I Stand Corrected

Ok after arguing most of the day with a friend about my Obama "attacks" I began to think about my feelings. I stand by my position that there is little difference between the two candidates and another debate is not going to change my mind. I will also continue to ask the question, "What Change?" If by change, he means not another Bush or Clinton--ok fine. The main point we were "discussing" today was about my privilege comment. I think of politicians as coming from privilege--maybe because many of them come from a dynasty and maybe because it seems like so many of them graduated from Harvard or Yale (I am a cynic and assume that equates to privilege). So I decided to investigate further the upbringing of the candidates. Its hard to find unbiased biographies --but I decided to look to one of my favorite sources--Wikipedia (there are times when Wiki failed me and I had to google to fill in some gaps).

Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton. Born in Illinois to Hugh Ellsworth Rodham and Dorothy Emma Howell. Hugh Rodham operated a small but successful business in the textile industry. His father was an immigrant factory worker. Hillary was in the National Honor's Society and was a merit scholarship finalist. She went to Wellesley College where she did all kinds of stuff including switching from Republican to Democrat and fighting for equal rights for African Americans and became the first student in the College history to deliver the commencement address (at the request of her fellow students). She then went to Yale Law School--met Bill, blah blah blah. Ok this isn't exactly the model of privilege--I would give them upper middle class--to upper class status and she definitely worked hard.

Barack Hussein Obama Jr. Born in Honolulu Hawaii to Barack Hussein Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham who were both attending college at the University of Hawaii. Sr. was a Kenyan son of a goat herder who had been fortunate enough to be selected by Kennedy to "achieve their goals" in the U.S. They separated when Jr was 2 and later divorced. Barack Sr. went on to Harvard to get his Ph.D, moved back to Kenya, and later died in a car accident. Ann remarried Lolo Soetero (another student) and they moved to Indonesia (Lolo's home country). At 10, Barack Jr moved back to Hawaii to live with his maternal grandparents and attended a private prep school Punahou. The following is a quote from the UK Independent Newspaper

"Yet not everything about Obama's formative years here – particularly as one of only a few black students at Punahou, a cradle of academic privilege that led him to a financial scholarship – were glorious. ..."We've been told not to talk to reporters," volunteers John Cheever, himself an old boy of Punahou and now a sociology teacher there. "He wasn't that much of a distinguished student but everyone will tell you he was a good guy, very popular, someone who was always comfortable with the other kids. ... the murk is more likely to be about drugs, including marijuana and cocaine, and slipping grades"

So I took that to meaning he got the scholarship to attend school there based on race --(which is fine with me)--but I may have assumed too much--maybe it was merit--and then his grades slipped.

Anyway, he did 2 years at Occidental College and then transferred to Columbia. He then became a community organizer for a few years and then went to Harvard Law. He became the first Black editor of the Harvard Law Review and graduated magna cum laude.

Ok, not privileged. But I wouldn't exactly call it Blue Collar either. He definitely improved with time and made the most out of his later education.

John Sidney McCain III was born in the Panama Canal to John S. "Jack" McCain II and Roberta Wright. John the II was a naval officer--a four-star admiral. His life was that of a navy brat--moving place to place. He finally settled for a while in Virginia and attended a prestigious Episcopal High School where he lettered in wrestling--most interestingly earning the nicknames "punk" and "McNasty". He then entered the Naval Academy and had a less than stellar career there and graduated 6th from the bottom of his class. He then was a navy airman for a while--and as we all know--a POW in Vietnam. He then attended the National War College--and by that time he was older than the other two when I stopped talking about them--so I'll stop here. I must say--he was a cutie in his younger years! Once again, not privilege in the conventional sense--although having a father as a four-star admiral I'm sure didn't hurt his naval career. Probably the least hard working of all the youth so far.

