and interesting. Unfortunately, I've posted this info a few days after the RSVP deadline (but do it anyway!), and I can't attend (because I'll be at a three-year-old's Halloween party in Philadelphia), but I wanted to share this information with others because I think you should go. Here is the flyer:
The Commission on the Status and Role of Women
of the Wyoming Annual Conference invites
United Methodist young women (ages 18 to 35)
to an afternoon workshop on:
Sexuality and the Church
How does the UMC understand sex and sexuality?
What guidance can the UMC offer on living life as moral sexual beings?
How does our sexuality impact our spirituality? and visa versa?
What does it mean to be a sexual being – and a single Christian woman?
What does it mean to be a sexual being – and a married Christian woman?
We’ll gather at 12:00 with a free lunch provided by the Centenary-Chenango Street UMC, hear talks on Christian sexuality in single and partnered life, break into groups to discuss the talks, and join together again to worship as a large group.
INFORMATION:
12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
October 27th, 2007
Centenary Chenango Street UMC
438 Chenango Street
Binghamton, NY
For all United Methodist young adult women and any female friends they want to bring.
Please RSVP to s.baron@gmail.com or 607-263-5152 (Rev. Sara Baron) by October 20th.
Sexuality and the Church
How does the UMC understand sex and sexuality?
What guidance can the UMC offer on living life as moral sexual beings?
How does our sexuality impact our spirituality? and visa versa?
What does it mean to be a sexual being – and a single Christian woman?
What does it mean to be a sexual being – and a married Christian woman?
We’ll gather at 12:00 with a free lunch provided by the Centenary-Chenango Street UMC, hear talks on Christian sexuality in single and partnered life, break into groups to discuss the talks, and join together again to worship as a large group.
INFORMATION:
12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
October 27th, 2007
Centenary Chenango Street UMC
438 Chenango Street
Binghamton, NY
For all United Methodist young adult women and any female friends they want to bring.
Please RSVP to s.baron@gmail.com or 607-263-5152 (Rev. Sara Baron) by October 20th.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
NOT One Day Monday
But it is the fall fund drive for WSKG. Call 1-877-975-9754 or visit http://www.wskg.org/ and give them some money so I don't have to keep listening to them ask for it. And because you support public television and radio? But mostly so I can listen to Steve Inskeep's sweet, sweet, informative voice uninterrupted. I already gave my pledge. And I get an awesome travel mug for pledging. (Well, I'll get it next November, since my gift arrives six to eight weeks after my pledge is paid in full, and my pledge is paid monthly for a year--but good news: I should be getting my NPR laptop bag from last year's pledge any day now! Woo hoo! I hope my antiquated laptop fits in it.)
Okay, Steve's back on. Gotta go.
Okay, Steve's back on. Gotta go.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
One year
Today, besides being the anniversary of the Peronist revolution in Argentina in 1945, is the one year anniversary of my blog. My blog is a year old today. Happy birthday, blog.
Monday, October 15, 2007
Blog Action Day
I've signed up to participate in Blog Action Day, a movement to get all bloggers to blog on the same subject for one day. This year's topic: the environment. I'd like to thank Al Gore for winning the Nobel Peace Prize for his role in raising awareness for the consequences of global climate change; it makes this easy.
In preparation for this blog entry I went to Google News and typed in "climate change." Mr. Gore dominated the articles listed, which only supports how beneficial it is to have him as a spokesperson for this issue. For some reason, many, many people do not like Al. But even those trying to discredit him give him and the climate change issue publicity (Al dislikers: keep it up--and he'll continue to prove you wrong.)
New York Times op-ed columnist Paul Krugman wrote a great article today on Al and his decractors. He notes that the Wall Street Journal didn't even mention Al Gore's winning of the Nobel Peace Prize, and instead made a list of all the people who deserved it instead. National Review Online writer Iain Murray likened Al Gore to a terrorist because Osama bin Laden is also against global warming. Mr. Krugman offers analyses of why Al his so hated, and how he's overcome it all. However you feel about Al, it's an interesting read.
Sharing the prize with Al is the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Al has made sure to mention this group in every public statement about the prize. So I would like to also give credit to them here. The Vancouver Sun offers an article about one of the involved scientists, Professor John Robinson, or "Dr. Sustainability" as he is called. He's been fighting to raise awareness since the early 1980s, and is happy it's finally getting the recognition it demands. Dr. R.K. Pachauri, head of the panel, has appealed to developing economies such as India and China to develop new, more environmentally friendly technology, and to stop their current consumption and pollution patterns; developed countries are not good examples to follow. The panel's report titled "The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change" can be found here. On February 2nd of this year the panel presented that global warming was unequivocally occurring, and was the result of human activity. An international, bipartisan effort, the panel finally got the world to open their eyes. On February 2, 2007. Hopefully it's not too late.
So if you don't want to listen to me, listen to the scientists. If you don't want to listen to Al Gore, listen to the scientists. What they'll say in much more elegant and intelligent ways is: Stop being so selfish and ignorant! The consequences are going to kill more than trees and animals and Democrats.
In preparation for this blog entry I went to Google News and typed in "climate change." Mr. Gore dominated the articles listed, which only supports how beneficial it is to have him as a spokesperson for this issue. For some reason, many, many people do not like Al. But even those trying to discredit him give him and the climate change issue publicity (Al dislikers: keep it up--and he'll continue to prove you wrong.)
New York Times op-ed columnist Paul Krugman wrote a great article today on Al and his decractors. He notes that the Wall Street Journal didn't even mention Al Gore's winning of the Nobel Peace Prize, and instead made a list of all the people who deserved it instead. National Review Online writer Iain Murray likened Al Gore to a terrorist because Osama bin Laden is also against global warming. Mr. Krugman offers analyses of why Al his so hated, and how he's overcome it all. However you feel about Al, it's an interesting read.
Sharing the prize with Al is the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Al has made sure to mention this group in every public statement about the prize. So I would like to also give credit to them here. The Vancouver Sun offers an article about one of the involved scientists, Professor John Robinson, or "Dr. Sustainability" as he is called. He's been fighting to raise awareness since the early 1980s, and is happy it's finally getting the recognition it demands. Dr. R.K. Pachauri, head of the panel, has appealed to developing economies such as India and China to develop new, more environmentally friendly technology, and to stop their current consumption and pollution patterns; developed countries are not good examples to follow. The panel's report titled "The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change" can be found here. On February 2nd of this year the panel presented that global warming was unequivocally occurring, and was the result of human activity. An international, bipartisan effort, the panel finally got the world to open their eyes. On February 2, 2007. Hopefully it's not too late.
So if you don't want to listen to me, listen to the scientists. If you don't want to listen to Al Gore, listen to the scientists. What they'll say in much more elegant and intelligent ways is: Stop being so selfish and ignorant! The consequences are going to kill more than trees and animals and Democrats.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Let's go Mets!
At trivia last night we talked briefly about post-season baseball, and how much we cared. None of our teams are in it. Everyone’s go-to the Cubs are out. Well, what about Boston? Some said yes. I said no.
Why? The Red Sox new curse: they are becoming just like the Yankees. In the past few years since the “curse” was lifted, Boston and their fans have left a progressively sourish taste in my mouth. I still choose the Red Sox over the Yankees, but I think it's because I choose anybody over the Yankees, even the Braves.
To justify all I say on the matter: I have both Yankee-fan friends and Red Sox–fan friends. (This makes what I say okay, okay?) But, Boston’s argument about the Yankees being the evil empire is bordering on hypocritical. Boston is second in payroll only to the Yankees; they are the second highest paid team in Major League Baseball according to 2006 statistics, higher paid than 28 other teams. And maybe it’s just me, but when I think of the Yankees, I don’t immediately think of Boston. However, when I think of Boston, I immediately think of the Yankees—their team identity is so dependent on the Yankees.
Many times I’ve walked the streets of Boston and have seen “Jeter Sucks” T-shirts. Never have I seen anyone selling or wearing “[Boston player] Sucks” T-shirts. (The brackets are because Boston has a high player turnover rate—the Yankees have more continuity. Sox fans can wear their Jeter shirt for years. Because Yankees are well paid, yes, but so are Boston players....) Maybe I need to get out more. I don't know.
The history of the rivalry is deep, and begins with the cities themselves: Boston vs. NYC. Patriots vs. Tories, which city is the intellectual/art/cultural center of the United States, etc. In the Boston vs. NYC argument, for me, Boston clearly without a doubt wins. I would pick to live in Boston over NYC in a heartbeat, maybe in even less time. I have many reasons for this, which I'll spare you. Moving on. In the beginning of the league, Boston was clearly the superior team. Then, as we all know, Babe Ruth got traded to the Yankees, and thus the curse was placed. The Yankees went on with their lives. The Red Sox did not.
So, help me out, Red Sox fans. Give me some non-Yankee reasons why I should like your team and why your abundant arrogance is justified. The Sox are good, yes, just as the Yankees have been year after year after year. What if the Yankees were to leave the league next year? Would you still love your team as much? I truly want to know; I'm not poking or picking. So enlighten me and bless me with understanding. Because right now, when someone asks me, Yankees or Red Sox? I'm likely to say neither.
Why? The Red Sox new curse: they are becoming just like the Yankees. In the past few years since the “curse” was lifted, Boston and their fans have left a progressively sourish taste in my mouth. I still choose the Red Sox over the Yankees, but I think it's because I choose anybody over the Yankees, even the Braves.
To justify all I say on the matter: I have both Yankee-fan friends and Red Sox–fan friends. (This makes what I say okay, okay?) But, Boston’s argument about the Yankees being the evil empire is bordering on hypocritical. Boston is second in payroll only to the Yankees; they are the second highest paid team in Major League Baseball according to 2006 statistics, higher paid than 28 other teams. And maybe it’s just me, but when I think of the Yankees, I don’t immediately think of Boston. However, when I think of Boston, I immediately think of the Yankees—their team identity is so dependent on the Yankees.
Many times I’ve walked the streets of Boston and have seen “Jeter Sucks” T-shirts. Never have I seen anyone selling or wearing “[Boston player] Sucks” T-shirts. (The brackets are because Boston has a high player turnover rate—the Yankees have more continuity. Sox fans can wear their Jeter shirt for years. Because Yankees are well paid, yes, but so are Boston players....) Maybe I need to get out more. I don't know.
The history of the rivalry is deep, and begins with the cities themselves: Boston vs. NYC. Patriots vs. Tories, which city is the intellectual/art/cultural center of the United States, etc. In the Boston vs. NYC argument, for me, Boston clearly without a doubt wins. I would pick to live in Boston over NYC in a heartbeat, maybe in even less time. I have many reasons for this, which I'll spare you. Moving on. In the beginning of the league, Boston was clearly the superior team. Then, as we all know, Babe Ruth got traded to the Yankees, and thus the curse was placed. The Yankees went on with their lives. The Red Sox did not.
