Daisy's favorite evening activity is cuddling with me on the couch while I watch TV and knit/crochet. She has her favorite blankie and can hardly wait for me to grab it before she leaps over the couch to be tucked in just the way she likes. This blankie is her favorite because the holes in the crochet are just the right size for her nose to sniff through, as well as her eyes to spy what's on the TV in case a dog appears on the screen and Daisy has to rescue us from that potential danger.
Mia, on the other hand, is not particularly thrilled that Daisy gets the special blankie while she has to stretch out on a mere towel that barely covers the couch she's NOT allowed to sleep on. (Well, that's the theory, but Mia does her own thing.)Last night, however, after spending a couple of days on the coast, I was tired and forgot to fold the special blankie and store it off the couch. When I came out to the living room this morning, Mia had commandeered the blankie and it was evident from her fierce scowl that she is neither giving it up nor sharing it. Daisy, observing from her perch on top of the couch cushions, seems content to wait Mia out because she knows I'll pick up the blankie and not bring it out until it's time to cuddle after dinner.
Oh, well. Time to do some laundry, including dirty dog blankies and couch cushion covers.
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Saturday, December 24, 2011
"Tis the Season -- Again
‘Tis the day before Christmas and all through the house not a decoration is to be found. IF anyone were going to drop by, I probably would have caved and put up something, but my preference is don’t go there. Christmas has never been my favorite holiday, but my dotter annually insisted that I purchase this ‘n that, decorate everything in sight, and enjoy, enjoy, enjoy. That’s her Christmas; this is my Christmas, and reading a headline that assures me it's never too late to find a last-minute gift, even at the corner drugstore, does not make me want to rush out and buy something, anything, everything because I may have forgotten someone somewhere whose feelings I have inadvertently crushed.
Get over it: life is more than the number of gifts under the Christmas tree!
I used to be totally involved in church, spending endless hours working my tush off because God is sitting in the High Heavens marking up a huge black book that has my name in it and two columns: coming to heaven and going to hell. My goal was to earn as many black marks as I could because I knew there would eventually be lots of red marks because that’s just who I am. The harder I try to be good, the more trouble seems to come my way, and I’ve always hoped that I accrued enough black marks to somehow balance the totality of my life. To be honest, I’m not sure heaven is all that, but the fear of being burned alive for eternity was enough to make me want to be on the goodness and light side of that final decision. If that is even possible, that is.
I love Christmas carols, but mostly hate all of today's popular Christmas music because it’s all about what I want at this time of the year, and that’s mostly expensive presents that affirm I’m worthy of everyone I know spending money they may not have to keep me on their friends’ list on Facebook. I suspect there are far more people who feel as I do that being good just to get an unwanted, unneeded present from the Jolly Old Fatman isn’t all that much incentive after the first rush of adrenalin passes on Christmas morning.
It is absurd to me that anyone goes into debt to buy anyone’s affection with extravagant gifts they darned well know they cannot afford, yet TV commercials portray that as “the thing” to do. Ergo, the young, well-dressed, seemingly affluent couple in the elevator when the special music plays to alert the unsuspecting hubby that there’s a new car waiting at the curb. THAT is a discussion and a decision the couple should make together, NOT a surprise that one person springs on the other in the spirit of conspicuous Christmas consumption.
No wonder all those children stand in line at the present give-aways: all they know is that the more they get, the happier they’ll be – until the present loses its initial appeal and life has not changed one iota for the unhappy child. I’ve heard the mothers (primarily) in the retail stores threatening the children to be good “or else.” The “or else” is far too often no presents, when it should be an appropriate punishment for bad behavior, such as a time-out or, in my book, taking the overly-tired, stressed-out child home for a nap!
And, being brutally honest this fine Christmas Eve morning, I am totally suspect of all the “needy” families who get as much free bounty during the holidays as they possibly can score. When the media shows these “needy” families lining up for the give-aways, I’m often struck by the quality of the clothing, the trendy accessories, the huge, new SUV’s and the spiffy custom chrome wheels on the family sedans. In downtown LA, the street people who show up to eat the holiday meals are truly in need of the meal, as well as the kindness of strangers, but out where I live? Not so much.
I’m not into buying presents because it’s Christmas: I prefer to gift people who need gifts throughout the year but even that practice comes back and bites me in the ass more often than not.
Example: a woman I know who receives public assistance, also works a part-time job, and sometimes gets child support from her child’s father (never married), complained to me at T’giving that she didn’t have the money to put gas in her car so she could drive to her parents’ home for T’giving dinner. Yep, I fell for it and gave her $25 for a tank of gas. Imagine my surprise when she told me after the fact that she received a free holiday meal, so she didn’t drive to her parents’ home after all, but … a week later, she told me she purchased a computer for her dotter, as well as upgraded her cable service to include internet service.
