I want to ride my...

I was attacked by a woman in a giant SUV today. She was upset about something I'd done on my bike and chose to scream at me over her little girl that was sitting in the passenger seat. I wanted to say so many things to this woman, but, in respect for the child, I chose to say, "I'm sorry." I thought it was a nice thing to say, but it seemed to infuriate her. She shouted, "If you're going to ride your bike, you should learn how to ride it!"

This upset me on so many levels. Every day, as I ride to work, I deal with drivers who choose to ignore my presence. They encroach on the bike lane, honk at me if I'm forced to ride in the real lane due to narrow roads and no bike lane, turn right without signaling, and countless other offenses. I was guilty of not coming to a complete stop at a red light when I was going to turn right. On the face of it, I was wrong; but in lieu of what I am up against every day I think it was a minor offense. I understand that many people get their kicks by shouting at other drivers and "flipping the bird" at every error whether intentional or not. I personally choose to believe that most of these little mishaps are just mistakes in judgement or lapses in attention. Yes, they sometimes cause accidents, but if you're wary enough to see it, you should just be glad that you were and cut a little slack. That's just me. I know others who choose road rage and think my method is weak. I couldn't help but feel sorry for that little girl. If this woman screamed at me like that--even after I apologized, what must her life be like? I felt like shouting back, "if you're going to have a child, you should learn to control your anger!"

The main thing that bothered me though was her attitude that me riding a bicycle was somehow encroaching on her rights to drive a gigantic, gas-guzzling SUV. Huh? How about, "If you're going to drive an SUV, you should have a good reason."

Am I getting special "privilege" to reduce carbon emissions and fuel use by those who choose to ignore the problem of non-renewable resources and climate change? Well I just want to say, thank you to all the folks that choose to have a carbon footprint larger than the Grand Canyon. Thank you for letting me breath in your exhaust as I take up less than my allotted 3 feet of space against the curb. Thanks for the air pollution and the noise pollution. Mostly, thank you for allowing me and my bicycle to risk life and limb navigating through a world full of motorized machines that could grind me into the pavement while the driver talks to her lawyer on her cell phone. Thank you.

Ironic Bumper Stickers

I have to wonder whether the driver's of these cars have a sense of humor, are altering the meaning of the message, or are just ignorant of their own irony

"5% Of The World's People Consume A Third Of Its Resources & Make Nearly Half The Waste. That 5% Is Us" was seen on a Chevy Suburban in Flagstaff--were they bragging?

"Born in the USA" on the back of a Toyota Tacoma--technically these days probably true--but certainly not conceived in the USA.

Paying for Love

No, this blog is not about Eliot Spitzer or any of the other tens of thousands of men and women who have participated in prostitution (Kinsey estimated 70% of all men had participated at some point in their lives). This is about paying for love in a different way--pets. Yesterday I was browsing craigslist while my computer was processing an image, (I had to say that in case my boss reads this--really, it was processing). I came across this link

"PETITION: Ask Obama to adopt rather than buy dog. NOT politicall
Obama has made it public that he has promised his daughters a dog. He would set such a great
example if he adopted from a shelter or foster care. Please sign and pass on. Animals desperately need homes.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/tell-obama-to-adopt-when-he-gets-his-daughters-a-dog"

In the first place, let me just say that I think it is ridiculous to pay for a purebred dog (even though a few members of my immediate family have done so--I still think its stupid). I have two adopted dogs and they are head and shoulders better than any purebred I've ever met (no, I'm not biased at all!). On the other hand, I was captivated when Barney the Beagle won Best in Show at Westminster--he was pretty cute. But for the most part, I find purebreds to be dull.

I also feel that if someone is running for office--especially the executive office of the United States--that they are inviting a scrutiny of their personal lives. Much the same as I don't feel sorry for Brittany Spears who begged for attention for so long and now is feeling the adverse effects, I don't feel sorry for those running for or in political office when some aspects of their lives are exposed. I don't personally care much about it, and it does make me mad that the media makes a circus about it; but in this day and age, I do feel that people should come to expect it. However, this seems to be going a bit far. There are many ways in which candidates could make good examples: the cars they drive (we've already heard about that one), whether they shop at locally-owned businesses or multi-million dollar corporations, whether they wear clothes that were made in sweatshops, if they take public transportation when available, what kind of floor coverings are in their house?, do they have extra insulation for an energy efficient home?, what percent of their income is donated to charity every year (I'm sure we know that one as well), when its yellow...do they let it mellow? Wait..I'm going to start a petition that says "Tell Hilary to Let it Mellow when Its Yellow and Save our Water Resources"--will you sign it?