So, help me out, Red Sox fans. Give me some non-Yankee reasons why I should like your team and why your abundant arrogance is justified. The Sox are good, yes, just as the Yankees have been year after year after year. What if the Yankees were to leave the league next year? Would you still love your team as much? I truly want to know; I'm not poking or picking. So enlighten me and bless me with understanding. Because right now, when someone asks me, Yankees or Red Sox? I'm likely to say neither.
Friday, October 05, 2007
The Church Has Left the Building
Below is an article I wrote that will be appearing tomorrow in the local Press and Sun Bulletin. (Update: you can find it here.) It can also be found on the Wyoming Conference Web site.
The Church Has Left the Building
If you intended to attend Sunday morning worship at
On her table are a list of projects: yard cleanup, handicap ramp building, home rehabilitation, child care, sewing walker bags for a local nursing home, visiting nursing homes, feed-the-hungry, planting a flagpole garden at a fire station, baking cookies for soldiers, painting, and a bottle drive to raise money to help train landmine sniffing dogs. So much for remembering the sabbath and keeping it holy.
But wait—aren’t these services holy too? Does holiness occur in only church sanctuaries? The Pharisees confronted Jesus with a similar question regarding proper observation of the sabbath, to which he replied, "Suppose one of you has only one sheep and it falls into a pit on the sabbath; will you not lay hold of it and life it out? How much more valuable is a human being than a sheep! So it is lawful to do good on the sabbath" (Matthew 12: 11-13, NRSV).
One hundred and one Park Terrace congregation members tried to help pull sheep out of a pit on Sunday September 23. From
Each group began their project with a common devotional, focusing on Matthew 25: 34-45. Pastor Nick Keeney asked the groups to focus on missions being about people, not production, asking how our work would focus on people, how does reaching out to neighbors affect our relationships with God, why were participating.
The ramp and home rehab projects began the Saturday before. Along with the yard cleanup, these opportunities for service were discovered through Tioga Opportunities, Department of Aging Services. Roger Kinney, team leader for the ramp building, explained that Tioga Opportunities has an unlimited number of projects available for the service-minded, but that most of all they are need of funds. So if nail gunning is not your thing, a monetary donation is just as welcome. Tioga Opportunities Department of Aging Services is located at
Cooking at First Methodist in
The yard cleanup project took place a few miles from the church, and was being done for a lifelong firefighter who, due to health problems, could no longer perform maintenance. This was the task of on grandest scale of the day, with brush removal, gutter cleaning, tree limb removal, and general lawn care. When I asked seventh grader Stephen Lewis, who was helping with the yard cleanup, what he thought about canceling worship, he said he was okay with it, explaining, “I got to skip church to cut stuff up.” But he returned to heart of the matter by also saying, “I think Jesus would be proud of us.”
Back at the church groups were busy baking cookies for soldiers and jailed youth, sewing walker bags for local nursing homes, and sewing potholders for Sky Lake Camp and Retreat Center. Others were donating their time offering child care. Another group was sorting bottles collected from a bottle drive. Not only were these bottle drivers raising money to train landmine sniffing dogs, they were raising awareness. The group handed out flyers to those who, after hearing what the bottles were for, asked “huh?” The flyers explained that landmines currently litter the Angolan countryside, an estimated about one to eight million mines in an area the size of
Two groups went to nursing homes during the day, organizing worship services and visiting with residents. Another group painted a rundown shed in
Pierogy capital: Binghamton
Mrs. T's is holding a competition for the Capital of the Pierogy Pocket of America, and Binghamton is in the running. Go here and vote every day. If Binghamton wins, it will bring world peace. Your vote is important.
Voting lasts until October 23.
Press & Sun article
P.S. Binghamton will get a sweet banner and win $10,000, which will be donated to C.H.O.W.
Voting lasts until October 23.
Press & Sun article
P.S. Binghamton will get a sweet banner and win $10,000, which will be donated to C.H.O.W.
Monday, September 17, 2007
Absolutely nothing.
Seven active-duty soldiers wrote an article for the New York Times titled
"The War As we Saw It," which appeared on August 19. What a revolutionary concept to ask the opinion of people who are actually fighting the fight (and not riding a scooter on a ranch vacation or sitting at a fancy desk). You may have already read the article, and if you have, you know that one of contributors was shot in the head a week before the article came out. He is currently recovering. You may have also heard by now that two of the contributing soldiers were killed a week ago in a vehicle accident in Iraq.
Here is an excerpt from the op-ed:
To believe that Americans, with an occupying force that long ago outlived its reluctant welcome, can win over a recalcitrant local population and win this counterinsurgency is far-fetched. As responsible infantrymen and noncommissioned officers with the 82nd Airborne Division soon heading back home, we are skeptical of recent press coverage portraying the conflict as increasingly manageable and feel it has neglected the mounting civil, political and social unrest we see every day.
You can read the article here. Whatever your stance on the war, this is an insightful and smart commentary that should be listened to. It would be nice to hear more calm, researched soldier commentary. It’s too bad they are all busy at the moment.
"The War As we Saw It," which appeared on August 19. What a revolutionary concept to ask the opinion of people who are actually fighting the fight (and not riding a scooter on a ranch vacation or sitting at a fancy desk). You may have already read the article, and if you have, you know that one of contributors was shot in the head a week before the article came out. He is currently recovering. You may have also heard by now that two of the contributing soldiers were killed a week ago in a vehicle accident in Iraq.
Here is an excerpt from the op-ed:
To believe that Americans, with an occupying force that long ago outlived its reluctant welcome, can win over a recalcitrant local population and win this counterinsurgency is far-fetched. As responsible infantrymen and noncommissioned officers with the 82nd Airborne Division soon heading back home, we are skeptical of recent press coverage portraying the conflict as increasingly manageable and feel it has neglected the mounting civil, political and social unrest we see every day.
You can read the article here. Whatever your stance on the war, this is an insightful and smart commentary that should be listened to. It would be nice to hear more calm, researched soldier commentary. It’s too bad they are all busy at the moment.
Friday, September 14, 2007
No, really—what is is good for?
Last night as excerpts from the president’s speech were replayed on our television, my husband directed at the television his frustrated counterargument. I turned it off. I didn’t want my husband to get upset. I was tired. I am tired.
I’m glad the situation pisses my husband off. I’m glad I’m still pissed off. But I feel the lull of apathy setting in, and I wonder if it was this apathy that turned off my television last night instead of concern for my husband’s blood pressure.
But what can I do now? I can’t keep screaming: It’s not working! Start listening to the advice of others! My opinion is out there. The Bush administration knows how I feel—it’s echoed by many writers, lobbyists, Congress, and by more than half the country in polls. They don’t listen. The people who can actually change the situation aren’t listening. And the administration has put enough of “their people” into right positions so that all “news” we receive is Bush administration propaganda. Luckily, nobody believes it. Unluckily, they still get to decide and implement policy. My generation, American, Iraqi, and other, is being killed off because the Bush administration is too immature and selfish to admit they are wrong. And the soldiers are honorable enough to continue to serve this president, even if he serves only himself. Très frustrant.
I used to try to believe that the administration really did believe they were doing what was best. Even if it wasn’t working at the moment, they really did believe that the occupation would be good for both our country and for Iraq (although more for our well-being than for Iraq’s). Now I think they “stay the course” only because they don’t want the other side to be right, like an argument on the playground in fourth grade. In his speech last night (that I didn’t watch, obviously, but did read excerpts from, of course), Mr. Bush said the plan was evolving, that the “surge” is ending, that troops will be coming home, some big number by Christmas. The truth is (I learned on NPR this morning) all of these troops were scheduled to come home anyway, they just won’t be replaced now. Whoopee.
I suppose if I were a soldier, I would continue to do my duty in earnest hope that it would make a difference. As a citizen I guess I still garner some hope that this can happen, even in the mess we've made. I’d want to try to establish a healthy infrastructure for Iraq, train protective police forces, give their government time to get over their incompetence and get their act together. I’d have to believe this. I’d do it for my country, and my country is NOT my government. I admire all of the soldiers who haven’t gone AWOL. (But I hate guns and question authority, so I’d be a sucky soldier. And desert camo is, like, so not my color.)
We can’t leave yet; this I know. But we can establish a political dialogue, somehow, with all of the other countries Bush has pissed off and alienated. Iraq has oil, an interest for many countries, so that can be motivation #1. But oil or not they are not going to try to work with a man who doesn’t listen and does what he wants anyway, so a Bush apology would be motivation #2. But, obviously, this is a pipe dream. A little more peace in the Middle East can be motivation #3. Iraq’s conflict now is essentially a political one, so a political solution is needed. Really. A more realistic solution may be to call Mr. Peabody and jump in wayback machine and not invade Iraq at all. This would arguably be the most successful strategy.
Admitting we were wrong for invading Iraq would do more at this point to honor those who've died than to continue to send men and women to slaughter for lies, because any “good” reason for invading Iraq at this point will be believed a lie. This too is sucky.
Maybe tomorrow I'll wake up an Iraq will be stable, homes will have plumbing and electricity, Sunnis and Shiites will be working together on establishing a democracy, and the Iraqi army will be so well-trained, powerful, and fair that the so-called insurgents would take up knitting instead. Then I'll very, very gladly admit how wrong I was to doubt the Bush administration.
I’m glad the situation pisses my husband off. I’m glad I’m still pissed off. But I feel the lull of apathy setting in, and I wonder if it was this apathy that turned off my television last night instead of concern for my husband’s blood pressure.
But what can I do now? I can’t keep screaming: It’s not working! Start listening to the advice of others! My opinion is out there. The Bush administration knows how I feel—it’s echoed by many writers, lobbyists, Congress, and by more than half the country in polls. They don’t listen. The people who can actually change the situation aren’t listening. And the administration has put enough of “their people” into right positions so that all “news” we receive is Bush administration propaganda. Luckily, nobody believes it. Unluckily, they still get to decide and implement policy. My generation, American, Iraqi, and other, is being killed off because the Bush administration is too immature and selfish to admit they are wrong. And the soldiers are honorable enough to continue to serve this president, even if he serves only himself. Très frustrant.
I used to try to believe that the administration really did believe they were doing what was best. Even if it wasn’t working at the moment, they really did believe that the occupation would be good for both our country and for Iraq (although more for our well-being than for Iraq’s). Now I think they “stay the course” only because they don’t want the other side to be right, like an argument on the playground in fourth grade. In his speech last night (that I didn’t watch, obviously, but did read excerpts from, of course), Mr. Bush said the plan was evolving, that the “surge” is ending, that troops will be coming home, some big number by Christmas. The truth is (I learned on NPR this morning) all of these troops were scheduled to come home anyway, they just won’t be replaced now. Whoopee.