Ralph Nader was born in Winsted Connecticut to Nathra and Rose Nader (her maiden name not given) who were both Lebanese immigrants. Nathra was employed by a textile mill and owned a restaurant. Not much was said about Nader's young childhood. He went to Princeton University(graduate magna cum laude) and Harvard Law School--graduating with distinction. He served in the U.S. Army for 6 months in 1959 and then became a lawyer. Did he get scholarships? Who knows. Again, doesn't seem like a life of extreme privilege--although not sleeping in cardboard boxes either.

Ronald Ernest Paul was born in Green Tree Pennsylvania to Margaret Paul and Howard Casper Paul. Howard co-owed Green Tree Dairy with his brothers. Young Ron shared a bedroom with his 3 brothers. He was good at track and field and graduated Dormont High School with honors and was student council president. He went to Gettysburg College (after declining an athletic scholarship to a major university--due to an injury) and paid for the first year with newspaper-route savings--then received an academic scholarship. He went to Medical School at Duke University and was drafted into the U.S. Air Force. His wiki entry definitely stresses lack of privilege more than the others --slept in a 1-bedroom house with his brothers, etc etc.

Michael Dale Huckabee was born in Hope Arkansas to Mae Elder and Dorsey Wiles Huckabee. His father was a fireman and mechanic and his mother was a clerk. He was an early radio announcer (age 14) and was elected Governor of Arkansas of Boys State and president of his high school class. He graduated magna cum laude from Ouachita Baptist University (completing a bachelor's degree in religious studies in 2 1/2 years) before attending Baptist theological seminary (dropping out after 1 year).

So there you have it folks, I was wrong about all the candidates. None of them was exactly born with the George W. Bush silver spoon. None of them came from political backgrounds--although Nader talks about how his parents discussed politics at the dinner table. From where did I get this idea of privilege. Maybe it was all that time John Edwards spent talking about his own blue-collar background. In fact, many of these life stories sound fairly similar to my own--up until ambition needed to kick in to go to Harvard or Yale. Perhaps that's where the cynicism comes in--jealousy--it could have been me. Actually, they all have done some impressive things--although I might hate to admit it.

The future of elections

I just spent an hour listening to the Diane Rehm show. The topic: the difference between the economic proposals of the two Democratic candidates as seen by experts in the field. The answer: there is very little difference between the two. What a shock. I am so tired of this election. The other week I had a conversation with a very good, politically-minded friend (I will leave out his name to protect his reputation) who is an Obama supporter. My stance was that it didn't matter if Clinton or Obama won--because they were essentially the same candidate in different clothes. He strongly disagreed--but when I asked him to give me an example of how their policies differed, he couldn't come up with a single one, but instead resorted to Hillary bashing. Don't get me wrong, I'm no Hillary fan, but I'm not in love with Obama either. To me he's just another politician who grew up in a privileged family with a good education. All this talk of "change" sounds a lot like selling out to me. He says he's going to reach across the aisle--but look at his policy proposals. Which one is reaching across the aisle?? Repealing the Bush tax cut? Amending NAFTA?, Strengthing unions?, Increasing worker leave?, Increasing fuel efficiency standards?, Mandatory reduction of carbon emissions?, Universal healthcare?, Leaving Iraq?, Ending production of Nuclear weapons? Which one of those is reaching across the aisle?? Translation: this is what I say I'm going to do so that you vote for me. In actuality, I'm going to compromise and take a much weaker stance on these issues --and then I can turn around and say that I said I would reach across the aisle --and that's what I'm doing. I'm not picking on Obama--they all do that and they all will do that.

What really pisses me off is that American people are really brainless. Oh, he says he's for change and he's young--so he must be for change--but they never look at what he's actually saying. They let the media tell them who to vote for. Even the academics. If you're young and educated--you should vote for Obama. And another fricken debate!!???? Give me a break. What is that going to accomplish? Think of how many millions of dollars are being spent on useless ads and debates and in the end we're not going to know who will make a better president. Debates are just fashion shows--I'm surprised they don't have a catwalk.