My brother got to be the spiritual leader of my country, and all I got is this lowsy t-shirt

In the news recently is word of unrest in Tibet. The Chinese government accuses the Dalai Lama of encouraging this unrest, but his holiness denies involvement. Whenever I think of the Dalai Lama I think of the town in which I attended university, Bloomington, IN. What does Bloomington, IN have to do with Tibet? Well, the Dalai Lama's big brother lives there. That's right, you thought you lived under the shadow of your siblings? This guy owns a couple of restaurants in a small mid-western town (The Norbu Cafe and The Snow Lion--not sure if they are both still there) where he is also a professor. Frequently, Bloomington would host the Dalai Lama along with chanting Tibetan Monks. Bloomington is home to Indiana University, so although it is situated in the heart of a pretty red-neck part of Indiana, very close to where the KKK got its start, its actually a pretty liberal and interesting town. Nevertheless I do have to wonder why it was chosen as home for the brother of his holiness.

As far as I can tell, when a current Dalai Lama passes away, the new Dalai Lama is chosen based on similar characteristics. I picture it like Cinderella. A bunch of monks show up at the door with a picture of the departed Dalai Lama and hold it up to all the males in the house. I don't mean any offense by this but--what's that all about? Bald head--check, looks good in a saffron robe--check, brown eyes--check--I mean the kid was 2 years old! This Dalai Lama's real name is Tenzin Gyatso (Gyatso is just the Tibetan word for Dalai or Ocean) and his birth name is Llhamo Döndrub. He was two years old when he was chosen. His older brother was picked as the reincarnation of another pretty important Lama--but not THE DALAI LAMA. Poor guy. I don't know how much older he is--I think its significant like 15 years. Truth be told, he was probably extremely happy and honored that his brother was chosen--it seems like its always that way in other countries. I can't help but wonder though if he ever looks in the mirror and says, "that little punk, what does he have that I don't have?"

I used to hate it when I was a kid (I'm the youngest of 5) and my teachers would remember all of my siblings and where they sat in class. I would constantly get compared to them. Can you imagine Norbu's issue when he'd be having a discussion with some other lamas at the age of 25 or something and he would make some statement or suggestion, and the rest of them would say, "Yeah, that's a good point; but what do you think your brother would say?" You know, the 10 year old that's leading our country?

I know I shouldn't make fun--and really I'm not. I respect their religion--I just don't understand it--but I do wonder about sibling rivalry.

Expensive Taste

To say you have "expensive taste" means less and less these days. Recently two studies have come out showing that price is the best predictor of whether something is desirable or "effective". Showing once again, that you don't get what you pay for, but you only believe you are getting what you've paid for (uggh that's a horrible dangling participle--you get that for which you have paid is much better).

The first involved a hyper placebo-effect. Some researchers at MIT made up a codeine-like drug called Veladone (or something similar). They even made pens and brochures about the drug. So they asked subjects to take the drug and then they subjected them to electric shocks. If they told the patients the pills cost $2.50/pill, they subjects reported that they felt less pain than without the drug 85% of the time. If they told them that the pills cost $0.20/pill, the subjects reported that the drugs were effective only 61% of the time. (I might be slightly off on the numbers here--I heard it on NPR http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=87938032). The researchers hypothesized that drug companies exploit this effect by upping the prices on drugs.

The second story involved the price of wine. This was a Cal-tech study that offered test subjects the opportunity to taste wine and then performed MRIs of their brains to detect which wine activated their "pleasure sensors" more. (I don't know about you, but I think I would rather be a test subject that got to taste wine, than one that was given electrical shocks--but that's just me). The results showed that even if the subjects were given the exact same wine, but were told it was different and had a different price--their brains would find the more expensive wine more pleasant. Full text article here--http://w4.stern.nyu.edu/emplibrary/jobmarket_paper_plassmann_final.pdf. I wonder about the demographics of the test subjects. Did they test people that shopped at Trader Joes? I'm pretty sure that I would find the less expensive wine more pleasant because I would know that I could afford to buy more.

So what does this all mean? That we're stupid? That we're being cheated out of our money by marketers? or that we can now giggle at "wine snobs" who tell us that you can't possibly get good wine at trader joes?

