broad minded

Et tu, Newsweek?

2009-11-11T16:57:00.005-05:00

I know that I need to hear both sides of the issues. I should want to hear both sides, and while I have still not resolved my lack of love for Newsweek's redesign from earlier this year (WHEN will people learn that sometimes things are left well enough alone—yeah I am looking at you Facebook), I get their efforts to present a somewhat balanced approach to news and politics. Of course I am admittedly partial to their leftist-leaning writers—sue me I am an unabashed, unapologetic liberal.

But I had to stop and post something in response to the article by Yuval Levin I just read in their latest issue (November 16). And who you might ask is Mr. Levin? (It's ok, I had to ask that question myself.) Well, according to his byline he is the editor of National Affairs. A new publication, National Affairs is a quarterly journal, launched this year, "that aspires to help Americans think a little more clearly about the challenges of governing ourselves." Well bully for them.

Being not entirely sure what it means to "think a little more clearly"—I have found that generally liqueur is involved, or at least it should be—I decided to read on. Another journal, The Public Interest and its former editor Irving Kristol were credited as the model for Levin's new publication. Kristol, Kristol . . . any chance 'ole Irv is related to Bill Kristol of the conservative rag The Weekly Standard? Well a quick little jaunt over to Wikipedia confirmed that yes indeedy, Irv was the proud papa of Bill.

So with just a few quick search statements Levin's credentials as a conservative were established, but I kinda new that from the tone of his article. Titled "What Coattails? Why right-of-center candidated are succeeding in the age of Obama," Levin details why last week's off-year elections were a good thing for the GOP and should be a wake up call for the Dems.

Obviously, I am not convinced that an off-year election, when people are focusing on their own local issues, is really qualified as a referendum on the current president and the entire Democratic party. I will grant you that a mid-term carries a bit more weight, but I think we are jumping the gun to say that 10 months into the Obama administration, people are already fed up and looking to the benevolent Republicans to save us from the savage atrocities of the lefty liberals.

But what got me going about the article came down to two things. First that Levin said "Republicans are not in the midst of a destructive civil war, any more than the Democrats were when they kicked out Joe Lieberman in 2006." Lieberman was never kicked out of the Democratic party; rather, he chose to leave when it became obvious that he was facing a serious challenge during the primary from another Democrat. Last I checked it was certainly allowable for a member of someone's own party to challenge them during the primary season, thus the reason for a primary in the first place. Lieberman likes to whine, that is painfully apparent, but he created a situation in Connecticut where Democratic voters were no longer enamored of him and were leaning toward giving the Democratic nomination to Ned Lamont. So Mr. Levin, if you want me to give ANY credence to your musings, I suggest you get your facts straight.

Second, Levin ended the piece by saying "liberals in Washington would do well to let go of the Republican breakdown narrative, take a real look at the mood of the country and the state of their own party's prospects, and pull back to the center—or suffer the consequences." As some one who freely admits to being left of center, I can assure you that I in no way consider the current administration or the Democratic party in general to be left of center, if anything, the Democrats have become center in many cases with the Republicans veering more to the right. I wish the Dems would behavior as bigger lefties (dare to dream), but sadly, that is just a boogie man created by the right to scare those few Americans who sit on the fence and to reinforce the ideology of the right.

Oddly enough I agree in a way that the Dems aren't taking a real look at the mood of the country. In fact, in my opinion, if they were taking a look at the country's mood they would be doing a lot more left-leaning things, i.e. getting out of Afghanistan, funding a public option (otherwise known as "Medicare for everyone,") and sticking it to Wall Street but good.

So Mr. Levin can live in his fantasy land that the GOP is on the rise and the Dems are causing it. But I don't think that is the case. Not to say that the Dems aren't mucking things up, but I don't think the country is thinking the Republicans are the answer. At this point, I would hazard a guess that most Americans agree neither party has an answer.

Taking Stock

2009-11-05T12:24:00.004-05:00

Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi can be vulgar, crude and beyond incendiary and usually I love him all the more for it. Especially with the piece he wrote in the October 15th issue (RS 1089). Dude might want to relax on some of the heavier drugs though because he is getting super paranoid, and yet frankly I fear he may be on to something.

He addresses the unknown figure who gambled on March 11, 2008 that Bear Stearns' shares value would precipitously drop and was right. Taibbi calls it as insider manipulation, an effort on behalf of this mystery figure to cause Bear Stearn's demise. Adding to the general X-Files aura of the whole thing, there was a meeting that same day of the Federal Reserve Bank of NY which was attended by Both Ben Bernanke, Timothy Geithner and all the major Wall Street investment banks EXCEPT Bear Stearns. And the plot thickens.

It isn't known exactly what happened at the meeting, but by the time it ended Bear Stearns' fate was sealed and investors started banking that the company was going down. Apparently it all has to do with a practice called naked shortselling. Taibbi explains it and I almost understood it which says a lot of his powers of explanation, because banking ain't something Broad gets. I won't bore you with the details or try to explain it myself, but suffice it to say it is dirty and underhanded and generally kind of illegal (you can check out the link to the article above to get the scoop yourselves).

But it doesn't stop there. Apparently someone later tried this with Lehman Brothers and it of course worked again. Vanity Fair addressed the topic in an excerpt from Andrew Ross Sorkin's upcoming book in its November issue. Of course Sorkin is more deferential, polite, etc. than Taibbi and he also doesn't have the paranoid "they are all out to get us" ideas behind his article, but he adds that Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs feared they were next. From the tenor of Taibbi's piece I would say that just ain't so, that those two were in on the death of Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, but I don't want to fall into complete conjecture.