Ho-ho-ho: merry take what you can get and run like hell, laughing behind the guileless donor’s back!
I was taught to work for what I need and to think long and hard about what I want: once the needs are met, the wants can be considered, but no one is promised a life wherein all the wants are provided. I watched a Christmas movie (probably on Hallmark) that showed a “pioneer” family struggling to make it to the end of another year. The daughter worked night after night to first make, and then embroider, a hanky for her father. When he opened the meager package, he was emotionally overwhelmed by the gift that came straight from the child’s heart.
If there were more Christmases like that in reality, rather than confined to the sappy Hallmark movies, I’d probably be much more on-board with the whole holiday thing.
Get over it: life is more than the number of gifts under the Christmas tree!
I used to be totally involved in church, spending endless hours working my tush off because God is sitting in the High Heavens marking up a huge black book that has my name in it and two columns: coming to heaven and going to hell. My goal was to earn as many black marks as I could because I knew there would eventually be lots of red marks because that’s just who I am. The harder I try to be good, the more trouble seems to come my way, and I’ve always hoped that I accrued enough black marks to somehow balance the totality of my life. To be honest, I’m not sure heaven is all that, but the fear of being burned alive for eternity was enough to make me want to be on the goodness and light side of that final decision. If that is even possible, that is.
I love Christmas carols, but mostly hate all of today's popular Christmas music because it’s all about what I want at this time of the year, and that’s mostly expensive presents that affirm I’m worthy of everyone I know spending money they may not have to keep me on their friends’ list on Facebook. I suspect there are far more people who feel as I do that being good just to get an unwanted, unneeded present from the Jolly Old Fatman isn’t all that much incentive after the first rush of adrenalin passes on Christmas morning.
It is absurd to me that anyone goes into debt to buy anyone’s affection with extravagant gifts they darned well know they cannot afford, yet TV commercials portray that as “the thing” to do. Ergo, the young, well-dressed, seemingly affluent couple in the elevator when the special music plays to alert the unsuspecting hubby that there’s a new car waiting at the curb. THAT is a discussion and a decision the couple should make together, NOT a surprise that one person springs on the other in the spirit of conspicuous Christmas consumption.
No wonder all those children stand in line at the present give-aways: all they know is that the more they get, the happier they’ll be – until the present loses its initial appeal and life has not changed one iota for the unhappy child. I’ve heard the mothers (primarily) in the retail stores threatening the children to be good “or else.” The “or else” is far too often no presents, when it should be an appropriate punishment for bad behavior, such as a time-out or, in my book, taking the overly-tired, stressed-out child home for a nap!
And, being brutally honest this fine Christmas Eve morning, I am totally suspect of all the “needy” families who get as much free bounty during the holidays as they possibly can score. When the media shows these “needy” families lining up for the give-aways, I’m often struck by the quality of the clothing, the trendy accessories, the huge, new SUV’s and the spiffy custom chrome wheels on the family sedans. In downtown LA, the street people who show up to eat the holiday meals are truly in need of the meal, as well as the kindness of strangers, but out where I live? Not so much.
I’m not into buying presents because it’s Christmas: I prefer to gift people who need gifts throughout the year but even that practice comes back and bites me in the ass more often than not.
Example: a woman I know who receives public assistance, also works a part-time job, and sometimes gets child support from her child’s father (never married), complained to me at T’giving that she didn’t have the money to put gas in her car so she could drive to her parents’ home for T’giving dinner. Yep, I fell for it and gave her $25 for a tank of gas. Imagine my surprise when she told me after the fact that she received a free holiday meal, so she didn’t drive to her parents’ home after all, but … a week later, she told me she purchased a computer for her dotter, as well as upgraded her cable service to include internet service.
Ho-ho-ho: merry take what you can get and run like hell, laughing behind the guileless donor’s back!
I was taught to work for what I need and to think long and hard about what I want: once the needs are met, the wants can be considered, but no one is promised a life wherein all the wants are provided. I watched a Christmas movie (probably on Hallmark) that showed a “pioneer” family struggling to make it to the end of another year. The daughter worked night after night to first make, and then embroider, a hanky for her father. When he opened the meager package, he was emotionally overwhelmed by the gift that came straight from the child’s heart.
If there were more Christmases like that in reality, rather than confined to the sappy Hallmark movies, I’d probably be much more on-board with the whole holiday thing.
Crash, yes, but No Burn
I’ve never had a computer crash before, but about 2 weeks ago, I finished my business, shut down my laptop, and returned to it several hours later to find a blank grey screen. The Fujitsu logo flashed for an instant, but then … nothing. I removed the battery; I tried letting it “rest,” thinking that not using it would somehow change the blankness. I called around to find a shop that would take a look, then sent son the email, even though there was nothing he could do from thousands of miles away. Yesterday, my favorite international student came for a visit and we played computer repair for about 5 hours!!