I think debates should be structured like reality TV. I'm sure I'm not the first to say this--but why not have a multi-level competition to really weed out the unworthy. We want a president to be smart, right? Lets have the first round be Jeopardy. I don't know about you, but I want someone who can think on their feet--lets do a Survivor or Amazing Race comp. next. Put them all out there by themselves and let them figure out how to survive. Let's not let them have any advisors--well 1 advisor (because I want to see how well they can choose advisors). After they've figured out how to find food and build a boat to get them off the island--we'll send in disgruntled natives and see how diplomatic they are. See how composed they are when they are being tied to a stake over a fire! (Advantage: McCain). My prediction is that Hillary would be killed just to get rid of her annoying voice (and so Bill, her chosen advisor no doubt, could make off with the cute native girls), Obama would be imprisoned for life saying ,"Hey guys, guys, this isn't fair. Come on guys. Guys. while the natives gave him noogies and wedgies", McCain, would try to Jedi-mind trick the natives into thinking that he and his advisor (Senator Lieberman) actually had the upper-hand in the situation and they weren't going to leave until they had achieved what they came for, Ron Paul would get executed for racist remarks, and Ralph Nader would have escaped by convincing the lower echelon people that they should demand better working conditions--but after escaping he would decide that his work had just begun and he would never return to the U.S. So who would win? The Huckster? No, he would be too busy trying to baptize the natives.

Well if anyone did get off the island, we can end with American Gladiators. Hey, I would like for a president to be in good shape. How can I expect someone to take care of my country if they don't take care of themselves?

Then we would see which one is the best person for the job. Who cares whether you've been in the senate or been married to a president, I want to see if you can think on your feet.

The Kindness of Strangers

If I told you that I met up with a couple --two people I hadn't previously known-- and we got along so well that I invited them over for dinner, what would you say? "Well that sounds nice." Ok, let's say they were traveling and I not only invited them over for dinner, but I asked them to stay at my house? Same reaction? I'm going to guess that I probably would have lost some people there--"stayed at your house, are you crazy?!" Other folks would probably say, "Wow, that's cool."

So what really happened was this. I met this couple online. I didn't even meet them in person first, but I invited them to stay at my house while they were in town. Ok, give me the lecture--let me have it. Tell me about the hundreds of things that could have gone wrong and how I have to be careful. Tell me that it worked out this time, but next time it might not. It doesn't help. I know all of these things. The truth of the matter is I joined an online group called The CouchSurfing Project. I heard about it on NPR one day and found myself signing up within the hour. It is an international "organization" with over 200 countries represented. You don't have to pay to join, and you don't even have to agree to offer your couch. Over 360,000 "matches" (i.e. someone found a place to sleep for the night--not matches as in romantic matches--that's not allowed) have been made and so far they have only 1 reported criminal activity. So already after less than a week as a member, we've hosted a couple from Australia, will host a couple from Germany this week, and will have a gentleman from Belgium next week. Hopefully all of these people will be as charming and fun as the first couple. I am trusting my instincts that people involved with this project are basically good. If I'm right, I get to have positive experiences with people from all over the world and make connections that may lead to a free place to sleep in Berlin or Sydney some day. If I'm wrong, I lose faith in human kind and resort to a life of distrust and paranoia--its a big risk. So why do I want to take the chance? Wouldn't it be better if I just imagined that people were good, but never tested the hypothesis? Wouldn't it be better to play it safe?

I wear a helmet when I ride my bike to work and when I am rock climbing in areas that may have loose rock. I wear my seatbelt (usually) in the car. I am actually pretty cautious most of the time. But what's the point when it comes to other people? I don't subscribe to any religion (ok, maybe Raelianism when I feel like it), and I don't believe in heaven. The way to immortality in my opinion is not a genetic mutation like I've written about before, but making connections with people. To throw out this spider web of friendship and to see how many people you can catch--its like the old 7 steps to Kevin Bacon game. Think of how many people you've met in your life. Most of the meetings we have are unremarkable. Every once in a while, I'm sure some stranger does something nice for you. Maybe you remember the face, but never knew the name. I've put my trust in strangers so many times. Sometimes I look back and say, "wow, that was stupid, " and sometimes I say, " wow, that was amazing." The point is not necessarily to remember everyone and become instant friends, the point is that the more people are nice to me--the more likely I am to be nice to others. I know it sounds corny, but these may all just be baby steps to making a more pleasant living environment. Think about a world where people always let you in when you were stuck trying to get onto a busy road? Where people stopped to help you when you had a flat? When someone bent down to pick up something you've dropped, and didn't take off and run with it?