The takeaway for me is that the banking and investment worlds are dark, murky places and the inside folks like it that way. They don't want the average American to know or understand what they are up to because once we understood it, we would be appalled. It appears that much of what is going on Wall Street is legalized stealing and lying in many ways, but I guess that shouldn't come as too much of a surprise to any of us anymore.

What I can't help but wonder is if we had allowed these banks and investment companies that were deemed "too big to fail" to actually fail, how much would the average American have been hurt? Or would if have just wondered those people who will be fingering their six figure bonuses come this Christmas?

Home Sweet Home

2009-11-04T20:35:00.003-05:00

It ain't just something Vince Neil sings about anymore. I guess you have to be a child of the 80s for that one.

Moving on. For the past 15 years, it would appear that everything we have done as a society is to insure that we can live and work anywhere, anytime. From faxes first then cell phones and finally to email and the Internet, we have created a world that makes work something that is always with us, keeping us moving constantly, both literally and figuratively as we chase the latest and greatest job.

But oddly enough an article back in the October 19 edition of Newsweek talked about how grounded Americans are in their local neighborhoods and how unwilling they are to move. And I get it. I have had to apply for jobs outside of my city, and even outside of my state, because there just aren't that many jobs out there that are both interesting to me and that I am qualified for, but that doesn't mean I want to move. I like that the baristas at my local Starbucks know not only my name, but what I drink (and I refuse to dwell on the idea that this might mean I spend altogether too much time in said coffee shop). I like that we know the name of our postman and the guy that owns the restaurant in the heart of our hood. I like that I have a "hood."

I have even dared to dream in my current state of "Funemployment" that I might be able to eke out an existence via freelance work. It would mean a change in lifestyle, somewhat, but it would also mean not working for "the man" again, something that I never excelled at in my heart.

So no, I don't want to move. While the idea seems intriguing sometimes in the frustration of a boring day or when I am longing to have money to spare, it is not one that holds much water when I really start to think about it. So while all of our technology might have first been seen as a way for us to be more mobile, more fluid in our ability to move around the world, it is in actuality allowing us to do just the opposite and stay at home.

I'm On My Way
Well, I'm On My Way
Home Sweet Home
Tonight Tonight
I'm On My Way
I'm On My Way
Home Sweet Home

Joe Lieberman Can Kiss My Ass and Other Musings on Insane Elected Officials

2009-11-04T20:18:00.006-05:00

How in the world have we arrived at a point where that sniveling little Droopy Dog Joe Lieberman thinks he can lord over the fate of every American's health care? I get that many experts thing it doesn't matter and presumably they are right (dear lord I hope so), but it still chaps my backside that Lieberman can pull this stunt for the attention and to give him a false feeling of power. It makes me long for the Democrats missed opportunity to bitch slap him when he switched parties and became an independent because he knew he would lose the Democratic nomination to Ned Lamont. I hope the people of Connecticut give him a good swift kick in the tuckus next election.

Meanwhile, my own state's Virgina Foxx (a personal fave as my regular readers most likely know) opened her trap again and said something that almost surpasses her earlier outrageous statements about heathcare.

I believe we have more to fear from the potential of that bill passing than we do from any terrorist right now in any country.

She later added: “It is a bad bill and the American people should be frightened of it.”

Well thank you for that little nugget of wisdom Virginia. It almost makes me wish that the Democrats really were going to institute death panels, because I know of someone I would like to volunteer to go before them first for some "end of life" counseling . . .

That DID NOT Just Happen

2009-11-04T19:57:00.003-05:00

A couple of weeks ago, the spouse, spawn and I were cruising down one of North Carolina's major highways on our way to visit some friends from yore. My car still sports its Obama 08 sticker. As we went down a six lane road, we were in the center lane of our three. A car pulled in front of me and seemed to slow a bit. It was covered in copious amounts of anti-Obama stickers. I thought nothing of it, but the spouse remarked that the person probably deliberately slowed down in front of us because of my Obama sticker. Several moments later I moved into the far left lane and proceeded to pass the car. The driver of the car (a middle aged white woman) proceeded to flip me off when we got parallel to her.

Needless to say I was stunned and outraged–I had done nothing to this woman other than disagree with her politically via a BUMPER STICKER. Have we lost all of our ability to agree to disagree with civility?

The incident had really faded from my memory until this afternoon when the amazing level of hostility and animosity some have towards our current president came roaring back in an even more in my face kind of way.

The spouse and I were out at a small local hot dog restaurant that shall remain nameless. I was at the counter ordering when an older man got in the line next to me. As he ordered he remarked that he wished we could go back to the day of five cent hot dogs. As he said this I turned toward him and smiled, but that all changed with what came out of his mouth next. He said that it wasn't going to happen with Obama-laden in office and that he wanted to kill old people like him.

My first instinct was to inform the impolite geezer that we were all dying regardless, some of us faster than others. Then I wanted to yell at him that I was unemployed with no full time position in sight and unsure of my future insurance prospects thanks to the previous administration's negligence and that Obama's administration was trying to help that situation. But a combination of ingrained politeness and distaste for public confrontation (I know you are shocked that I avoid confrontation, but bare with me), led me to just stare straight ahead, ignoring him and stewing. Obviously saying something to someone like that would solve nothing and most certainly not change his mind. Maybe it was weak of me to not address is misinformation and blatant racism, but I also couldn't help being amazed at the sheer gall that this man thought it was not only appropriate to say that sort of thing to a stranger, but that I would agree with him.