I suppose if I were a soldier, I would continue to do my duty in earnest hope that it would make a difference. As a citizen I guess I still garner some hope that this can happen, even in the mess we've made. I’d want to try to establish a healthy infrastructure for Iraq, train protective police forces, give their government time to get over their incompetence and get their act together. I’d have to believe this. I’d do it for my country, and my country is NOT my government. I admire all of the soldiers who haven’t gone AWOL. (But I hate guns and question authority, so I’d be a sucky soldier. And desert camo is, like, so not my color.)
We can’t leave yet; this I know. But we can establish a political dialogue, somehow, with all of the other countries Bush has pissed off and alienated. Iraq has oil, an interest for many countries, so that can be motivation #1. But oil or not they are not going to try to work with a man who doesn’t listen and does what he wants anyway, so a Bush apology would be motivation #2. But, obviously, this is a pipe dream. A little more peace in the Middle East can be motivation #3. Iraq’s conflict now is essentially a political one, so a political solution is needed. Really. A more realistic solution may be to call Mr. Peabody and jump in wayback machine and not invade Iraq at all. This would arguably be the most successful strategy.
Admitting we were wrong for invading Iraq would do more at this point to honor those who've died than to continue to send men and women to slaughter for lies, because any “good” reason for invading Iraq at this point will be believed a lie. This too is sucky.
Maybe tomorrow I'll wake up an Iraq will be stable, homes will have plumbing and electricity, Sunnis and Shiites will be working together on establishing a democracy, and the Iraqi army will be so well-trained, powerful, and fair that the so-called insurgents would take up knitting instead. Then I'll very, very gladly admit how wrong I was to doubt the Bush administration.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
The New England Cheetahs
(Sorry, I'm keeping the title.)
So far I’ve heard it called “Cameragate,” “Spygate,” “Videogate.” It’s all speculation now—nothing has been proven—but New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick did offer an apology yesterday “to everyone who has been affected” by his “interpretation of the rules.” A vague apology at best, with no clear admission of guilt, but the sports world has certainly addressed the hot topic of the Patriots being caught illegally videotaping the Jets play signals.
I’m not a Patriots fan. I skirted fandom when Drew Bledsoe was their quarterback (but only after Buffalo was totally out, of course), but with the departure of Drew my apathy toward Bill Belichick changed to dislike. Besides my distaste for Bill’s disrespectful sideline attire (he looks like he just woke up, and not in the hot Colin Farrell way), I in spite of myself respected his decision making and coaching abilities, even if he was wearing sloppy gray sweatpants. Perhaps his talent is the root of my dislike, since the Patriots are the Bills’ AFC East conference mates and we more often than not lose to them.
In the past couple years opposing teams have been amazed by the Patriots and the quarterback Tom Brady’s ability to read the defense and defy it. Players and fans alike have been astounded by New England’s superb play calling. Belichick has been called “genius.” The Patriots did their homework and were a worthy adversary.
Fortunately, unlike war and love, not all is fair. The NFL has rules, and is a strong proponent of “equal opportunity.” The salary cap, the draft process, the constant drug testing, all attempt to give each team and equal chance every season to make the Super Bowl. New England, like Dallas before them, has been so celebrated because winning a Super Bowl more than one year in a row is a difficult accomplishment (as is winning the AFC championship four years in a row, going to the Super Bowl four years in a row, but I digress). It’s more often the case that the team who won the Super Bowl the year before doesn’t even make the playoffs the year after. And in the NFL, you are not allowed to set up a spy camera on the opposite team's sidelines.
Unfortunately, the NFL has had a rough beginning to the season: the suspensions of Michael Vick, Pacman Jones, the Patriot’s own Rodney Harrison, Wade Wilson, etc. And the Bills lost their first game by one point (but on a happier note Kevin Everett’s doctors are convinced he’ll walk again). Now all-star coach Bill Belichick is caught cheating. Has he been doing it all along? What kind of anger will mount if this is the case?
How do you defend this? As a fan, how do you react to this?
Confusion and disappointment? This article is especially interesting since the writer points out that current Jets coach Eric Mangini was a former protégé of Belichick, a member of his inner circle, so who better to know Belichick’s tricks? Coincidence?
Shock? This one is especially important to read since the title, "A Big Fumble," is a sports metaphor.
One writer offers that Bill is the only one who has been caught. So goes the theory that he's the smartest coach in the league.
Here is an article that has compiled the opinions of many sports writers.
Tony Dungy, longtime Belichick rival, is currently mum on the topic. He’s a classy guy.
Even if the cheating can be proved for only this one time, won’t we always wonder? It’s unfortunate—and by unfortunate I mean stupid—for the Patriots if they truly have spied this one time, because we always will wonder. They’ve now tainted all they’ve earned.
I wonder how much the players knew.
So far I’ve heard it called “Cameragate,” “Spygate,” “Videogate.” It’s all speculation now—nothing has been proven—but New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick did offer an apology yesterday “to everyone who has been affected” by his “interpretation of the rules.” A vague apology at best, with no clear admission of guilt, but the sports world has certainly addressed the hot topic of the Patriots being caught illegally videotaping the Jets play signals.
I’m not a Patriots fan. I skirted fandom when Drew Bledsoe was their quarterback (but only after Buffalo was totally out, of course), but with the departure of Drew my apathy toward Bill Belichick changed to dislike. Besides my distaste for Bill’s disrespectful sideline attire (he looks like he just woke up, and not in the hot Colin Farrell way), I in spite of myself respected his decision making and coaching abilities, even if he was wearing sloppy gray sweatpants. Perhaps his talent is the root of my dislike, since the Patriots are the Bills’ AFC East conference mates and we more often than not lose to them.
In the past couple years opposing teams have been amazed by the Patriots and the quarterback Tom Brady’s ability to read the defense and defy it. Players and fans alike have been astounded by New England’s superb play calling. Belichick has been called “genius.” The Patriots did their homework and were a worthy adversary.
Fortunately, unlike war and love, not all is fair. The NFL has rules, and is a strong proponent of “equal opportunity.” The salary cap, the draft process, the constant drug testing, all attempt to give each team and equal chance every season to make the Super Bowl. New England, like Dallas before them, has been so celebrated because winning a Super Bowl more than one year in a row is a difficult accomplishment (as is winning the AFC championship four years in a row, going to the Super Bowl four years in a row, but I digress). It’s more often the case that the team who won the Super Bowl the year before doesn’t even make the playoffs the year after. And in the NFL, you are not allowed to set up a spy camera on the opposite team's sidelines.
Unfortunately, the NFL has had a rough beginning to the season: the suspensions of Michael Vick, Pacman Jones, the Patriot’s own Rodney Harrison, Wade Wilson, etc. And the Bills lost their first game by one point (but on a happier note Kevin Everett’s doctors are convinced he’ll walk again). Now all-star coach Bill Belichick is caught cheating. Has he been doing it all along? What kind of anger will mount if this is the case?
How do you defend this? As a fan, how do you react to this?
Confusion and disappointment? This article is especially interesting since the writer points out that current Jets coach Eric Mangini was a former protégé of Belichick, a member of his inner circle, so who better to know Belichick’s tricks? Coincidence?
Shock? This one is especially important to read since the title, "A Big Fumble," is a sports metaphor.
One writer offers that Bill is the only one who has been caught. So goes the theory that he's the smartest coach in the league.
Here is an article that has compiled the opinions of many sports writers.
Tony Dungy, longtime Belichick rival, is currently mum on the topic. He’s a classy guy.
Even if the cheating can be proved for only this one time, won’t we always wonder? It’s unfortunate—and by unfortunate I mean stupid—for the Patriots if they truly have spied this one time, because we always will wonder. They’ve now tainted all they’ve earned.
I wonder how much the players knew.
Monday, August 27, 2007
Spin Doctor Needed
Roberto Gonzales is resigning. The press conference is happening this morning. I can't wait to hear why....My money is on: "Because you guys just keep bugging and bugging me I am unable to do my job."
Copyediting alert: I'm guessing Charles Schumer said that the justice department needs new leadership, not readership. (And delete the extra "announced.")
Reuters has offered up some Gonzales facts here. It's a bullet list. Enjoy.
Copyediting alert: I'm guessing Charles Schumer said that the justice department needs new leadership, not readership. (And delete the extra "announced.")
Reuters has offered up some Gonzales facts here. It's a bullet list. Enjoy.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Who is to blame?
(Besides Canada.)
The latest news I've read on products from China being recalled is pseudo-recall by Wal-Mart of a few dog treats and pseudo-recall by Toys 'R' Us of a some baby bibs. These aren't official recalls; both companies are "just checking." In addition, New Zealand has begun officially recalling some clothing products imported from China for containing poisonous levels of formaldehyde. Following Thomas the Tank Engine, Barbie and Polly Pocket (among others) can now give you lead poisoning. Toothpaste, tires, space heaters, lamps, chairs, and dog food all make the list as well, but this is old news. What's next?
To whom do I direct my anger? China for being cruel and greedy? The U.S. importers for being cruel and greedy? Did the government drop the ball, or is this oversight the responsibility of private manufacturers, buyers, distributors, and sellers? I'm going with China first, because we all know they know better. Then with the U.S. importers because obviously the toys etc. were cheaper for a reason. And Merry Christmas kids: at least 70 percent of the toys in U.S. stores are made in China (a Forbes article has this a 80 percent).
How embarrassing for China, who has launched a campaign to redeem themselves (my favorite defense regarding the Mattel recall being "well, no one got hurt"). How embarrassing for the company who sold the toys. What shameful ways to make a profit.
This special report by BusinessWeek highlights some of the most recent recalls. You may want to double-check that you aren't currently using any of these products.
Ugh. Sometimes I'm so ashamed to be a human.
The latest news I've read on products from China being recalled is pseudo-recall by Wal-Mart of a few dog treats and pseudo-recall by Toys 'R' Us of a some baby bibs. These aren't official recalls; both companies are "just checking." In addition, New Zealand has begun officially recalling some clothing products imported from China for containing poisonous levels of formaldehyde. Following Thomas the Tank Engine, Barbie and Polly Pocket (among others) can now give you lead poisoning. Toothpaste, tires, space heaters, lamps, chairs, and dog food all make the list as well, but this is old news. What's next?
To whom do I direct my anger? China for being cruel and greedy? The U.S. importers for being cruel and greedy? Did the government drop the ball, or is this oversight the responsibility of private manufacturers, buyers, distributors, and sellers? I'm going with China first, because we all know they know better. Then with the U.S. importers because obviously the toys etc. were cheaper for a reason. And Merry Christmas kids: at least 70 percent of the toys in U.S. stores are made in China (a Forbes article has this a 80 percent).
How embarrassing for China, who has launched a campaign to redeem themselves (my favorite defense regarding the Mattel recall being "well, no one got hurt"). How embarrassing for the company who sold the toys. What shameful ways to make a profit.
This special report by BusinessWeek highlights some of the most recent recalls. You may want to double-check that you aren't currently using any of these products.