One of my favorite stories was when I was traveling alone in Italy. I was 18 and this was a graduation present from my parents. I was supposed to go with a girlfriend, but she backed out 2 weeks before we were set to leave. My first destination was a small town in the Italian Alps. I flew to Milan and was soon informed that my luggage didn't make it across the Atlantic Ocean. The town to which I was traveling was a full day's travel by train and bus from Milan. I gave the agent the phone number for the Inn at which I was staying and made my way to the train station. I couldn't believe the lines! Holy Cow. I didn't speak Italian and tried to make a rough translation using my knowledge of Spanish and my limited knowledge of French. There was a train strike that had just begun--that's why it was so crowded. Only about 30% of the usual trains were running. I wandered around various platforms for a while pointing at the name of my destination town. Finally, a nice woman pointed to a very crowded platform. "hurry" she said. I got my ticket and stood with the rest of the masses. I heard a strange sound coming from behind me at some point--was it?-- yes it was. It was English. I had only been in Italy for 1 day and already the sound of English made me feel more relaxed. I took the train until somebody told me I should get off (after much pointing at my piece of paper). I was then directed toward a bus station. There was some concern and lots of strange looks and broken English from the person behind the counter at the bus station. She handed me two tickets. "Only 1 bus to inn" she said. ?? I got on the first bus and handed the two tickets. The bus driver took one and shoved the other back at me. Ok. After a few hours, he looked at me in the rear view mirror and said something in Italian pointing at the door. I dutifully disembarked. He got off the bus and I thought perhaps he was chasing me off--no, he only wanted to point, make unrecognizable gestures, and finally walk me over to another bus. I must have been a great joke because there was much laughter between he and the new bus driver. He he, I smiled and feigned laughter. By this time it was about 8 p.m. Italy time and I had been traveling a long time. Against all sense of safety, I fell asleep. I awoke to the bus driver shaking me. It was pitch black outside. "your stop, your stop." I guess so-- as it was the last one on the route. I thanked the driver and got off the bus in a small plaza. I had no idea where I was or where I was going. I saw a light on and gravitated toward it. It was a bar. There were two young men at the bar and one older man. I walked in and said, "English?" They shouted a name and a woman came out from the kitchen. She was younger and friendly looking. I told her my situation and showed her the paper. She said something to the two younger men who began to walk in my direction. "They will take you, " she said. At that point I was so tired and lost I didn't care what happened to me. I thought briefly about how I shouldn't trust strangers, nevermind young strange me--but I couldn't help it. I had no other way. The end of the story was uneventful. The two nice young men took me to the Inn, carried my bag in for me, and returned the next day to make sure I was ok. No funny business, no misconduct. I never got their names, but I will probably always remember that story. Its one of many instances of strangers showing me their good sides. One day, maybe this memory will serve to enable me to do something really foolish that I will regret, but for now, it helps me to feel good about offering a couch and perhaps a meal to some weary travlers.

What's in a Name

FYI I changed the title of this blog--the address is still the same--I didn't want to confuse anyone, but I picked a catchier title.

You should have thought of that before!

Ok, I told myself I wasn't going to blog about politics for a while, but I have something on my chest that needs to get out.