And of course it reminded me of the incident on the highway. We really seem to be regressing as a society. I don't have an answer for this, but I am certainly in possession of a full cup of outrage and I guess that will have to suffice for today.

An Elegy for Elegance

2009-10-27T12:40:00.007-04:00

Lo these many years ago, 13 to be exact (my how the 'ole broad is aging . . .), I was privileged enough to land a job at Elegant Bride magazine. It was not located in New York, as it is now, nor was it like the depictions of magazine publishing you often find in entertainment today ala Ugly Betty or The Devil Wears Prada. But it was thrilling. There is something thrilling about magazine publishing in general in my mind. In my career, I have done just about every kind of magazine publishing there is, newsstand, business-to-business and custom, and who wouldn't be excited to see their name on the masthead of a magazine that can be found in Seattle or Topeka or Boston?

What did I love about Elegant Bride? I loved learning the rules of getting married, my anal retentive soul gobbled up the do's and don'ts, the etiquette for how to be an elegant bride like a drunk on a bender. To this day I can still tell you how to properly address an envelope to a household with two last names or what time of day requires formal attire, not that many people care any more about such rules, much less obey them.

I loved seeing my name of course, but what I loved more was the idea that thousands of people were reading my words. Since first grade I knew I wanted to write, and although writing about how to handle including step parents on your invitation may not have been my seven year old self's dream, these were still real people reading my writing.

But most of all I loved the people I worked with—they continued my education on how to be more of a girl, adding how to be a lady and how to be a professional. That is not to say that I achieved those goals while working there. Nor have I necessarily achieved them at this current moment in time, but those women (and man) gave me the ideals I will forever strive to obtain. They showed me style, savvy, fortitude, humor, compassion, adaptability, charm, grace and that sometimes it is best to quit while you are ahead. I was honored to work with them and grateful that I still call so many of them friends.

Several years after I left the magazine, things were changing and not looking promising for me career-wise (and as I mentioned my co-workers did teach me to quit when I was ahead), the publishing company who owned it sold it to Conde Nast. The publishing giant already published Brides and Modern Bride so I never quite understood why they would want a third magazine, although style-wise Elegant Bride was head and shoulders above those two books, and apparently I was right. It would appear that in a recession one does not in fact need three bridal magazines. So Conde Nast is shuttering both Modern Bride and Elegant Bride (apparently we no longer need to distinguish between brides, just any old bride will do during hard times), as well as the parenting magazine Cookie and the venerable Gourmet.

I don't like change and I most certainly don't like goodbyes, but then I guess most don't. And while no one I know works for Elegant Bride any longer, it is still a prized part of my past that is being razed due to the almighty dollar. I wonder what else I love will be lost because of the transgressions of men in suits who control the purse strings?

Atonement

2009-10-23T12:57:00.004-04:00

You know how it happens, you get busy and distracted and the next thing you know weeks have gone by and you meant to call that friend, clean that closet or finish that project. But it doesn't happen, it slips through the cracks and then you start to get to the point where so much time has passed it almost seems harder to do that thing than to just continue on and pretend that it no longer exists.

Unfortunately that is just what happened to me and the blog. It isn't that I haven't had ideas, I have steadily accumulated a stack of magazines with pages dog-eared with topics I wanted to expound on. And yet.

I am consistently amazed at how easy it is for the day to slip away when you are unemployed. Mind you, I have been somewhat busy with some freelance work, possibly something that will even turn into more of an ongoing, long-term gig (fingers crossed), and I am extremely grateful, but that is no excuse. I have been out of the work force for almost six months now and in that time my book shelves have not been alphabetized like I have dreamed of (I blame the spouse who helped me move in low these many years ago—10 to be exact— and who put the books on the shelf with little rhyme or reason), the spawn's toys have only been organized once, months ago, and now the blocks are living with the toy people and the trucks with the puzzles and in my head it is a mighty clash of civilizations that keep me up at night (okay not really, but it does bug me to my anal retentive core), and that dream of scrubbing the baseboards is still just that. And yet.

I do dream of suit shopping with Bill Maher (paging Freud for the meaning of that one), I did a marathon nine hour day of proofing and I attempted to run a 5K. So I have not been idle. And yet.

Earlier this month, one idea I dog-eared corresponded with my boyfriend Jon Stewart mentioning on his show Yom Kippur, the Jewish holiday of atonement. Newsweek editor Jon Meacham wrote his weekly editor's letter back in the September 28 issue (told you I was thinking of you gentle reader, all along . . .) about the consequences of words. I know the power of words to wound and heal and yet I am endless careless with them, waving them about like a cocked and loaded gun. It is shameless really, so that is why Meacham's essay struck me so I think.

Meacham talks of how we delude ourselves when we think that there was once a golden age of bipartisanship. Like the unicorn and yeti, bipartisanship is a myth, a fantasy that we delude ourselves with when times are particularly hard like they are now (despite those bankers on Wall Street raking in their millions). But where I felt truly called to the carpet was when Meacham talks of Obama supporters saying the hostility towards our President is unprecedented. And he is right, my hostility to Dubya was legendary (at least in my own mind) and was, dare I say it, wrong and misguided. The people who demonize President Obama are just as wrong as I was to demonize Dubya, doesn't mean I like him or that my opinion of him has changed or will ever change, but I should have been able to keep my level of discourse on a more civilized plane. And yet.

The level of hostility and hatred that is leveled at President Obama does strike me as different in tone than that aimed at Dubya. Our current president is being judged, by many, for the color of his skin. In my opinion, George W. Bush was being judged by his lack of intelligence and his gung-ho, cowboy attitude toward diplomacy. Many may think I am splitting hairs, but that strikes me as apples and oranges.