Geraldine Ferraro and Me

Just when I was complaining that nobody had been talking about Geraldine Ferraro--here she comes! At first I was kind of embarrassed that she had made a somewhat racist remark about Obama's campaign after I had talked about her being a hero of mine. But the more I read about what was said and what's been said since, the more I like her. Geraldine Ferraro is as unrefined a politician as they come--which is probably why she never made it. I was reading a New York Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/13/us/politics/13ferraro.html?ref=us) about her this evening and it hit me that Geraldine Ferraro is the politician that I would be--and why I would never make it as a politician. She gets heated and says what's on her mind--sometimes its offensive--but you can tell she's got passion. It's too bad we don't like our politicians to be passionate. In some ways, I understand--but in others--isn't it kind of refreshing to see that they are human? Like the "Howard Dean Scream"--what was so wrong about that anyway? Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending being politically incorrect--or what she said, but I have to admit, she's pretty darn gutsy.

Civil Rights

So now I'm feeling nostalgic about my friends.

I have a friend, D, who is a truly awesome person. We were roommates in Albuquerque and to this day I think he's one of the most incredible people I know. When I met him I assumed he was approximately my age--I later found out he was over 10 years my senior. You wouldn't know it by looking at him. He rides his bike to work almost everyday--no matter how far. He's in great shape for an "old guy". He served in the navy like his father and is very close to his family. D was always involved with Big Brother's/Big Sisters and got paired with the most unfortunate of families. D would go to teacher conferences with his Little Brother's teachers because the kids mother was unable or unwilling. He gave the most precious gift to a friend who wanted a child, but not a husband; and now he is also a father. D is one of those perfect hosts--attending to your every needs. He is very thoughtful and very smart. A few years ago he met the love of his life and the two of them lead a picture-perfect life traveling the world and taking care of one another. The only problem is that D is gay.

This is not a problem for D--he would gladly tell you straight off the bat. I use his initials only because I didn't ask if I could write this. The problem is with the rest of us. D and his partner are in a monogamous relationship. They bought a house together, they share bank accounts, they share a love that is becoming rare among two people no matter what the sexual preference. But if D's partner were to find himself in the hospital, D would have no rights to see him or to decide what to do in case of a permanent coma or other horrible occurrence. The other problem is that D's partner is not a U.S. citizen. He came here from India to get his Master's and Ph.D in engineering. He is a very smart person and was soon recruited by a local company. He has applied for a green card--but unfortunately the backlog in immigration means that it will be at least 7 more years before he gets it. He cannot be promoted in his job without his green card, but he also cannot switch to another company--doing so would start the green card process over again. In order to justify hiring a foreigner, the company has to show that this guy is unique and has to pay him better. But the truth of the matter is that they told D's partner that they would tell the government they were paying him more, but he wouldn't actually get more pay. He is stuck like a well-paid indentured servant.

Now they are thinking of leaving this country. Going to a place where the laws on civil unions and immigration are more agreeable. On the one hand I hope they find somewhere where they can be happy, on the other I am heartbroken. D has served his country, has volunteered, has made many charitable donations, and his been a great "American". In return, America has made him a second class citizen and denied him the right to fulfill his dreams. I find this extraordinarily sad. If only half the heterosexual couples I've met had as much love for one another as these two, we wouldn't have nearly the amount of domestic violence, single parenthood, and screwed up kids. It really sickens and confuses me.

Tribute to my friend Seamus

Early this week I learned of the passing of a dear friend of mine, Seamus Breslin. The news came as a shock to me partly because it drew attention to the fact that I haven't spoken to him since about 2002 and partly because his strength of mind and body was the stuff of legends.

I met Seamus through my work with a non-profit in Albuquerque called Hawks Aloft. I was working as an environmental educator with the organization and Seamus came to us as a volunteer. The story of Seamus arriving in Albuquerque is as follows. He was living in Ireland and met an American who was visiting the country. He and this American woman got along well and some time later he heard she was pregnant. Seamus had been both a commercial fisherman and a merchant marine. His life had been full of adventure as well as tragedy. A tragic accident on a BP oil tanker had left him paralyzed from the waist down. An anchor had crushed his torso and broken his leg just above his ankle (bones were snapped completely). His family was convinced that Seamus would not live to leave the hospital. For whatever reason and with some hidden strength, Seamus left the hospital and taught himself to walk again. One benefit of this accident was that BP paid him disability for the rest of his life allowing him to pursue his interests untethered by financial woes. Seamus made a vow to come to America to raise his daughter until she was 16 at which time he would return to Ireland--the country he loved dearly.