This morning I heard a story about how the democratic party was in a tizzy over whether or not to count the delegates from Michigan and Florida. Some folks (mostly supporters of Hillary Clinton) say that it is disenfranchising the voters of those states not to seat those delegates. Ok wait, I remember this battle months ago where the Democratic National Party made the decision to punish these states for moving their primaries up. At that point, the respective states made the decision to do it anyway (don't they feel stupid now--they would have had more of an effect on the race if they had waited). So that's when the discussion of voter disenfranchisement should have taken place. Seriously, I wonder if this wasn't a ploy to ensure Hillary's election. "Yeah guys, we're just going to boycott those states--nudge nudge wink wink" It's ridiculous to me. They (the states) flipped the National Party the Bird so they lost their ability to seat their delegates--period!

The same goes for the people who are registered with a non-mainstream party. (I hate the term 3rd Party because it just perpetuates the idea that a 2 party system is natural). When I registered as a Green Party member in New Mexico, the nice elderly lady that was taking my application told me that registering as "Green" meant I couldn't vote in the primaries--did I understand? Of course. It was my decision. Its not like I was forced to register as Green because I was a woman of short stature or due to ethnicity--I had the choice and I made it. I don't get to vote for the NRA president--why? Because I'm not a member. I don't vote for Governor of Pennsylvania--why? Because I chose not to live there. Make a decision and stick with it already. We aren't guaranteed the right to choose the candidate from a particular political party by the constitution--you're supposed to pick a party based on your interest in it. Instead of meddling in the mainstream parties' business why don't you spend your energy getting your own party candidate?

You are what you eat

So I'm a vegetarian. I have been since I was like 15 years old. In most educated parts of the country this isn't very unusual. Sure I still get looks when I'm out in the sticks and I ask if there's meat in the refried beans (well of course there is, honey!), but for the most part this is an accepted diet choice. Not eating meat is a part of my personality. I am quite sure I know people who, when my name comes up, immediately think 'vegetarian". Its strange that it can become a defining character of one's personality. The thing that really gets people is that I don't really have a "cause". I'm not a vegetarian because I'm a big animal rights person--although I do have a soft spot for scaly, slimy, furry, and feathered friends alike. I'm not a vegetarian because I think meat is necessarily the answer to the global warming crisis--although I do think Americans could stand to devote a little less of our purple mountain majesties to the pursuit of obese livestock. I don't have an issue with hunters--in fact, I am really starting to think that if someone can't stomach killing an animal, they shouldn't put a killed animal in their stomach.

I've been thinking about this a lot lately with the whole recalled beef scandal. Most slaughter houses are not nice places--yeah this one was particularly bad--but I do wonder if Americans were forced to kill their own livestock, how many steak houses with giant plastic cows out front would still be in existence. On that point--what's up with the barbecue joints with pigs in aprons out front or on the sign?? My friend Ben (www.sportsacademic.blogspot.com) and I have often discussed this phenomenon. Pigs with chefs hats and forks and knives serving up pork ribs--now that's just weird!

When I was in Kenya, I stayed with a friend of mine and his family out near Lake Victoria. One day I was sitting out with the kids in the yard looking at their chickens. I had been trying to learn Swahili, but was certainly no master of the language. The eight-year -old boy asked me a question about the chickens. I thought he asked me which one I thought was the prettiest. Of the three chickens, I pointed to the biggest, brightest, most handsome one. No sooner had I pointed it out than the boy scooped up the chicken in his hands and broke its neck with the skill of a mob hitman. I'm sure my mouth stood open for quite some time after that. er ah, um...so I guess that's dinner?? I gave myself a free pass on the vegetarianism that night since I had just sentenced that beautiful animal to death--the least I could do was eat it. Not to mention I'd just taken their largest bird--it would be a little rude to refuse it now.

Mostly I am a vegetarian because its a part of my personality--like being short. I've thought about giving it up--but there's really no reason. Its healthier, its cheaper, and I don't have to think of how hypocritical I am for not killing my own food. I'd gladly kill celery or a carrot though--just let me at em! I'd never last as a hunter/gatherer.