So while I am a tad behind, today I will celebrate my own day of atonement and I will try to do better in the future—not only in keeping a civil tongue when it comes to my disagreements with the conservatives in politics, but I will not let things slide in my life. Like this blog.

Poetry Time

2009-09-16T16:59:00.001-04:00

“Personal” by Tony Hoagland

Don’t take it personal, they said;
but I did, I took it all quite personal—

the breeze and the river and the color of the fields;
the price of grapefruit and stamps,

the wet hair of women in the rain—
And I cursed what hurt me

and I praised what gave me joy,
the most simple-minded of possible responses.

The government reminded me of my father,
with its deafness and its laws,

and the weather reminded me of my mom,
with her tropical squalls.

Enjoy it while you can, they said of Happiness
Think first, they said of Talk

Get over it, they said
at the School of Broken Hearts

but I couldn’t and I didn’t and I don’t
believe in the clean break;

I believe in the compound fracture
served with a sauce of dirty regret,

I believe in saying it all
and taking it all back

and saying it again for good measure
while the air fills up with I’m-Sorries

like wheeling birds
and the trees look seasick in the wind.

Oh life! Can you blame me
for making a scene?

You were that yellow caboose, the moon
disappearing over a ridge of cloud.

I was the dog, chained in some fool’s backyard;
barking and barking:

trying to convince everything else
to take it personal too.

RESPECT

2009-09-12T12:56:00.004-04:00

It ain't just an R&B song so expertly belted by Ms. Franklin gentle reader, it is unfortunately something, along with civility, that is all to lacking in our society today—at least American society, I won't presume to speak for the other nations around the globe.

I have been ruminating on this for a little over a week now, starting with the nonsense surrounding President Obama's speech to school children and the way so many on the right lost their shit over the idea. 'The very idea of the President wanting to tell our kids to work hard and stay in school! How dare he!' Alrighty. I may catch some grief over this, but I stand with many of the more outspoken commentators on the Left who believe this all boils down to simple racism and nothing else.

During a broadcast of the Stephanie Miller show on Air America this week, a guest (I apologize I didn't catch who the guy was, but it was a show when Miller was on vacation and had a guest filling in) stated something along the lines of a lot of this garbage we have been hearing about President Obama is coming from the South and that many Southerns seem to take pride in being ignorant.

At first I was offended. I am a Southerner and I certainly take no pride in ignorance, my own or anyone elses'. But then I started thinking about it more and while this may not be exactly what the guest meant, from my final take on it he may have a point after all. Thirty years ago, before 24 hour media, before the Internet, before bloggers, people got their news from the major three networks, newspapers and some magazines. And while this may be a rosy, glow, Ozzie 'n' Harriet view of things, I have this gut feeling that they were better informed than the average American today who has WAY more access to information. I think this is a particular problem with self-identified Rednecks, who while a vast section of the Southern populous, also exist any where across our nation. My point is people don't seem to care today that they aren't informed, many do take pride in not knowing about politics and history and geography, if it doesn't directly impact them, they think it doesn't matter.

The reaction to Obama's speech I think falls in this domain to a certain degree, while I disagree that it comes exclusively from the South. I believe that a fair amount of blame can be laid at the feet of the media. As Bill Maher said on his show this week, "The Media is supposed to be the teacher." And when the Media gets their knickers in a twist over a Coast Guard training episode, even though it occurred on the anniversary of September 11, before finding out the hard facts, then they are doing a disservice to Americans and are not teaching us anything but that they are not to be trusted.

One of Maher's guests, Paul Rieckhoff (Director, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America) also said of the Media, "They confuse balance with accuracy." All too true. Having talking heads from both sides screaming at each other does nothing to educate the general public, it is merely a Jerry Springer-esque way to hold too easily distracted Americans' attention. That isn't news, it isn't educational and it is surely not accurate.

Finally, I would be remiss if I didn't mention how that wing-nut from South Carolina, Joe Wilson, figures into all of this. While I often, in my Anglophile heart, long for America to be more British, we are not in fact British. Therefore, it is not acceptable in our Congress to heckle our leader. What Wilson did during Obama's speech before Congress was not only unacceptable, it was juvenile, ridiculous, uncouth, racist and disRESPECTful.

Yep, there we are gentle readers, full circle back to Ms. Franklin's ode. If I had a dollar for every time I had to endure people saying during Dubya's eight years of lunacy that he should be respected because he was president, I would be a rich woman right now and not living off the government's dime and looking for work. But alas . . . . Now those same people are the ones applauding this dipshit who acted like a drunk frat boy at a comedy club. Well turn about is fair play folks. Obama is your president now, and you need to show him the respect the office deserves, even if you don't like him or didn't vote for him.

I made no bones about my dislike of Dubya, still don't, but for all my blustering, I would have been just as dismayed and outraged should someone had acted towards him in that manner. Aw, who am I kidding I would have loved it, just as I loved it when the guy in Iraq threw a shoe at him. My real problem with Mr. Wilson's outburst is less that he made it and more the reason behind it—racism. I bet you dollars to donuts that he would have never done that had it been a white democrat standing up there as president.

Finally, I know this is a bit lengthy and rambling, but I want to close with something else that Bill Maher said on his show last night (I know I need to develop a new news crush) that liberals aren't taking to the streets to protest the way the right-wing crazies are, instead we sit on our sofas and yell at the TV. Well, maybe it is time we get off our asses and show our country some R*E*S*P*E*C*T.