Ugh. Sometimes I'm so ashamed to be a human.
Monday, August 13, 2007
This horn I'm tooting? Yeah, it's mine.
As the appointed "convener" of the BishBash 2007 I get to take credit as "leader" of the event. Although, as anyone who attended the event could see, many people did a whole lot of work and it was truly a team effort--someone just needed the head title for answering questions and taking blame :-)
The planning committee worked on BishBash from September/October 2006 until the event in July. Even with all of the late registrations and last-minute potato chip buying, everything was ready and together for the day of the event. Some people even dared to call the event organized. So I'm shamelessly taking pride in BishBash 2007, planned and executed by young adults (and the bishop of course). Anyone who helped should toot their horns too.
Here are some photos from the day and an article written on the Conference Web site. I'm quoted in the article, and sound super flaky (so don't worry: humility is balancing out my pride).
BishBash article
BishBash photos
BishBash photos
P.S. Maybe some, just some, credit should go to GOD.
The planning committee worked on BishBash from September/October 2006 until the event in July. Even with all of the late registrations and last-minute potato chip buying, everything was ready and together for the day of the event. Some people even dared to call the event organized. So I'm shamelessly taking pride in BishBash 2007, planned and executed by young adults (and the bishop of course). Anyone who helped should toot their horns too.
Here are some photos from the day and an article written on the Conference Web site. I'm quoted in the article, and sound super flaky (so don't worry: humility is balancing out my pride).
BishBash article
BishBash photos
BishBash photos
P.S. Maybe some, just some, credit should go to GOD.
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
What I just learned:
Bed-and-breakfast is spelled with hyphens.
It never occurred to me to look it up before, but this morning I wanted to see if the abbreviation, B&B, had spaces. (For example, R & D, research and development, should be spelled with spaces between the characters.) I learned that neither B&B nor B & B is in Webster's, but "b and b" is, so I concluded that the abbreviation needed spaces. When I looked at the definition of "b and b" I noticed the hyphens in bed-and-breakfast, looked it up, and learned something new.
Now you maybe have too. Use this knowledge to impress others. You're welcome.
It never occurred to me to look it up before, but this morning I wanted to see if the abbreviation, B&B, had spaces. (For example, R & D, research and development, should be spelled with spaces between the characters.) I learned that neither B&B nor B & B is in Webster's, but "b and b" is, so I concluded that the abbreviation needed spaces. When I looked at the definition of "b and b" I noticed the hyphens in bed-and-breakfast, looked it up, and learned something new.
Now you maybe have too. Use this knowledge to impress others. You're welcome.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
One year
Last night my husband and I shared a piece of the top of our wedding cake and watched our reception video, for the first time (I'm still not ready to watch the ceremony). As I had already concluded from still pictures, my bridesmaids' bouquets and my hair were twice the size I wanted them to be, and I probably should have told the groom to have the groomsmen wear black vests instead of green so they weren't so matchy-matchy weddingy (since renting tuxes was cheaper than having the boys buy suits, even if tuxes were more formal than we wanted). And I'd do the invitations differently. That's what I'd change about the day, a year later--well, except for maybe eloping in the French Quarter as was my original plan.
We realized the best way to include our friends and family would be to have a traditional wedding. In a church (ruling out informal wedding party attire, we felt, out of respect). With a reception at a place where others did the work (ruling out the backyard picnic idea). Even our honeymoon plans changed from "hop in the car and just drive" to "stay in one spot all week," because by the time it was all said and done, the less decisions that had to be made the better.
I didn't give a crap about anything, really, on the wedding day itself: I just wanted to get married and then go have a party with my friends and family. It bothers me that I'm bothered now by the hair and flowers and formality, but I think this is because it's the wedding that everyone else reviews and scrutinizes and holds for posterity. The wedding does not matter. The vows very much matter, the promises very much matter, thanking your friends and family for their support very much matters; all the other stuff is just expensive fluff (on which conversations will be had forever).
And the pictures are nice, even if your hair is way too stiff and poofy. And even if everyone looks too much like they are in a wedding.
We realized the best way to include our friends and family would be to have a traditional wedding. In a church (ruling out informal wedding party attire, we felt, out of respect). With a reception at a place where others did the work (ruling out the backyard picnic idea). Even our honeymoon plans changed from "hop in the car and just drive" to "stay in one spot all week," because by the time it was all said and done, the less decisions that had to be made the better.
I didn't give a crap about anything, really, on the wedding day itself: I just wanted to get married and then go have a party with my friends and family. It bothers me that I'm bothered now by the hair and flowers and formality, but I think this is because it's the wedding that everyone else reviews and scrutinizes and holds for posterity. The wedding does not matter. The vows very much matter, the promises very much matter, thanking your friends and family for their support very much matters; all the other stuff is just expensive fluff (on which conversations will be had forever).
And the pictures are nice, even if your hair is way too stiff and poofy. And even if everyone looks too much like they are in a wedding.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Happy birthday Henry!
Today is Henry David Thoreau's (190th) birthday. It was at my age, 27, that Thoreau began his stay at Walden pond. After a week away at camp, I can see the appeal.
So happy birthday Henry.
Everyone celebrate it well: Plant a bean field, watch ants, play with loons, take a walk, write in a journal, babysit for a famous writer, have your aunt bail you out of jail, make a pun, sit alone on a pumpkin, live deliberately.
So happy birthday Henry.
Everyone celebrate it well: Plant a bean field, watch ants, play with loons, take a walk, write in a journal, babysit for a famous writer, have your aunt bail you out of jail, make a pun, sit alone on a pumpkin, live deliberately.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Spicy
I spent all of last week counseling junior high camp at Sky Lake. This camp was Reality Camp, with each day's theme and evening competition relating to (1) a reality television show and (2) a real-life reality, such as poverty, hunger, immigration, war, slavery, etc. (Side note: Don't worry, this is not an attempt at a profound diatribe; it's okay to keep reading.) During our rendition of America's Got Talent, my group sang their camp version of the Spice Girls' "Wannabe." They did such a great job with this song that I'm posting their lyrics here. (Another side note: Many camp-specific references are made in the song, but those of you who haven't been to camp at Sky Lake will get the gist I'm sure...and you can ask me--I'll gladly share.)
So you want my pigtails?
Remember your bag.
We don’t lose our points
’cause we got our tags.
Now don’t go wastin’ my swim time.
Send Methusala to East Shore and we’ll be just fine
So tell me whatcha want whatcha really, really want.
I’ll tell you what I want what I really, really want:
I wanna huh! I wanna huh! I wanna huh! I wanna huh!
I wanna really, really, really wanna zoomy zoomy ahh.
Chorus
If you wanna be a raspberry,
you gotta become a spice.
We live in cabin A5,
and it is wicked nice!
(Repeat)
So whatcha think about horders?
Orange knows how it feels.
You say that salt warms butter—
are you for real?
Now do be hasty; get to breakfast on time.
’Cause if you don’t then two points will say good-bye.
So tell me whatcha want whatcha really, really want.
I’ll tell you what I want what I really, really want:
I wanna huh! I wanna huh! I wanna huh! I wanna huh!
I wanna really, really, really wanna zoomy zoomy ahh.
(Chorus)
Now here’s a story from West to East.
You wanna be a raz you gotta listen carefully.
We got J by the can who loves Superman.
We got R who doesn’t stop ’cause she wants her lemon drops.
We got T by the lake who is afraid of snakes.
We got K in the sand filling up the can.
We got A in the path making everybody laugh.
(Pause)
Uhh, I’m T, and I like tots. ’Cause they’re Amurican.
Grab your buddy’s hand and raise it in the air!
It’s a buddy check so wave ’em everywhere!
(Chorus)
P.S. We won the talent show.
P.P.S. During huh! the girls made the huh! game arm movements. It was awesome.
P.P.P.S. The only lyrics I contributed were "We live in cabin A5, and it is wicked nice." Moving, I know. The girls did all of the rest. Cheers to them.
So you want my pigtails?
Remember your bag.
We don’t lose our points
’cause we got our tags.
Now don’t go wastin’ my swim time.
Send Methusala to East Shore and we’ll be just fine
So tell me whatcha want whatcha really, really want.
I’ll tell you what I want what I really, really want:
I wanna huh! I wanna huh! I wanna huh! I wanna huh!
I wanna really, really, really wanna zoomy zoomy ahh.
Chorus
If you wanna be a raspberry,
you gotta become a spice.
We live in cabin A5,
and it is wicked nice!
(Repeat)
So whatcha think about horders?
Orange knows how it feels.
You say that salt warms butter—
are you for real?
Now do be hasty; get to breakfast on time.
’Cause if you don’t then two points will say good-bye.
So tell me whatcha want whatcha really, really want.
I’ll tell you what I want what I really, really want:
I wanna huh! I wanna huh! I wanna huh! I wanna huh!
I wanna really, really, really wanna zoomy zoomy ahh.
(Chorus)
Now here’s a story from West to East.
You wanna be a raz you gotta listen carefully.
We got J by the can who loves Superman.
We got R who doesn’t stop ’cause she wants her lemon drops.
We got T by the lake who is afraid of snakes.
We got K in the sand filling up the can.
We got A in the path making everybody laugh.
(Pause)
Uhh, I’m T, and I like tots. ’Cause they’re Amurican.
Grab your buddy’s hand and raise it in the air!
It’s a buddy check so wave ’em everywhere!
(Chorus)
P.S. We won the talent show.
P.P.S. During huh! the girls made the huh! game arm movements. It was awesome.
P.P.P.S. The only lyrics I contributed were "We live in cabin A5, and it is wicked nice." Moving, I know. The girls did all of the rest. Cheers to them.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
My College on a Hill
This is a simple story, really, in which nobody was seriously hurt, thankfully. It does concern my college that is set on a hill. I've been trying to come up with something funny regarding "higher learning" for about the past minute and a half, but I could not. Let me know if you do.
My college is currently renovating parts of the library, involving work that requires a wrecking ball. Well, the wrecking ball cable snapped, and the huge, round chunk of metal pinballed down North Main Street, hitting parked cars and eventually landing in the trunk of an Allegheny junior. The domino effect turned this into a four-car accident. As I said, everyone is so far okay.
I have not included a link to this story, because I want you to look it up on Google News. Type in "Meadville, PA," then click on "see all stories." Here are some of the headlines:
"Escaped Wrecking Ball at Allegheny College Goes to Town"
"Wrecking Ball Wreck"
"Wrecking Ball Comes Loose and Does What It's Designed to Do"
"Meadville Mishap Defines Wrecking Ball"
The third one listed is my favorite. Notice too how many Australian news outlets covered the story. I have no theories regarding this...I just thought it was interesting. Enjoy your Google.