Group Mentality

I just finished watching "An Unreasonable Man" the documentary about Ralph Nader and it got me all fired up about politics again (and it made me really dislike movie maker Michael Moore). i recognize that if I wasn't a Nader fan at the start, I would just have passed the documentary off as Nader propaganda--but how can you ignore what this man has done and accomplished in his life. How can you ignore the irony of the "Change" chants of todays presidential race in light of Nader's campaign? Here is a man that was talking Global Climate change in the 2000 election. Here was a man who was talking about corrupt lending practices in the mortgage industry in the 2000 election! To what country do I have to move in order to get a man like Nader as the leader? He is criticized for being ego-centric--seriously what politician isn't? Here is the man who brought us consumer protection--who brought us air bags--and what will he be remembered for??? "Spoiling" the election for Al Gore. Al Gore who uses other people's work in his own documentary and is hailed as a hero. Are we forever going to be slaves of the media? Sadly, the answer is --most likely.

Lets talk about Michael Moore for a second--the "crusader" against injustice. "The Unreasonable Man" shows clips of Moore in the 2000 election touring with Nader and raging on about how the lesser of two evils is still evil. And then in 2004 saying how Nader just needs to go away and how it was all his fault that Bush was in the whitehouse. What principles are you standing on exactly, Mr Moore? The Sewer Rat policy of abandoning ship when times get tough? Yeah, its ok to regret decisions you've made in the past--but at least own up to them. Don't bow down to the group mentality of blaming Nader.

This whole group mentality thing has been on my mind lately as well. The political troubles in Kenya have continued to plague my thoughts. Its amazing how much more we are affected when we have an emotional relationship to a place. I know what's happening in Darfur is terrible and tragic--but I've never been there. I've never met the people there--so I have to admit to not being as affected by that crisis. It's sad--but true. Anyway, Isaac and I were discussing the crisis in Kenya and I was saying how I felt that this ability to turn on our neighbors and brutalize them--must be an instinct in all of us. There are so many instances of this happening--in so many different situations. It's a really frightening thought. Even if its not physical violence--we all have that instinct to exert power over another to our benefit. Some of us can fairly successfully control it--but I feel that there might be a trigger in all of us that makes us snap. Isaac had an interesting theory related to this idea of the group rather than the self. He felt that once you can claim membership in a group--rather than acting as an individual--you can justify doing unspeakable things. People have done it on behalf of religion, tribe, ethnicity, political beliefs. It something I would like to flesh out a bit in the future--but I got to thinking about this with Michael Moore.

As long as the group of Liberal Democrats got together to blame Nader for stealing the presidency--it was ok for someone like Moore to be a hypocrit. As long as I'm not alone, I can justify. My membership in this group makes it ok. Because I'm a woman, I can justify voting for Hillary Clinton even though I don't agree with her--its much easier to just be part of a group than to actually think for myself. My political leader tells me the election was stolen--therefore I can turn against my neighbors and friends and stone them to death--I am acting on behalf of a group now. Very disturbing.

I'm so embarrassed (for you)

As someone who frequently points out my own short-comings, I'm not often in the state of embarrassment--not for myself anyway. I do, however, often find myself feeling embarrassment on behalf of others--what's that all about?

I was thinking about this the other day when an acquaintance used the term "Patagucci" when referring to the clothing brand Patagonia and then had that self-satisfied look like they'd just made the most hilarious and original joke. I was wounded with embarrassment for this person--are you so clueless that you think that someone in my age group could possibly have gone through life without having heard that term? Come on! To add salt to the wound, this person kept repeating the phrase--with each shot glancing at my face to see if I "got it." Yeah I got it--you're an idiot. But rather than feeling simple irritation for this clueless person, I feel embarrassment on their behalf. Its one thing to have empathy for someone who is in an embarrassing situation and is clearly embarrassed themselves--but to feel embarrassment for someone who is so out of touch that they don't even realize that they should feel shame! What's wrong with me? How did this evolve? Its not like I'm going to pull that person aside and inform them re their faux pas.

I wonder if the Great Apes share this apparent mutation that I have. One chimp says to the other, "Where do you think they got these bananas--'Whole Paycheck'? Har har, that's what I call Whole Foods cause its so expensive. Get it. Yeah these look like designer bananas--I bet they got them at Whole Paycheck." Meanwhile the recipient of this humor quietly puts her faintly pink face in her hand and mutters "yeah, I get it--you're an idiot".