Defining the Times

2009-09-08T09:13:00.003-04:00

A lesson today for all of you who might be confused by the rhetoric being tossed about so liberally in the news of late.

From Merriam-Webster online:

Socialism
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Fascism
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

Communism
1 a : a theory advocating elimination of private property b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed
2 capitalized a : a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and Marxism-Leninism that was the official ideology of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics b : a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production c : a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably d : communist systems collectively

Nazism
: the body of political and economic doctrines held and put into effect by the Nazis in Germany from 1933 to 1945 including the totalitarian principle of government, predominance of especially Germanic groups assumed to be racially superior, and supremacy of the führer

Now many pundits and talking heads have been spouting that President Obama is a socialist, a Nazi, a fascist. Well I will admit that in some people's eyes the socialist label might have some sticking power to the current administration, not that I have any problem with that personally, I am all for there being less of a yawning gap between the haves and have nots. Plus Sweden doesn't look so bad and they are socialists.

But the latter two labels really rub me the wrong way. Obama and his administration are not fascists or Nazis and while the two groups may both espouse authoritarian rule, their goals for that rule were different in my eyes, as were their ideology of why such rule was necessary.

Now listen, I didn't major in political science, so maybe I am missing some small nugget of correlation between the two, but in the broader range of things, all these people on the right aim to do is frighten the beejesus out of people by invoking Nazis and Fascists and the like.

So far as all this hullabaloo about the President indoctrinating school children today during his speech, well give me a break. President Obama is not the first president to address schools and he won't be the last (Remember Dubya reading My Pet Goat? Anyone??). It appears to me that a speech about personal responsibility, staying in school and trying to get ahead is not even remotely rooted in socialism or any ideology that is centered on the government owning the means of production. No in fact, those all seem like tools that might come in handy for this kind of society:

an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market

Yep, CAPITALISM.

Peggy Get Your Gun

2009-09-01T14:43:00.005-04:00

What is there to say about Mad Men? I am quite frankly obsessed—with Don Draper's classic depiction of a troubled asshole, which despite just how unfeminist it is, fascinates me to no end; with the idea that the 1960s were not all Ozzie and Harriet, that people were cruel and manipulative and most of all fucked with abandon; with the way you can see glimmers of change and strength in all the characters, but particularly the women. Big things are afoot this season I believe and with a show that is replete with female writers, it is no wonder that so many of the female characters are as rich, if not richer than their male counterparts. Hello Joan, Betty and Peggy, I am talking about you.

Which leads me to Sunday's episode, where Peggy tokes up, asserts herself with the boys in a way that wins not only the smarmy adulation of the Princeton pal selling the pot, but of her coworker Smith. You could see the wheels turn in that boy's head as he began to rewrite his opinion of Peggy. For that I say hell yeah! You go girl—who is smart and quick and who the boys seem to dismiss specifically for those reasons.

But what I loved most of all is the following, her conversation with her new secretary Olive, that the women at Salon's Broadsheet extrapolated:

And in her loopy, stoned, sweet way, Peggy suddenly gets it: “But you're scared,” she says. Olive isn’t scolding her, per se, she’s scared for her, and worried about the consequences to a young lady who breaks the rules that governed women in her own day. Leaning in, Peggy says, “I am going to get to do everything you want for me. I'm going to be fine, Olive.”

How I have dearly wanted to say just that very thing to older, female figures in my life who have doubted me or worst of all been jealous. 'I am going to get to do everything you want for me, and while you may hate me for it in the end, I will be fine. I am fine.'

In Other Words, an English Major

2009-08-28T10:07:00.004-04:00

Just another reason to love Garrison Keillor . . . the September 2009 Vanity Fair features him on their end page Proust Questionnaire. Mr. Keillor was asked—"What is the quality you most like in a woman?" He responds:

High-spiritedness, wit, a love or repartee and wordplay and allusion and jokes—in other words, an English major.

As a former English major, I say God Bless you Mr. Keillor, if only more boys I knew had held you same esteem for wit and wordplay in my impressionable teens and twenties . . .

On Death and Dying

2009-08-26T12:02:00.003-04:00

"Why would any member of Congress, especially those of us who are grandmothers, want to pull the plug on Grandma?" So sayeth Rep. Maxine Waters (D).

Valid point, one I would think many in Congress could agree on, these aren't exactly young whipper snappers, guiding our fair nation.

Meanwhile, the lion of the Senate is gone, healthcare is no further along than it was two months ago (although perhaps their is a faint light ahead, dare I dream?), and as one older, African American woman at a recent town hall, who had lost her job and had no insurance, queried the gathering only to be booed, "Aren't I an American too?"

Yes ma'am you are, and we are all deserving of care, unless you buy what the CEO of Whole Foods recently shared in an OpEd.

But I digress, a 35-year-old woman is dead of breast cancer, and more like her will die today and tomorrow. If we fix our healthcare, maybe we can save one or two of these people who are loved by so many. Maybe we can't, but isn't it better to try?

Me & Julia

2009-08-18T23:19:00.004-04:00

A twofer! I told you I was inspired . . .

And it is all due to Mrs. Julia Child. I just saw the movie, Julie and Julia, and I found it quite charming, as well as laugh out loud funny. Mrs. Child was a remarkable woman from the looks of things, and not just because she deciphered French cooking for us crass Americans.

While I couldn't come home at 10pm and start deboning a duck, don't you fret, it is in my plans. It may appear that politics is my first love, but I would trade every pundit out there to just cook, and cook well, at will.