My college is currently renovating parts of the library, involving work that requires a wrecking ball. Well, the wrecking ball cable snapped, and the huge, round chunk of metal pinballed down North Main Street, hitting parked cars and eventually landing in the trunk of an Allegheny junior. The domino effect turned this into a four-car accident. As I said, everyone is so far okay.
I have not included a link to this story, because I want you to look it up on Google News. Type in "Meadville, PA," then click on "see all stories." Here are some of the headlines:
"Escaped Wrecking Ball at Allegheny College Goes to Town"
"Wrecking Ball Wreck"
"Wrecking Ball Comes Loose and Does What It's Designed to Do"
"Meadville Mishap Defines Wrecking Ball"
The third one listed is my favorite. Notice too how many Australian news outlets covered the story. I have no theories regarding this...I just thought it was interesting. Enjoy your Google.
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Hey! I'm sweaty!
It's going to be in the low 90s at the baseball game tonight.
Haze hung on the hills as I drove to work at 7:00 a.m.
This is what I've been looking forward to.
My hair is going to look so bad.
I love summer.
Haze hung on the hills as I drove to work at 7:00 a.m.
This is what I've been looking forward to.
My hair is going to look so bad.
I love summer.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
E6
Through the thick, hazy glass the book editor spied the yellow bag, whose colorful contents she knew would make the day's final chapter easier to read. She placed dimes and nickels in a fitted slit until through the dirty plastic screen above a red number 70, the high yet magic number needed to extract the yellow bag, shown.
It was time to press the item's letter-number combination, time to press the two slick buttons that would release the yellow bag from its hypnotizing captor. It was then the editor noticed that the bag's edge hung below the sticker below the bag that indicated what the letter and number were. A brief and necessary panic hit her chest: I can't see the combination!
But before looking at the items on either side of the yellow bag to determine the bag's combination, she let her hand raise, unrestricted, to the rows of letters and numbers on the right side of the machine. Only half aware of what was pressed she watched in subdued excitement as the yellow bag twisted free and fell with a chunk to the cavity below.
She retrieved the yellow bag and consumed its contents in spite of the tacos and dirt Kevin would be serving two hours later. The tacos were just a dream, and a dream can't get you through bland and obsure reports on the status of the hospitality industry around the world. But candy can. Peanuts covered in chocolate and decorated with a candy shell can. Kevin will forgive her. And she'll still eat a taco.
It was time to press the item's letter-number combination, time to press the two slick buttons that would release the yellow bag from its hypnotizing captor. It was then the editor noticed that the bag's edge hung below the sticker below the bag that indicated what the letter and number were. A brief and necessary panic hit her chest: I can't see the combination!
But before looking at the items on either side of the yellow bag to determine the bag's combination, she let her hand raise, unrestricted, to the rows of letters and numbers on the right side of the machine. Only half aware of what was pressed she watched in subdued excitement as the yellow bag twisted free and fell with a chunk to the cavity below.
She retrieved the yellow bag and consumed its contents in spite of the tacos and dirt Kevin would be serving two hours later. The tacos were just a dream, and a dream can't get you through bland and obsure reports on the status of the hospitality industry around the world. But candy can. Peanuts covered in chocolate and decorated with a candy shell can. Kevin will forgive her. And she'll still eat a taco.
The Most Wonderful Time of the Year
In my passenger seat sits sunblock, a pair of sunglasses, a Keith Urban CD, and a parking stub from a B-Mets game. I can smell the baby powder of my deodorant, and light brown dust has settled on my dashboard from too many constructions zones driven through with a rolled down window.
It's summer.
It's summer.
Friday, June 15, 2007
Jesus forgot to get a green card.
When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him. The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.
Leviticus 19:33-34 (NIV)
Ye "Christians" of immigration reform, heed this teaching before thou beist a-holes.
(Imagine you were the immigrant. Just a thought. Maybe then you'd start working toward making immigration into our country less necessary; this means making the world better for everyone, everywhere. I know, wtf. How un-American of me. Fortunately, despite David Bowie's claim, God is not an American--we just think he is.)
Leviticus 19:33-34 (NIV)
Ye "Christians" of immigration reform, heed this teaching before thou beist a-holes.
(Imagine you were the immigrant. Just a thought. Maybe then you'd start working toward making immigration into our country less necessary; this means making the world better for everyone, everywhere. I know, wtf. How un-American of me. Fortunately, despite David Bowie's claim, God is not an American--we just think he is.)
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Pencil lead, eraser shavings, and cracker crumbs
I just spent the past hour cleaning my computer keyboard, popping off each key and Clorox wiping it. Then I disinfected the cavity below. I just wanted my accomplishment of this worthy task recorded in writing.
When I reached the L key, NPR began a story about putting your keyboard in the dishwasher; Morning Edition and I are so in sync. Apparently putting your keyboard in the dishwasher is all the rage now, except with anyone who knows anything about computers. "Short circuiting" I think I heard the Microsoft employee say in the report (and unfortunately not regarding the awesome Steve Guttenberg movies).
However, if I've just given you an idea you can't possibly resist, you can buy waterproof keyboards from a company called Seal Shield. The company sells mostly to hospitals, for understandable reasons, but that "dishwasher safe" now appears on the keyboard's box leads me to believe the company intends a general market appeal. But if you don't want to buy a $50+ keyboard, and still want to put your keyboard in the dishwasher, the two people in the piece who had dishwashered their board report that the keyboard still functions.
Though I doubt it's far less satisfying than popping keys out and putting them back on.
When I reached the L key, NPR began a story about putting your keyboard in the dishwasher; Morning Edition and I are so in sync. Apparently putting your keyboard in the dishwasher is all the rage now, except with anyone who knows anything about computers. "Short circuiting" I think I heard the Microsoft employee say in the report (and unfortunately not regarding the awesome Steve Guttenberg movies).
However, if I've just given you an idea you can't possibly resist, you can buy waterproof keyboards from a company called Seal Shield. The company sells mostly to hospitals, for understandable reasons, but that "dishwasher safe" now appears on the keyboard's box leads me to believe the company intends a general market appeal. But if you don't want to buy a $50+ keyboard, and still want to put your keyboard in the dishwasher, the two people in the piece who had dishwashered their board report that the keyboard still functions.
Though I doubt it's far less satisfying than popping keys out and putting them back on.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
It's summer: don't forget your parka.
I'm about to blog on a subject of great importance: air-conditioning.
It is currently 73 degrees Fahrenheit outside, a dream temperature that weatherpersons dare to call comfortable. But holy crap the office has air-conditioning, so it must be on, and set at "blast."
First of all, I kind of hate air-conditioning. It's artificial, dry, wasteful, selfish, harmful, and often unneccesary in most circumstances in central New York. I recognize the instances in which it is necessary (nursing homes, hospitals, large gatherings of people, etc.), but by necessary I do not mean set at 57 degrees in every standing building from May 15 to October 15. Who is comfortable at 57 degrees anyway? The exceptions, that's who, so why the heck do we make this the rule? Why make ourselves cold when we do not have to be? I'll let you all in on a little secret: we control the level of air-conditioning. Unlike the weather, all we have to do is press the "off" button if we want to stop shivering in July. Let the revolution begin!
Rarely do truly hot days occur in this area of the world. When they do, you have my permission to turn on the air-conditioning. In fact, I may thank you for it, but I'm really okay with being a little warm. When it's in the 70s, and even low 80s, just turn the darn fan on (and save energy, and money, and your soul). Maybe dress as if it were warm? Such clothing is sold. Let the revolution continue!
I wish I was being facetious about my anger, but I'm not. I like being warm (and even hot and sweaty has its moments), so in the bloody summer why do I have to wear winter clothing to work/grocery store/movie theater/theater/book store/coffeeshop/restaurant? Feel free to join the revolution.
It is currently 73 degrees Fahrenheit outside, a dream temperature that weatherpersons dare to call comfortable. But holy crap the office has air-conditioning, so it must be on, and set at "blast."
First of all, I kind of hate air-conditioning. It's artificial, dry, wasteful, selfish, harmful, and often unneccesary in most circumstances in central New York. I recognize the instances in which it is necessary (nursing homes, hospitals, large gatherings of people, etc.), but by necessary I do not mean set at 57 degrees in every standing building from May 15 to October 15. Who is comfortable at 57 degrees anyway? The exceptions, that's who, so why the heck do we make this the rule? Why make ourselves cold when we do not have to be? I'll let you all in on a little secret: we control the level of air-conditioning. Unlike the weather, all we have to do is press the "off" button if we want to stop shivering in July. Let the revolution begin!
Rarely do truly hot days occur in this area of the world. When they do, you have my permission to turn on the air-conditioning. In fact, I may thank you for it, but I'm really okay with being a little warm. When it's in the 70s, and even low 80s, just turn the darn fan on (and save energy, and money, and your soul). Maybe dress as if it were warm? Such clothing is sold. Let the revolution continue!
I wish I was being facetious about my anger, but I'm not. I like being warm (and even hot and sweaty has its moments), so in the bloody summer why do I have to wear winter clothing to work/grocery store/movie theater/theater/book store/coffeeshop/restaurant? Feel free to join the revolution.
Friday, June 08, 2007
They made a statue of us.
My husband and I were watching Studio 60 last night (apparently NBC is airing new episodes on Thursday nights?), and a continuing plot point is that the characters Matt and Harriet should be together, with constant flashbacks to their history to help prove the point. The key word here is history.
It’s a common tool in art and life to rely on the past to determine the present, especially regarding relationships. But shouldn’t determining who you are meant to be with be focused more on the future? Having a “history” with someone is a poor measurement on which to base a relationship. Before you indulge in previous good times and kind acts, think: Why are we not together now? (Some may offer the advice, “think of all the bad times and what you hated about him/her,” but this is crap, because all relationships have bad times and annoying habits. I offer instead that you figure out why you couldn’t get past them the first [second, third, etc.] time around. It’s not the bad times that are to blame, it’s the coupling of the people.)
Every situation is relative, and I’m not talking about the growing pains of young love. You two may truly be “meant to be” at a later time, but meant to be occurs in the moment, and it isn’t up to your control, so if a real relationship with the past person occurs again, I guarantee it won’t be based on the past (if it is, be prepared to break up), you’ll be different (if you aren’t, be prepared to break up), and the relationship will be wholly new (if it isn’t—you guessed it—be prepared to break up). It is easy to think, hey, with all this crap it must be love. It's not. History is history for a reason.
Thank God my husband and I didn’t have “history.” We didn’t even know each other when we first kissed, but we knew that from that moment on it would be impossible to live separate lives. I’ve watched Gone with the Wind, I’ve watched The Notebook and Sweet Home Alabama, so how could this guy possibly be the One if we didn’t have a history? We hadn’t played any mind games. We hadn’t used or tested each other. I hadn’t broken his heart just to make sure I could. How could the love of my life be a man I had never ridiculously, incredibly hurt? Pardon my lapse into drama, but I’d rather die than do any of those things to my husband.