Raelian

I was listening today to Diane Rehm and she was interviewing E.J. Dionne who just wrote a book about politics and religion. He's an unabashed liberal, but also a fairly devout Catholic. He makes the point that being a liberal does not preclude being religious--even though many liberals are distrustful of religious sects--making all of them out to be right-wing conservatives.

There isn't any reason why a liberal couldn't be religious. The problem is that most religions are so hypocritical and, in my view, cult-ish. I don't feel like there is anything missing in my life because I don't subscribe to any religious views. I'm comfortable with thinking that I'll be fertilizer when I die. I don't even like having to tell people whether I'm agnostic or atheist--can I be neither? I really don't give it enough thought to make the choice. I don't deny others their right to believe in something--which some would say makes me agnostic--I'm not denying that a higher being exists--but I'm not denying it because I'm not really thinking about it at all. I frame my thoughts on religion with the frame of other people--I don't ever put the scope on myself and examine my own beliefs very thoroughly--and I'm ok with that.

There is one religion that has captured my interest--Raelian. This "religion" was started by a French guy who says he was visited by Aliens on December 13, 1973 who explained to him that this race of aliens created all life on earth--through DNA technology--and that they were mistaken for gods. This is intelligent design taken to its extreme. Aside from that--the religion is fairly innocuous. They are accepting of all races, all sexual preferences, they feel that sex out of marriage is cool, and they are very pro science (for obvious reasons). I can get behind this religion in a way, because I feel that humans don't belong on earth. Whereas Raelians believe all life was created by aliens--I think they got it wrong. I think only the humans were placed here. And we don't fit. We don't adapt to our surroundings like other members of the Nature Club. The Raelians are pretty wacky--building an embassy to welcome the aliens back to earth when they return--but is that really any more wacky than the Vatican? Is the fact that a race car driver from France had a vision--any wackier than what the Mormons believe? Here's the thing, it just so happens that my birthday is December 13, 1973--maybe I know something the race car driver doesn't....

Immortality

The other night, we were watching this movie about Japanese Shinobi (called Shinobi). I don't know much about them, but they were supposed to be super-special ninja that had really cool powers. One of the shinobi was immortal. It got me to thinking--how would you know you were immortal in this day and age? What if you did have some genetic mutation that made you immortal--but you didn't know. I mean how would you? I'm not talking about the ability to heal like on the TV show "Heroes"--I'm talking about the inability to die. You've spent your entire life being careful--for nothing. When you finally find out--you're like 80 years old (which is pretty young for immortality--but lets say your particular brand of genetic mutation allowed you to get physically old). Its kind of a weird thing immortality. In movies it seems like the immortal are almost always physically fairly old--but we almost never learn how they found out about their condition. Are you just born with the knowledge? Is there always some wise old Asian man there to tell you?
Something to think about.

Disenfranchisement and Apathy

Super Tuesday has come and gone and I had a huge rant. As you might imagine, I am not nor have I ever been apathetic about politics and elections. When I was in fourth grade we held a mock election for the Mondale/Reagan race. We had real voting booths with the levers and everything. Similar to the national election, there were about 10 of us in the Mondale camp, but we were passionate about it. I was especially motivated by the choice of Geraldine Ferraro as a running mate. The first woman to be chosen as a running mate in a major political party--wow! I was impressed. My fourth-grade cohort was not quite as taken by this landmark occasion. I remember one boy telling me that a girl couldn't be president--no way. I told him he was simply too ignorant to understand the presidential election and the only reason he was for Reagan was because he recognized the name--what a moron! Of course I neglected to acknowledge that my own dedication to the Mondale/Ferraro ticket had more to do with my parents' liberal leanings than to my understanding of the issues--but nevertheless I admired Ferraro.