Points No. 1, 2 & 3

2009-08-18T22:50:00.003-04:00

Why is it that someone who is most assuredly not a night person is so often struck by inspiration in the final dark hours of the day? Well that is a question to ponder some other day I suppose, but for now, more on healthcare.

I know, I know. I am sick of the topic too, but sometimes you have to worry over something until you are thoroughly sick of it before you see the light and can make things right. I have three points to make in that vein, so bare with me.

Point No. 1
The spouse asked me the other day if I knew what the public option was. I do not. Nor could I properly explain how that might differ from a single payer system. Admittedly, I am sure that I could dig around, do my research and come up with an answer. Hell, I could just try to muster up some common sense and make a best case scenario guess, but off the top of my head? Nope, stuck. And that seems, to me, to be a BIG problem. The spouse and I watch/read a fair bit of the news, probably I would estimate more than your average American. If we can't give a reasonable response to that question, then I would venture to say that neither could that average American. Which means (not that we didn't already suspect this) the people hollering at these town hall meetings have no clue what they are yelling about.

Point No. 2
I have a dear friend of going on 18 years who is in the process of saying goodbye to a beloved friend of hers. This woman is dying of breast cancer and most likely has but weeks to live, if that. She is not even 35. I have met her, dined at her house, and although we are in no sense of the word close, I can't shake the feeling of just how wrong this is. She is younger than me, she never had the chance to have children. She leaves a husband who never imagined he would have to say goodbye to his wife so early and so young. It does something to shake my inner bouncy ball core, which seems so resilient despite my better efforts to kill it. I don't know what the financial condition of this young woman and her husband is. I don't know what their insurance situation is either, but I do not doubt that even if they have "good" insurance there has been a significant accumulation of expense during her sickness. So not only his her husband left alone, bereft, he is left with God knows what kind of debt to handle as he is grieving. That simply seems too much for one soul to take on.

Point No. 3
To finalize, and somewhat combine the previous two points, I was just reading Jonathan Alter's Newsweek essay "Health Care as a Civil Right." In it, Alter not only makes the point that Obama & Team need to reframe the argument for healthcare reform to center it around the belief that healthcare is a RIGHT and not some ridiculous luxury afforded only to those who are not sick and who have money, but that this public option hullabaloo has overshadowed this idea and is, in fact, not central to the issue. Did you know that half of U.S. bankruptcies are a result of medical expenses? Isn't that shameful? And when Alter says, "Passage [of healthcare reform] would end the shameful era in our nation's history when we discriminated against people for no other reason that that they were sick."

Even if you are sick of the subject that is something to think about, don't you think?

The One Where Broad Loses Her Temper

2009-08-11T17:06:00.006-04:00

Moments ago, I was blithely watching the local evening news as they interviewed people at a restaurant that was going to be part of Obama's listening tour on the healthcare issue. When what to my wandering ear should be heard, but an ignorant redneck with eight tiny brain cells. This woman was voicing her opinion that the Democrats weren't on the right track with the healthcare reform because EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE A CHOICE.

Well goddamn people (to paraphrase the gd bomb that Chris Matthews just let fly on MSNBC). Last I checked that is exactly what the freak President Obama was offering. A CHOICE. He isn't going to take away healthcare, he is going to make it so more people can have it. If you want to dither about how it is going to be paid for, fine, I got the time. I am unemployed. But don't say horseshit like the plan won't give you a choice.

I thought I couldn't abide a hypocrite, but idiots are fast getting aided to my list of things I just can't take in my dotage.

Political Terrorists and Death Panels

2009-08-08T11:55:00.005-04:00

Once again I am compelled to say that the Democrats need to get off their asses and grow a set. Gentle reader, the nonsense that the GOP is saying in regards to the healthcare plan put out there by President Obama is crazy, and the biggest loon of them all—Sarah Palin—decided to add her measly two cents the other day on Facebook. Come on people, I thought Facebook was for sharing your thoughts on the latest box office offerings and letting your 200 closest "friends" know what you ate for lunch, not implying that the President want's to off your developmentally disabled spawn. But I have been wrong before.

So Palin says that the healthcare plan will create death panels that will determine whether the infirmed or disabled will be allowed to live or die. Hogwash. The stuff that Palin and her buddies in the Republican party are coming up with are so off base as to be laughable, but the problem is the Democrats aren't busting their chops on this. Maybe they are waiting for the lunacy to die down, but meanwhile, the lunatics are growing in number.

Take for instant these town hall meetings where middle aged, lower to middle class white people are asking for their country back. Well I have to agree with Mr. Maher on this one, what they mean is they want their country back from the black guy. Nice, huh?

But speaking of growing a set, the Dems could take a page from Hillary Clinton who when questioned recently about John Bolton's response to her husband's efforts to return the two American journalist being held in N. Korea, laughed uproariously, and then said basically that what had been done was far from out of the ordinary. See for yourself below:

Now that is what I call balls, ladies and gentleman. More democrats need to pay attention to her easy, breezy way of just blowing off the GOP as ridiculous fossils that are out of touch with reality.

But getting to the political terrorists part of things. Steven Pearlstein wrote recently in The Washington Post, about the Republican's efforts to derail heathcare efforts:

The recent attacks by Republican leaders and their ideological fellow-travelers on the effort to reform the health-care system have been so misleading, so disingenuous, that they could only spring from a cynical effort to gain partisan political advantage. By poisoning the political well, they've given up any pretense of being the loyal opposition. They've become political terrorists, willing to say or do anything to prevent the country from reaching a consensus on one of its most serious domestic problems.