So my point, if I even have one, is to say love really isn't, or doesn't have to be, as complicated as Dawson's Creek or Ross and Rachel. As for Matt and Harriet, I think they're in love with being in love but broken up. That's a whole other issue. Hopefully real love comes and saves them.
It’s a common tool in art and life to rely on the past to determine the present, especially regarding relationships. But shouldn’t determining who you are meant to be with be focused more on the future? Having a “history” with someone is a poor measurement on which to base a relationship. Before you indulge in previous good times and kind acts, think: Why are we not together now? (Some may offer the advice, “think of all the bad times and what you hated about him/her,” but this is crap, because all relationships have bad times and annoying habits. I offer instead that you figure out why you couldn’t get past them the first [second, third, etc.] time around. It’s not the bad times that are to blame, it’s the coupling of the people.)
Every situation is relative, and I’m not talking about the growing pains of young love. You two may truly be “meant to be” at a later time, but meant to be occurs in the moment, and it isn’t up to your control, so if a real relationship with the past person occurs again, I guarantee it won’t be based on the past (if it is, be prepared to break up), you’ll be different (if you aren’t, be prepared to break up), and the relationship will be wholly new (if it isn’t—you guessed it—be prepared to break up). It is easy to think, hey, with all this crap it must be love. It's not. History is history for a reason.
Thank God my husband and I didn’t have “history.” We didn’t even know each other when we first kissed, but we knew that from that moment on it would be impossible to live separate lives. I’ve watched Gone with the Wind, I’ve watched The Notebook and Sweet Home Alabama, so how could this guy possibly be the One if we didn’t have a history? We hadn’t played any mind games. We hadn’t used or tested each other. I hadn’t broken his heart just to make sure I could. How could the love of my life be a man I had never ridiculously, incredibly hurt? Pardon my lapse into drama, but I’d rather die than do any of those things to my husband.
So my point, if I even have one, is to say love really isn't, or doesn't have to be, as complicated as Dawson's Creek or Ross and Rachel. As for Matt and Harriet, I think they're in love with being in love but broken up. That's a whole other issue. Hopefully real love comes and saves them.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
The Opposite of Faith
As I sat perfectly dull and unuseful on the lifeguard's dock this past Memorial Day (don't worry, I wasn't lifeguarding), the John Andrewses with Eliza in tow pulled up alongside the dock and waited for my husband to deboat them. While waiting the elder John asked me, "What would you say the opposite of faith is?" Because I think I'm just so darn witty and I know what non does to a word, I replied, "Nonfaith." I knew better, but I couldn't help myself. "Nope," John confirmed. The only other words I could think of were disbelief, apathy, and hate, so knowing I wasn't going to come up with the answer he was looking for, I said, "Well, there are a lot of dumb words I'm thinking of..." (perhaps it's not fair to call the words dumb), trailing off so that the answer could instead be given to me. (Admitting a lack of smartness seems a better option than proving it.) As hoped, John gave me the answer: certitude. How can you have faith if you know?
(He gave a few examples of people who knew and yet claimed to have faith--our Tinky-Winky loving friend was one.) So certitude it is. A professor had told John this once, and I'm glad he in turn told it to me. The whole point of faith is not knowing; belief is strong but certitude is final. John went on to talk about 1 Corinthians 13:13: "And now these three remain: Faith, hope, and love. But the greatest of these is love." He explained that when humans reach of point of heaven faith and hope will have been fulfilled, but love will still remain, thus making it the greatest. Love can coexist even with certitude.
I'm glad my lazy sunblocked self was finishing a book while the Andrewses decided to go boating. So I'm sharing, and hoping that by sharing I don't forget to share these tidbits in the future.
(He gave a few examples of people who knew and yet claimed to have faith--our Tinky-Winky loving friend was one.) So certitude it is. A professor had told John this once, and I'm glad he in turn told it to me. The whole point of faith is not knowing; belief is strong but certitude is final. John went on to talk about 1 Corinthians 13:13: "And now these three remain: Faith, hope, and love. But the greatest of these is love." He explained that when humans reach of point of heaven faith and hope will have been fulfilled, but love will still remain, thus making it the greatest. Love can coexist even with certitude.
I'm glad my lazy sunblocked self was finishing a book while the Andrewses decided to go boating. So I'm sharing, and hoping that by sharing I don't forget to share these tidbits in the future.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Do you need me to make you a mix tape?
Tonight is the season finale of LOST. I'm very excited for this forthcoming two hours of my life. It is sure to be a life-changing event.That is all.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
By the way, NBC
I was a happy girl this past Saturday to be able to watch game five of the NHL Eastern Conference playoffs. In an effort to save money to pay for our B-Mets season tickets, we have only thirteen cable channels (plus National Geographic channel that comes in on channel 75), which means we do not get Versus, the network on which most of the hockey playoff games have been shown. It was not an easy prioritization process, but dollar hot dogs, kiss cam, and the spiedie race won out over cable. And we have friends with cable. But back to my story.
I listened to the first four games of round 3 on Internet radio, which is a very nice option to have, but it's just not the same as seeing the boys' bearded faces on the TV screen. On Saturday afternoon, thanks to NBC, I got to watch the game. Schubie, Patrick, Antoine--whose faces I once oft encountered at Wegman's and Uncle Tony's--appeared before me once again in all their Senatorial glory. (Even Daniel Alfredsson was a participant in a conversation between Stacy, Matt, me, Antoine, and Martin Havlat, on the sidewalk by the Holiday Inn-Arena, about wearing skirts. FYI: Martin is pro-skirt. Such occurrences are why I love having minor league sports teams in my town. But I digress. Again.)
Bad reffing aside, the game was a nail-biter. The score at the end of the game was 2-2, so once again Ottawa and Buffalo were heading into overtime. I would be attending a minor-league (of course) baseball game in Syracuse on Saturday night, so this break between regulation and OT was the perfect time to drive to our friends' apartment where we were meeting before the baseball game. Right before we turned our TV off we heard NBC tell us that they would be leaving the playoff game to cover hours of prerace Preakness. NBC would maintain coverage in Buffalo, but everyone else was SOL. At this point the series was 3-1 Ottawa: if Ottawa won the game in this seven-game series, they'd be going to the Stanley Cup finals; if Buffalo lost, they were eliminated. So the game was kind of a big deal. But apparently not as big a deal as talking about a horse race.
The Preakness is a big event; I am not belittling it, but I don't think it would have killed NBC to be a little late in getting to the prerace coverage. And I think it's safe to assume most regular folks would prefer playoff hockey (although this is not based on any published research, so don't quote me). And not all hockey fans have cable and/or Internet, so what were they to do? I couldn't find the game coverage on local radio stations, since the Mets were playing/beating the Yankees on more than one station. So, finally, my point: NBC, you are very lucky my friends had Versus at their apartment on which I could watch Ottawa WIN in overtime, and you are lucky that I had independent plans on going over there, or you would have received a dreaded strongly worded letter. I'm sorry if this makes you lose sleep at night, but it had to be said.
However, if you would like to write a strongly worded letter to NBC, here's some addresses:
nbcsports@nbcuni.com
NBC Universal
100 Universal City Plaza
Universal City, CA 91608
I listened to the first four games of round 3 on Internet radio, which is a very nice option to have, but it's just not the same as seeing the boys' bearded faces on the TV screen. On Saturday afternoon, thanks to NBC, I got to watch the game. Schubie, Patrick, Antoine--whose faces I once oft encountered at Wegman's and Uncle Tony's--appeared before me once again in all their Senatorial glory. (Even Daniel Alfredsson was a participant in a conversation between Stacy, Matt, me, Antoine, and Martin Havlat, on the sidewalk by the Holiday Inn-Arena, about wearing skirts. FYI: Martin is pro-skirt. Such occurrences are why I love having minor league sports teams in my town. But I digress. Again.)
Bad reffing aside, the game was a nail-biter. The score at the end of the game was 2-2, so once again Ottawa and Buffalo were heading into overtime. I would be attending a minor-league (of course) baseball game in Syracuse on Saturday night, so this break between regulation and OT was the perfect time to drive to our friends' apartment where we were meeting before the baseball game. Right before we turned our TV off we heard NBC tell us that they would be leaving the playoff game to cover hours of prerace Preakness. NBC would maintain coverage in Buffalo, but everyone else was SOL. At this point the series was 3-1 Ottawa: if Ottawa won the game in this seven-game series, they'd be going to the Stanley Cup finals; if Buffalo lost, they were eliminated. So the game was kind of a big deal. But apparently not as big a deal as talking about a horse race.
The Preakness is a big event; I am not belittling it, but I don't think it would have killed NBC to be a little late in getting to the prerace coverage. And I think it's safe to assume most regular folks would prefer playoff hockey (although this is not based on any published research, so don't quote me). And not all hockey fans have cable and/or Internet, so what were they to do? I couldn't find the game coverage on local radio stations, since the Mets were playing/beating the Yankees on more than one station. So, finally, my point: NBC, you are very lucky my friends had Versus at their apartment on which I could watch Ottawa WIN in overtime, and you are lucky that I had independent plans on going over there, or you would have received a dreaded strongly worded letter. I'm sorry if this makes you lose sleep at night, but it had to be said.
However, if you would like to write a strongly worded letter to NBC, here's some addresses:
nbcsports@nbcuni.com
NBC Universal
100 Universal City Plaza
Universal City, CA 91608
Monday, May 21, 2007
Ain't no party like a Scranton party
Scranton, PA, Binghamton's brother from another mother (or perhaps the same mother, just another daddy), is hosting The Office Convention this October. Apparently, tourism to the Electric City has increased since Dunder-Mifflin had its television debut, and the time has come for all (of us) Office crazies to save our Shrute bucks and convention (don't forget the black light)! Check out the Web site here: http://www.theofficeconvention.com/about/
Will I be making the hour trek to Scranton for something other than the Wyoming Annual Conference this year? It's wonderfully tempting. Maybe we can road trip and moon one another. I have cruise control.
Will I be making the hour trek to Scranton for something other than the Wyoming Annual Conference this year? It's wonderfully tempting. Maybe we can road trip and moon one another. I have cruise control.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Gooder writing tip #8
I haven't posted on of these in awhile, and I know your life has suffered for it.
So today's topic is less versus fewer.
Perhaps the most predominant misuse of the word less occurs in grocery stores, in the popular express lanes allowing your use of the lane as long as the items you have do not exceed a certain number. If you're like me, and I know you are, it takes all your strength to put your Bagel Bites and coffee on the checkout counter under the sign that reads "7 items or less" without telling someone, anyone, that "less" should be "fewer."
Despite that pointing this out to my line mates and cashier would make me many instant friends and love interests (you know you would want to make out with me immediately), I have never done so. But it doesn't mean I won't celebrate when I see a correct sign, such as the signs used by Whole Foods, this particlar sign hanging in Whole Foods on Bowery in NYC:
Cheers to you Whole Foods.