That year in school was the same year that the teachers decided that boys and girls could no longer play together on the playground in any competitive fashion. Even if the game didn't involve "boys against girls" any competition--indeed any game--was forbidden. As fourth grade citizens we were required to sign a "contract" agreeing to these rules. As one of only two holdouts for freedom and equality, I was threatened with suspension for refusing to sign the contract. Mind you, in these pre-pubescent years, I was top of my class, curve-breaker (if they had curves in 4th grade), teacher's pet. I'm sure the teachers thought that suspension would scare the goody-two-shoes right off of me. Forget it. I stood firm. They told me I wouldn't be allowed to have recess until I signed the contract. Fine. That lasted about 3 days until my mother stormed into the school and gave the teachers a verbal lashing that left visible marks. Go mom. Anyway, so I was primed for this election. Girls were equal to boys and should be allowed to do anything that boys did and I hoped Geraldine Ferraro would prove it.

What ever happened to Geraldine Ferraro anyway? It seems like in these days of "hilary-mania" some mention would be made of this political pioneer. Well Wikipedia tells me that after Mondale was squashed by Reagan, Geraldine Ferraro ran for U.S. senate and was defeated. Wow. The people of New York state are tough. Now, wiki tells me, Ferraro is working for the Clinton campaign. Huh. I have to say that I'm not a Hilary fan anyway, but the fact that she doesn't draw attention to the lady who "went first" makes me dislike her even more. Why do I dislike Hilary so? I guess I don't feel the same pioneer spirit I felt with Ferraro. She's just riding on Bill's coat-tails in my opinion.

Anyway, back to my disenfranchisement and the initial impetus for this rant. So I go to vote on Tuesday--armed with my driver's license--because that's the law in AZ. The line was ridiculous. Most people didn't have IDs or weren't on the rolls or were registered independent or undeclared and didn't realize they couldn't vote. So I felt pretty confident--I had my license with me--and my voter registration card--yes! I get to the front of the line and the woman shakes her head. I'm sorry the address on your license doesn't agree with the address we have. Oh, that's ok, I have my voter registration card right here and it has my new address on it. Sorry, that's not good enough--you need two pieces of ID with your new address--or two pieces of mail. What? But I have my driver's license--so you know its me right? And my voter registration card agrees with the information you have, right? So what are you questioning? When I re-registered with my new address, I provided my driver's license number and my old address--so couldn't we cross-reference this? I was told I could fill out a provisional ballot and then come back by Friday with another piece of mail to verify my address. I got really irritated at that point. Come back on Friday? I just waited in line for 20 minutes and you want me to come back? What's worse is you're telling me that if I had stolen my neighbor's mail and claimed to be her, I would be seen as having more legitimate forms of ID than a current driver's license!! I felt so violated--and well, apathetic. Like my vote is going to count on Friday! This is the primary for christ's sake! Super tuesday! I grumbled my way through the provisional ballot form--and --just to show them--I voted for my preferred candidate (who is no longer in the race) Bill Richardson. Ha! I sure showed them--disenfranchise me why don't you. Well, I'll just.. just.. just disenfranchise myself.

What ever happened to that fourth grader who sacrificed herself for principles?

peeve

At the risk of sounding like I spend all my free time at the grocery store--I do have another peeve that's been bothering me, and I wonder if it happens to anyone else.

The situation is generally when I just have a few items--and maybe I have one of those hand baskets. I'm in line, and the people in front of me are either holding their items or don't have many. The little conveyor belt is running and I'm trying to put my items on it in some orderly fashion. For some reason I like for my groceries to be orderly when I lay them out there for all to see. Why is it that cashiers--who have complete control over the conveyor belt--will let the thing run on and on while someone like me is desperately trying to keep their grocery items in line? Have you had this experience? You keep sliding your groceries back to keep from encroaching upon the person in front of you's "conveyor space" meanwhile the cashier --who could easily stop the belt because its not actually serving any purpose at this time--pretends he/she doesn't notice your struggle.

Tell me, is this an intentional power play--or is it just my insanity??