The Congress may be taking a break, but this ain't over yet. Far from it.

RIP John Hughes

2009-08-06T16:56:00.005-04:00

"Sweetheart, you couldn't ignore me if you tried."

And with that, my heart was forever stolen by the groups of dysfunctional, Chicago-based teens that traipsed through John Hughes movies. From Sixteen Candles to The Breakfast Club to Ferris Bueller's Day Off, my coming of age happened to the images that Mr. Hughes placed before me on the big screen. I wanted to be the princess and the basket case, I wanted to have the balls to escape and have the adventure of a lifetime in one day, and I longed to construct my own prom gown from vintage dresses and roar off in my pink Kharman Ghia (still a fantasy to this day). Unfortunately, none of that was to be. But I did pierce my ear a second time in homage to Molly Ringwald, I did studiously court the bad boys until I realized that it was no longer in my best interest hoping one would turn into Judd Nelson, and I did pretend I was daring by the occasional attempt at a Chinese firedrill on a deserted road.

So rest in peace John Hughes, this is one Gen-Xer that will miss you.

Dear Mr. Vernon, we accept the fact that we had to sacrifice a whole Saturday in detention for whatever it was we did wrong, but we think you're crazy to make us write an essay telling you who we think we are. You see us as you want to see us... In the simplest terms and the most convenient definitions. But what we found out is that each one of us is a brain...and an athlete...and a basket case...a princess...and a criminal.

Does that answer your question?... Sincerely yours, the Breakfast Club.

Good for Wall Street

2009-08-03T15:01:00.003-04:00

So I was watching Real Time with Bill Maher from last Friday (full disclosure, you know I dvr'ed and watched it on Sunday, but same difference). And he has this writer on there Joe Queenan who right off strikes me as a serious asshat (and no he wasn't a conservative—he was a liberal, see I am not a blanket love all my lefty-types gal after all). I will say that he made several good points, but he got my dander up when Bill asked the panel to grade President Obama.

Queenan said that if the stock market had closed on Friday over 9,000 (I believe this was his number) he would give Obama a 90-something (aka an A), but that if it closed under he gave him an 87 or a B.

What Mr. Queenan was oh-so-less than subtely implying was that if Wall Street is happy the rest of us are doing OK. Uh, dude? Not so much. I mean yahoo and all that Goldman and Bank of America are making money, but that doesn't mean that the REAL America, the folks I see in the grocery day in and day out are hunky dory. Corporate America and therefore the stock market is doing well and making money because THEY ARE LAYING PEOPLE OFF. STILL. I can't say that with enough implied screaming.

I would never say that my life or little world is indicative of how the rest of the country is going, but chew on this little tidbit gentle readers, I live on a corner, two houses down from me one member of that household has been laid off for at least six months now. My immediate neighbor just got laid off on Friday and of course I was laid off the end of April. So three houses in a row, all have members who have been a victim of this recession. And don't even get me started on how all three are women. Nothing funny afoot there at all.

So Mr. Queenan, you can take your stock market rally and shove it up your sanctimonious ass, as far as I am concerned. That is not to say that I don't believe that a lot of what Obama has done is good, I do. But some of it ain't, mostly as it pertains to the money the banks got and the fact that there weren't enough rules and regulations placed on how they had to use that money. But you know the stock market closed over 9,000, why aren't we all happier?

Yes Virginia, You Are a Douchecanoe

2009-08-01T08:38:00.002-04:00

Healthcare is a problem. A big problem. I think that there are serious issues with the idea of someone making a buck over whether or not someone lives or dies. Our system frankly sucks. As one of the unemployed masses, having your healthcare tied to your job just ain't cool, and makes a trying time that much more scary and dangerous. Lose coverage because you can't afford it and you won't be able to get covered again if you have pre-existing conditions. And with insurance companies today, a freakin' hang nail is considered a pre-existing condition I believe.

I know that the Republicans like to say that universal healthcare is evil and that the Europeans and Canadians have to wait for care, etc. That may be true, but if you ask them about whether or not they are happy with their plans, the majority are. For instance, 78% of the French say they are happy with their healthcare. But we wouldn't want to be like the French. Canadians seem equally pleased. Ninety two percent (yep 92%) would recommend their family doctor, and 85% of the population over 12 have a family doctor. Yes there are issues, but that seems pretty good to me. I doubt the same could be said of Americans.

I don't doubt that there are issues and problems with President Obama's health plan. Nothing is perfect, certainly not our system currently. So I say "good for the dems for at least TRYING." But as usual that isn't enough for the GOP. Not that they have a plan, at least not one that I have heard articulated.

And there there is Virginia Foxx. Who had this to say about Obama's plan last week:

"Republicans have a better solution that won't put the government in charge of people's health care," she said. "(The plan) is pro-life because it will not put seniors in a position of being put to death by their government."

Thank God I am not in the district this woman represents, although Lord knows I have enough to apologize for having been born in that area that would elect her I suppose.

Million Dollar March

2009-07-09T15:04:00.003-04:00

Now that the Dems have 60 votes in the Senate you would think they could get off their asses and push through some serious reforms, like oh say in health care for example. Unfortunately, it would appear that some of the more conservative democrats (I can't even BELIEVE I am writing those two words together) seem to have other plans. And their efforts are being aided by the fact that the health care industry is spending at least ONE MILLION DOLLARS a day on lobbying Congress to squash any serious health care reform.

Well gosh guys, thanks for looking out for the little people.