(Update: Wegman's uses "fewer" too. I did not mean to neglect my local grocery store.)
Now explanation.
Both less and fewer mean the opposite of more, so it's easy to confuse them, but they are used in different instances: less for "not as much," and fewer for "not as many." Less is used with mass nouns, and fewer is used with count nouns.
What is a mass noun? A plural entity that cannot be counted.
What is a count noun? A plural entity that can be counted.
So, if you can count it (glasses, blankets, crackers, cheese cubes) use fewer.
If you cannot count it (water, love, sun, wine), use less.
The second beach we went to had less sand and fewer lifeguards.
The small cart had less space than the large cart, so I put in fewer items.
Exceptions (because you know they exist): less is used with money, distance, and time.
Jack Lynch, an associate professor of English at Rutgers University has an online style guide, and discusses this topic here.
And of course I recommend Grammar Girl's explanation.
And you're welcome.
So today's topic is less versus fewer.
Perhaps the most predominant misuse of the word less occurs in grocery stores, in the popular express lanes allowing your use of the lane as long as the items you have do not exceed a certain number. If you're like me, and I know you are, it takes all your strength to put your Bagel Bites and coffee on the checkout counter under the sign that reads "7 items or less" without telling someone, anyone, that "less" should be "fewer."
Despite that pointing this out to my line mates and cashier would make me many instant friends and love interests (you know you would want to make out with me immediately), I have never done so. But it doesn't mean I won't celebrate when I see a correct sign, such as the signs used by Whole Foods, this particlar sign hanging in Whole Foods on Bowery in NYC:
Cheers to you Whole Foods.
(Update: Wegman's uses "fewer" too. I did not mean to neglect my local grocery store.)
Now explanation.
Both less and fewer mean the opposite of more, so it's easy to confuse them, but they are used in different instances: less for "not as much," and fewer for "not as many." Less is used with mass nouns, and fewer is used with count nouns.
What is a mass noun? A plural entity that cannot be counted.
What is a count noun? A plural entity that can be counted.
So, if you can count it (glasses, blankets, crackers, cheese cubes) use fewer.
If you cannot count it (water, love, sun, wine), use less.
The second beach we went to had less sand and fewer lifeguards.
The small cart had less space than the large cart, so I put in fewer items.
Exceptions (because you know they exist): less is used with money, distance, and time.
Jack Lynch, an associate professor of English at Rutgers University has an online style guide, and discusses this topic here.
And of course I recommend Grammar Girl's explanation.
And you're welcome.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Milbloggers
A story on Morning Edition (shocking that I'm listening to NPR, I know) this morning discusses the Pentagon ban on soldiers' use of Internet sites such as YouTube and Myspace, and this ban likely blocking soldiers' access to blogs, such as the blog hosted by former paratrooper Mathew Burden called BlackFive.net.
Mathew and I probably have different political viewpoints, but we both want the same thing: for the soldiers to stay alive and the truth to be available. I'd also like Iraqis etc. to stay alive. His Web site is worth reading. It's direct entries from soldiers, and as far as I can tell (I briefly browsed) it isn't being used for any sort of propaganda. It understandably includes a lot of military talk/terms, but it's a great alternative to the news for soldiers and for citizens who just want to know, on some level, what's actually going on.
BlackFive.net is also naturally upset about the Internet ban. The soldiers are asked to spend years now away from their families, and now they are blocked from telling wives and husbands that they aren't shot in the head, and blocked from seeing a child sing them a song, all because the Pentagon wants to make sure their version of the "truth" is the only version. I know the argument is that the Pentagon is worried operational secrets will get out, but I think it's BS--the soldiers who believe in what they are doing, and even the soldiers who are questioning, aren't going post confidential information on their Myspace page. Seriously.
It makes you wonder why the Pentagon is so worried all of a sudden.
I mean, I have no idea why soldiers would be upset.
The NPR article is here, and it includes links to Mathew's and other milblogs.
Mathew and I probably have different political viewpoints, but we both want the same thing: for the soldiers to stay alive and the truth to be available. I'd also like Iraqis etc. to stay alive. His Web site is worth reading. It's direct entries from soldiers, and as far as I can tell (I briefly browsed) it isn't being used for any sort of propaganda. It understandably includes a lot of military talk/terms, but it's a great alternative to the news for soldiers and for citizens who just want to know, on some level, what's actually going on.
BlackFive.net is also naturally upset about the Internet ban. The soldiers are asked to spend years now away from their families, and now they are blocked from telling wives and husbands that they aren't shot in the head, and blocked from seeing a child sing them a song, all because the Pentagon wants to make sure their version of the "truth" is the only version. I know the argument is that the Pentagon is worried operational secrets will get out, but I think it's BS--the soldiers who believe in what they are doing, and even the soldiers who are questioning, aren't going post confidential information on their Myspace page. Seriously.
It makes you wonder why the Pentagon is so worried all of a sudden.
I mean, I have no idea why soldiers would be upset.
The NPR article is here, and it includes links to Mathew's and other milblogs.
Monday, May 14, 2007
Whatever my lot, thou hast taught me to say: it is well, it is well with my soul.
My outstanding mission weekend with the youth in New York City is done. When I got home last night I was physically, and emotionally, spent. I’m 27 years old and have done this type of volunteering before, but it doesn’t matter; every time I’m still surprised about how much of who I am is revealed to me when I think I’m out to learn about others.
Last night I was raw and heartbroken—not emo heartbreak, true heartbreak. It’s not a bad heartbreak. It’s sucks feeling this way, but it also doesn’t. It also feels Good and real to know how lucky I am to have met the people I did. I feel wonderfully little and challenged.
And K, J, S, L, N: I am so proud of you.
Last night I was raw and heartbroken—not emo heartbreak, true heartbreak. It’s not a bad heartbreak. It’s sucks feeling this way, but it also doesn’t. It also feels Good and real to know how lucky I am to have met the people I did. I feel wonderfully little and challenged.
And K, J, S, L, N: I am so proud of you.
Friday, May 11, 2007
If Katie Holmes and Julia Louis-Dreyfus had a baby...
Since organizing a disorganized contributors list for a tourism and hospitality book couldn't keep my undying attention this morning, I played around on the My Heritage Web site to see what celebrities they say I look like. If you look on the right margin of this blog (scroll down), you'll see the results. Since the first results did not have any boys, I tried a second photo, and it's awesome. The second set of results is the best :-)
Update: I took these off because I got tired of them. Some of the people I looked like were Katie Holmes and Julia Louis-Dreyfus, obviously, but the best were Kathy Bates, Roseanne Barr, Shelley Winters, a male German soccer player, and a male lead singer of a Finnish rock band. My self-esteem remains in tact.
Update: I took these off because I got tired of them. Some of the people I looked like were Katie Holmes and Julia Louis-Dreyfus, obviously, but the best were Kathy Bates, Roseanne Barr, Shelley Winters, a male German soccer player, and a male lead singer of a Finnish rock band. My self-esteem remains in tact.
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
You just have to look for it sometimes.
This postcard is my Post Secret selection for the week. It wasn't until I posted it here that I realized "good" was "good"; I'd been reading it this week as "God." And I'm a copy editor. I'd say that maybe I was looking for something that wasn't there, but God is there, just with an extra o.
I'm glad the sender believes this, and that he or she made it this far along in life to come to this realization.
Now digression.
I'm not Pollyanna, or even her cousin, but I'm neither a complete realist by definition (realism: concern for fact or reality and rejection of the impractical or visionary, or a practice in literature or art of accurately representating nature or real life without idealization) due to my tendency to strive for--and to believe we can achieve--something better than what is.
I suppose too that realism depends on your definiton of real. What may seem an idealistic interpretation to you may seem very real to me (or, more likely, vice versa). Without waxing too philosophical, for I am far too untrained in the matter, isn't acknowledging that Good exists an accurate representation of nature and life? Isn't recognizing the fact of good an accurate representation of what is? Isn't accepting goodness real? Some "realists" acknowledge only the bad, the ugly, the dark as "real," but not all instances of goodness are contrived. That the world is entirely ugly may be more idealistic, in the anti-Pollyanna sense, than realistic.
For example (in case you need one), I paint a bowl of fruit. In my painting, the oranges are bland and lifeless but the grapes and cherries are gorgeous. You look at that bowl of fruit and believe that I have inaccurately represented the oranges, which appear bright and juicy to you, and that I've idealized the grapes and cherries. I look at the bowl of fruit again and see exactly what I painted. Who is the realist? Who is the idealist?
Another example, I make a documentary of a homosexual teen's experiences at school and church. The movie consists solely of the preacher preaching against homosexuality, a therapist counseling the teen "back" to heterosexuality, bullies harassing the teen, whispers and looks given to the teen, and the teen confessing to thoughts of suicide. I have made a realist film by documenting the teen's reality accurately. You leave the theater feeling hopeless; viewers would call this very real. But why did I make you feel this way? Just cuz? Does anyone really do anything just cuz? Wouldn't my filming of the youth group who accepts the teen, of the teacher who mentors the teen, of the preacher who preaches love also be just as real? I'm not questioning the definition of realism, just our pereception of realism.
I apologize to anyone with a background in philosophical theory who may be reading this (leave comments?). It's pretty apparent that I perhaps subscribe more to idealism (or, more accurately, lean toward idealism on the spectrum, the middle of which most of us lie). Idealism: a theory that the essential nature of reality lies in consciousness or reason, that only the perceptible is real. Or it is an artistic or literary expression placing more value on imagination than in directly copying nature. I see idealism as, in a way, dealing with the possible, not necessarily the probable (to paraphrase Nathaniel Hawthorne).
Without at least a small amount of idealism, what's the point of anything? My realist take on it: idealism is a part of an accurate interpretation of what is.
I love blogs.
Friday, May 04, 2007
Save face.
Okay, now it’s just getting embarrassing.
It’s no secret that the current president and administration are not my favorite. I’m so tired of getting so angry at the self-centered, self-righteous, arrogant, nepotistic, abusive, and disrespectful policies. The president or a member of his administration speaks and I feel my face contort and hear my mother saying, “You keep making that face it’s going to stay that way.” Please, please let me make it until January 2009 without my face staying that way.
It’s pretty safe to say that George W. Bush will go down in history as one of the worst presidents the country has ever had. The Harris Poll, as reported in Wall Street Journal on April 26, has the president’s current approval rating at 28 percent. The poll reporting the highest approval rate, a Rasmussen Report, has Bush’s approval rating at 39 percent (44 percent were polled as strongly disapproving, 15 percent somewhat disapproving, 20 percent somewhat approving, and 19 percent strongly approving). Even the GOP admits that Bush’s “approval rating has stayed below 40 percent for the seventh consecutive month.” My favorite quote from this article: “White House spokeswoman Dana Perino told the newspaper that the president pays little attention to polls.” Phew! Why would we want a president to who listens to what the American people want?