While in Albuquerque he volunteered as a field biologist for a number of different people and organizations. Seamus had an unbelievable amount of knowledge of wildlife and ecology--all self-taught. He would take on any task asked of him. When he first arrived in New Mexico, he didn't have a car--nor did he want one. Seamus found a bike at a thrift store and rode it everywhere--sometimes with his daughter in the baby seat behind him. He once rode from Albuquerque to Chaco Canyon (a distance of about 140 miles one way) in the summer (through some pretty grueling desert terrain I might add). He rode up to a Hawk Watch site at the top of the Manzano Mountains on a trail that is difficult for some to hike--he was unstoppable!

Once while we were doing Flammulated Owl suveys in the Zuni Mountains, Seamus took off from base camp to the owl site with a marine boat battery in each hand, told us he'd meet us up there, and marched off making it to the site long before any of us carrying much lighter loads ever arrived. He had the strength of a mule--and sometimes the personality. Seamus could be exasperating and infuriating even while being the most helpful volunteer. He loved to tease, and I have many memories of catching his slow sheepish grin out the corner of my eye as he was having me on. He revealed his personality to us in that same slow, deliberate way--very quiet and reserved at first, but becoming more outspoken as time went on.

Seamus was finally taken by pancreatitus at the age of 46. It seems such a young age, but I think Seamus experienced more in those 46 years than some do in 92. My friend Hannah reminded me of the words Seamus used for her when she was leaving New Mexico to return to New Zealand after spending the summer with us. He said, "I shan't miss you, Hannah; but I'll think of you often." Missing implies regret--and I'm quite sure Seamus had very few regrets. I use those same words to him--so long, Seamus, I'll think of you often.

Get over it!

I am REALLY tired of journalists criticizing Nader for running again. Finally, I lost it when the High Country News blog posted this letter to Nader
http://blog.hcn.org/goat/2008/02/26/dear-ralph/

You can read my comment on the blog--or I have pasted the text here

Dear Marty,
I am sorry that your decision in 2000 troubles you because you obviously made it without firmly understanding or firmly believing in your actions. It is clear that you did not listen or comprehend the message of Ralph Nader's candidacy, but only got caught up in the frenzy of your peers--much like you seem to be caught up in the current rhetoric of the Democratic Party. Your letter to Nader evokes for me the image of a scorned college student who is embarrassed "the morning after" passion got the best of them. Hindsight, as they say, is 20/20.

Al Gore had the benefit of hindsight when he created "An Inconvenient Truth". I wonder if his hindsight included the fact that the Clinton administration refused to outline a timetable to reduce U.S. carbon emissions while Gore was in the Whitehouse. I wonder if his decision to hold his tongue while promised public land use reforms fell by the wayside keeps him awake at night just as your 2000 presidential vote.

Meanwhile, it certainly wasn't hindsight that impelled Ralph Nader to take on the automobile industry to fight for tougher safety standards, and drive the creation of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. It wasn't hindsight that made Nader question the use of DDT on Princeton campus only to be told that Princeton had some of the world's best biologists and if they didn't feel that it was DDT killing the birds, then who was Ralph Nader to question them. It wasn't hindsight that caused Nader to question mortgage lending practices back during the 2000 election--no, not hindsight. Nader has an incredible ability to identify a problem before the rest of the country even recognizes it. His major downfall is that once that problem is identified, he won't rest until he has made progress toward fixing it. Nader's message in 2000 was that the American people were being sold to the highest bidder by corrupt politicians nestled deep in the pockets of big business. His message was that the two party system is leaving us with effectively no choice. His message was that we shouldn't feel that we "owe" our vote to anyone, but rather, that they should earn it. That was his message in 1996, 2000, 2004, and now in 2008. He is running for president because he believes in what he says. He is not swayed by whiners who can't make a decision without the media telling them how to make it. He is not swayed by lawsuits by the Democratic Party. One only needs to look at Nader's record to recognize that he isn't easily swayed.

I only wish journalists like you had the same courage of your convictions.

If you do not want to Vote for Nader, by all means, do not. It is exactly that right for which he is fighting.