What is wrong with this picture? I mean I thought the country voted for some change last November. It seemed to me that the majority spoke that they wanted the Democrats to make some change in Washington, and not continue down the path of lining the pockets of corporate America like the Republicans did for eight years. Health care should not be a for-profit industry. Why should corporations get rich off the backs of the average American living or dying? They make more money by keeping us sick then they do by healing us. It just all stinks if you ask me.

Republicans Gone Wild

2009-07-08T13:09:00.003-04:00

Like most of the world I was surprised and immensely curious about Sarah Palin's decision to leave office. Part of me gets her wanting to focus on her family if that is in fact the true reason, but something in my gut says no. If that were the case, why wouldn't she have quit before her son was born? Why wouldn't she have never accepted the VP nod from McCain? There is too much raw ambition in this woman for her to simply be quitting because it isn't convenient for her family and their lives. As far as the media attention goes, the Palins have more than courted that in my opinion, so I can't really give her a pass on that one either. I mean what did she think would happen in our media-saturated culture that thinks it is ok to tour the home of a dead pop star, a home that he no longer lives in and is devoid of furniture or personal effects? I mean what does that even tell us about him or us other than that we are extreme voyeurs with souls that may no longer be worthy of redemption?

But back on topic. You can't rationally expect to be the first Republican female vice presidential candidate, especially one with five kids, one of whom is a pregnant teenager and another who is special needs, and not expect to get some media attention. If you thought it would be otherwise you are either in deep denial or delusional. Sarah Palin, may of course, be both of those things, but I strongly suspect she is a bit more canny than that. Lord knows I hate to give a Republican too much credit, but she has to have some smarts to have gotten where she is. So yes, I think that there is much more going on with her resignation than simply wanting to spend more time with her family. The other day the spouse saw a Romney/Palin sticker. So I wouldn't count Palin out in the political arena just yet.

Meanwhile, across the country another Republican governor should be resigning and isn't yet. What is with these dude's in the GOP not being able to keep it in their pants? But hey, at least Mark Sanford has found his soulmate right? Glad that his wife and sons weren't inconvenienced by his little affair of the heart. Just like with Palin, I think there is more going on here than we know about now. First, they tell us they don't know where he is, then he is hiking, but no one can contact him for days over Father's Day weekend. Finally he says he was in Argentina and is having an affair. And he supposedly used some tax payer money to fund his little love jaunts south of the border. But he doesn't want the state of South Carolina to take any of the bailout money, explain that logic to me. I hope Mrs. Sanford sticks it to the Governor but good, he deserves whatever she does to him.

Finally, Norm Coleman has decided to back down in the Minnesota senators race, after eight months, countless legal wrangling efforts, and the state Supreme Court saying that Franken was the winner. How gracious of him. If I remember correctly he said something about not wanting to divide the state anymore. Wow! Really—not having a junior senator for eight months was divisive enough for you?

It is amazing how much trouble the Republicans can get into in less than a month when you are just minding your own business and living life. Don't make me have to start paying more attention boys and girls . . .

Talk the Talk

2009-06-17T14:31:00.003-04:00

I admit it, I got giddy when I heard that CIA director, Leon Panetta had manned up and said that Cheney almost seemed to want the country to be attacked again, merely so he could be proven right about all his doom and gloom media ramblings of late.

And then he did what all Democrats seem to do. Panetta backed down. Dear lord. What is wrong with the Democratic Party? Are they completely lacking in balls? I gotta go with Bill Maher here, who's final New Rule last Friday night called the Dems and specifically Obama to task by saying if they can't get their agendas through now, then when can they?

Dubya thought he had a mandate in the 2004 election because he scraped out a win. Obama beat McCain decisively and he acts like he has to tip toe around a sleeping lion. The Republicans are down right now for the count, but if Obama and the rest of the Democratic Party don't grow a set (and SOON!) then they might as well be on the mat beside the GOP helping them back to their feet before the ref reaches 10.

The Democrats time is now and if they fuck this up, they have no one to blame but themselves.

Enough

2009-06-10T19:55:00.003-04:00

I have been largely tuned out of the normal media melee of late. And I wouldn't say I have missed it. In a way I think I have purposely distanced myself from it all because there is only so much that even I can process at once and current personal events (ie BEING UNEMPLOYED) have somehow taken precedence. Selfish little broadminded.

But I heard about Dr. Tiller being murdered. I was outraged, horrified and disgusted at my "fellow Americans" but still I tried to not let it sink in. Then today an 88-year-old man killed another man at the Holocaust Museum. Dear god people.

WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH OUR COUNTRY?

How can we harbor so much hate? This decrepit old white supremacist fart, kills a black guard, scares the beejesus out of a bunch of school children and all for what? He's pissed because a BLACK MAN is president? Because some family members job got sent to India? Because he thinks the Jews made the whole holocaust up? I mean what could be so awful and wrong that you are possessed to go kill an innocent person and god knows who else before someone else with a gun stops you?

Yell and scream all you want about the bad things going on in the world, I have no problem with that. But this is insanity and I have had enough.

Vindication Is Mine

2009-06-09T07:26:00.002-04:00

Not to harp on this (because we all know that I would never hold onto something like a dog with a bone . . .) but I am about three issues into the Newsweek redesign and it is still leaving me cold. I have actually skipped articles accidentally because I thought they were ads, the layout confused me so.

Well I am not alone apparently. Rolling Stone labeled the redesign a "Hot Thud" in their recent "Hot Issue" (RS1080). Not even the nuttiness of Lady Gaga gracing the cover can wipe the smile off my face. And here I thought I was just being contrary because I don't like change.