The disgrace that is the U.S. government causes furrowed brows across seas as well. This article by Walter Ellis in the Belfast Telegraph titled “629 Days to Bush to Go” (from May 2) is testament to the international frustration at how Bush Administration incompetence affects not just the United States but the world.
The hurricane Katrina disaster that was not Katrina’s fault, his poor domestic policy, his more than poor foreign policy, the Republican scandals tied to his administration, the illegal firings of federal judges and the administration’s “losing” of all incriminating e-mails, the wire tapping, the disrespect and disregard he shows to not just other countries but to his own country, the lies, the manipulation, the war crimes, the failure to find Osama bin Laden, and the Iraq war are a few examples of Bush’s greatest hits. All presidents have their flaws. All administrations make mistakes. But knock it off already!
I’ve never been president (news flash), nor do I want to be, so I do not deny what an incredibly difficult job it must be. Of course nobody would get a 100 percent approval rating in the United States today, not even (or especially?) Jesus. Of course anyone in the position would make mistakes. This is human, normal, and expected. But so is admitting those mistakes and trying to fix them. Perhaps Bush and Buddies do not think any mistakes were made; they cling stubbornly and arrogantly to their failing policies, and, after all, pay “little attention to polls.” As Mr. Ellis in the Belfast Telegraph put it, “Few any longer believe a word the [p]resident says. It is assumed that he is living in a world of his own. At the same time, Bush has stopped listening to anybody except the voices in his head.” The last sentence just may be facetious, but doesn’t it make you wonder?
It’s very hard to admit to making mistakes, and it’s even harder to fix them after you’ve admitted they’ve been made. I understand why Bush doesn’t want to admit he was wrong, and wants to give the ideas he promoted for years more time to work. I’m stubborn and proud too. But I like to think that I’m at least a little compassionate, and maybe even little logical—two characteristics glaringly lacking in the Bush presidency. If Bush were a baseball player and his presidency were his at bat, I’d surrender with a sigh and wait for the strikeout. It’s hope I lack now. I wish I could be more like my youth group, who would cheer “We believe in you!” as they do when any of our players, the good and especially the not-so-good, go up to bat. They mean it when they say it, and sometimes the batter with the lowest batting average will hit a home run.
Maybe it’s our fault. We did let him get away with way too much for way too long. Now that we’re finally getting upset, he doesn’t know what to do but to do what he’s been doing all along (that has worked all along/reelection). But please, for the sake of my country and of my generation dying in Iraq, try something else. My face is going to stay this way.
It’s no secret that the current president and administration are not my favorite. I’m so tired of getting so angry at the self-centered, self-righteous, arrogant, nepotistic, abusive, and disrespectful policies. The president or a member of his administration speaks and I feel my face contort and hear my mother saying, “You keep making that face it’s going to stay that way.” Please, please let me make it until January 2009 without my face staying that way.
It’s pretty safe to say that George W. Bush will go down in history as one of the worst presidents the country has ever had. The Harris Poll, as reported in Wall Street Journal on April 26, has the president’s current approval rating at 28 percent. The poll reporting the highest approval rate, a Rasmussen Report, has Bush’s approval rating at 39 percent (44 percent were polled as strongly disapproving, 15 percent somewhat disapproving, 20 percent somewhat approving, and 19 percent strongly approving). Even the GOP admits that Bush’s “approval rating has stayed below 40 percent for the seventh consecutive month.” My favorite quote from this article: “White House spokeswoman Dana Perino told the newspaper that the president pays little attention to polls.” Phew! Why would we want a president to who listens to what the American people want?
The disgrace that is the U.S. government causes furrowed brows across seas as well. This article by Walter Ellis in the Belfast Telegraph titled “629 Days to Bush to Go” (from May 2) is testament to the international frustration at how Bush Administration incompetence affects not just the United States but the world.
The hurricane Katrina disaster that was not Katrina’s fault, his poor domestic policy, his more than poor foreign policy, the Republican scandals tied to his administration, the illegal firings of federal judges and the administration’s “losing” of all incriminating e-mails, the wire tapping, the disrespect and disregard he shows to not just other countries but to his own country, the lies, the manipulation, the war crimes, the failure to find Osama bin Laden, and the Iraq war are a few examples of Bush’s greatest hits. All presidents have their flaws. All administrations make mistakes. But knock it off already!
I’ve never been president (news flash), nor do I want to be, so I do not deny what an incredibly difficult job it must be. Of course nobody would get a 100 percent approval rating in the United States today, not even (or especially?) Jesus. Of course anyone in the position would make mistakes. This is human, normal, and expected. But so is admitting those mistakes and trying to fix them. Perhaps Bush and Buddies do not think any mistakes were made; they cling stubbornly and arrogantly to their failing policies, and, after all, pay “little attention to polls.” As Mr. Ellis in the Belfast Telegraph put it, “Few any longer believe a word the [p]resident says. It is assumed that he is living in a world of his own. At the same time, Bush has stopped listening to anybody except the voices in his head.” The last sentence just may be facetious, but doesn’t it make you wonder?
It’s very hard to admit to making mistakes, and it’s even harder to fix them after you’ve admitted they’ve been made. I understand why Bush doesn’t want to admit he was wrong, and wants to give the ideas he promoted for years more time to work. I’m stubborn and proud too. But I like to think that I’m at least a little compassionate, and maybe even little logical—two characteristics glaringly lacking in the Bush presidency. If Bush were a baseball player and his presidency were his at bat, I’d surrender with a sigh and wait for the strikeout. It’s hope I lack now. I wish I could be more like my youth group, who would cheer “We believe in you!” as they do when any of our players, the good and especially the not-so-good, go up to bat. They mean it when they say it, and sometimes the batter with the lowest batting average will hit a home run.
Maybe it’s our fault. We did let him get away with way too much for way too long. Now that we’re finally getting upset, he doesn’t know what to do but to do what he’s been doing all along (that has worked all along/reelection). But please, for the sake of my country and of my generation dying in Iraq, try something else. My face is going to stay this way.
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
Hey Mary Clare lets write about stuff and pass it to each other
In the same vein as Post Secret, I have also recently discovered Found. It’s, appropriately, a magazine and Web site that shares with the world things that have been found. By the vague word “things” I mean “love letters, birthday cards, kids’ homework, to-do lists, ticket stubs, poetry on napkins, doodles—anything that gives a glimpse into someone else’s life.” The first issue was published in 2001, so I’m admittedly very late in the game here, but I’m sharing it with you anyway. You will likely enjoy it if you do not already know of it and enjoy it.
It reminds me of when my cousin and I were young and used to fill out offering envelopes in church with fake names and addresses we thought were hilarious. I wonder what happened to them.
It reminds me of when my cousin and I were young and used to fill out offering envelopes in church with fake names and addresses we thought were hilarious. I wonder what happened to them.
Penny for your thoughts
Deleting yet another overused semicolon in a short story about a teenage boy’s Internet adventures, the editor pauses. I have not yet checked Post Secret, she realizes. She wonders how a week could reach Wednesday before this realization occurred. Admonishing herself for the oversight, she quickly forgave herself and tended to the unremembered task.
As always, it was time well spent.
My favorite this week:
As always, it was time well spent.
My favorite this week:
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
I have an idea: stop lying.
I'm glad American media outlets and *gasp* Congress are letting Jessica Lynch and the Tillman family (finally) have an "official" voice. To put it eloquently, as is my nature, what the Pentagon put them through is crap. Served on a glittery spoon, we swore it was pudding and we ate it up. "Pudding," they said. "Mmmm."
Stay tuned for the next blockbuster to be put out by Pentagon Studios. Directed by Michael Bay of course.
New York Times article
Forbes article
CNN article
Stay tuned for the next blockbuster to be put out by Pentagon Studios. Directed by Michael Bay of course.
New York Times article
Forbes article
CNN article
Thursday, April 19, 2007
The wisdom of Eddie Izzard.
Just two quotes.
That's all.
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people, and monkeys do too (if they have a gun)."
"And the National Rifle Association says, 'Guns don't kill people, people do,' but I think the gun helps. I think just standing there going, 'Bang!' isn't going to kill too many people, is it?"
That's all.
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people, and monkeys do too (if they have a gun)."
"And the National Rifle Association says, 'Guns don't kill people, people do,' but I think the gun helps. I think just standing there going, 'Bang!' isn't going to kill too many people, is it?"
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Half a mile. That's it.
Yesterday I managed to make it to the park before the sun disappeared. Despite the unseasonable weather, it was actually a good day for running (then too-soon-after walking). Many others had the same idea—dog walkers, stroller pushers, playground players—all in an effort to coax timid spring out of the closet. It didn’t work.
I used to visit this park daily when the weather was above forty degrees and not raining, and sometimes even when it was raining. I lived down the street, a mile and a half’s run, and being there was part of my routine. I miss it. I miss the regulars. I saw only one yesterday, and our relationship only ever developed into slight head nods, never the hellos and even smiles and waves shared with others. Sweaty McTanrunner was not there; his schedule must have changed this past year when I’ve been absent.
I knew to value that time of my life, at the park especially. It's a very rare occasion when a human being can appreciate a moment in the moment. Perhaps, ironically, impermanence is what made those years so satisfying.
So I'm just going to reintroduce myself to the squirrels and the woodchuck and the regulars who I hope are still regulars.
And my husband is hotter than Sweaty McTanrunner anyway :-)
I used to visit this park daily when the weather was above forty degrees and not raining, and sometimes even when it was raining. I lived down the street, a mile and a half’s run, and being there was part of my routine. I miss it. I miss the regulars. I saw only one yesterday, and our relationship only ever developed into slight head nods, never the hellos and even smiles and waves shared with others. Sweaty McTanrunner was not there; his schedule must have changed this past year when I’ve been absent.
I knew to value that time of my life, at the park especially. It's a very rare occasion when a human being can appreciate a moment in the moment. Perhaps, ironically, impermanence is what made those years so satisfying.
So I'm just going to reintroduce myself to the squirrels and the woodchuck and the regulars who I hope are still regulars.
And my husband is hotter than Sweaty McTanrunner anyway :-)
So it goes.
Writer Kurt Vonnegut passed away yesterday night. I've admittedly read only Slaughterhouse-Five, but his other books have been on my to-read list since I was seventeen years old. I can understand why he's very many people's favorite author, and I'm sad that he will not be around to continue commenting on the ridiculousness of humanity, which will no doubt supply much material. So if you haven't yet, and if nobody has told you to do so yet (which I doubt), read a book of Kurt's in his honor. I have Slaughterhouse-Five if you want to borrow it.
Boston Globe article
Boston Globe article
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Well, God does love everyone.
Mr. Fish (2007). “The Real Cause of Global Warming.” April 10. http://www.truthdig.com/cartoon/item/the_real_cause_of_global_warming/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