Bottom line is that there was nothing, so with nothing to lose we wiped the hard drive clean, then started over. Yeah, all those files are gone, but I saved most of them on a flash drive within the last month, so what’s lost is lost, but what’s saved is still saved. Nothing else to do when nothing is working. It was challenging to get anything on the screen, but we plowed through it and used the disks that came with the laptop to reformat it, then used my purchased copy of Microsoft Office to put that back as it’s one of my most-used programs.
Somehow, we were successful and everything is working again. There are subtle changes so it’s not exactly “my” laptop again, but we’ll get there.
PS: 2 preferences I don't seem able to find are (1) my font for Microsoft Word and auto delete browing history upon leaving the web. Any assistance will be appreciated.
Bottom line is that there was nothing, so with nothing to lose we wiped the hard drive clean, then started over. Yeah, all those files are gone, but I saved most of them on a flash drive within the last month, so what’s lost is lost, but what’s saved is still saved. Nothing else to do when nothing is working. It was challenging to get anything on the screen, but we plowed through it and used the disks that came with the laptop to reformat it, then used my purchased copy of Microsoft Office to put that back as it’s one of my most-used programs.
Somehow, we were successful and everything is working again. There are subtle changes so it’s not exactly “my” laptop again, but we’ll get there.
PS: 2 preferences I don't seem able to find are (1) my font for Microsoft Word and auto delete browing history upon leaving the web. Any assistance will be appreciated.
Friday, December 23, 2011
Descending
Sometimes, it takes a thousand words to tell a story; other times, all it takes is one good picture to tell it better than any words. The best scene in the limited release movie The Descendants is the panoramic view of virgin Hawaiian land, 25 million acres of it handed down through the generations to what appears to be an all-haolie conglomeration of off-spring of Hawaiian royalty determined to get rich off selling that inheritance to the highest bidder. The land is in a trust solely administered by George Clooney’s character and it is his decision to make whether to sell the land to developers, and, if that is the decision, to which developers. Meanwhile, George’s screen wife is in a boating accident and brain dead, so he also has to honor her living will and pull the plug.
Stressful time poorly presented by mediocre acting, especially by George Clooney, who stands to the side of the wrenching emotional aspects of the film and portrays a distraught husband and father, rather than becoming one. A good actor doesn’t play the part, s/he becomes the character, a concept that eludes this cast and degenerates the film into a farce.
This is a movie I would have walked out on but for my movie buddy, who stays until the bitter end of even the most awful movie – and this is one of the most awful movies I’ve endured in a while. It’s not just the story, which could have ended with George turning to his cousin after viewing the panorama of unspoiled land and saying, “Nope, not going to sell it.” It could have ended when George acknowledges the doctor’s prognosis and decision to honor the living will and pull the plug. It could have ended with George slapping the crap out of his filthy-mouthed typical teen daughter, who richly deserves it. It could have ended with George telling Syd, his daughter’s boy friend, not only no, but hell no: he is not going to be blackmailed by his filthy-mouthed teen daughter into dragging this worthless piece of humanity with them through the death process of his soon-to-be deceased wife. It could have ended with him making the decision not to ruin anyone else’s lives by confronting the realtor who had an affair with George’s soon-to-be-deceased wife.
It should have ended when the back cover of the book closed, but someone decided it would make a good film. Bad decision; bad film.
Stressful time poorly presented by mediocre acting, especially by George Clooney, who stands to the side of the wrenching emotional aspects of the film and portrays a distraught husband and father, rather than becoming one. A good actor doesn’t play the part, s/he becomes the character, a concept that eludes this cast and degenerates the film into a farce.
This is a movie I would have walked out on but for my movie buddy, who stays until the bitter end of even the most awful movie – and this is one of the most awful movies I’ve endured in a while. It’s not just the story, which could have ended with George turning to his cousin after viewing the panorama of unspoiled land and saying, “Nope, not going to sell it.” It could have ended when George acknowledges the doctor’s prognosis and decision to honor the living will and pull the plug. It could have ended with George slapping the crap out of his filthy-mouthed typical teen daughter, who richly deserves it. It could have ended with George telling Syd, his daughter’s boy friend, not only no, but hell no: he is not going to be blackmailed by his filthy-mouthed teen daughter into dragging this worthless piece of humanity with them through the death process of his soon-to-be deceased wife. It could have ended with him making the decision not to ruin anyone else’s lives by confronting the realtor who had an affair with George’s soon-to-be-deceased wife.
It should have ended when the back cover of the book closed, but someone decided it would make a good film. Bad decision; bad film.
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Te-bowing
I can think of at least one hundred more awful things that students do on a daily basis without being suspended from school, so to me, the "Tebow" is not worthy of mass media coverage.
The pose is the classic "Thinker" pose, and it never hurts anyone to take just a second to stop and think before moving on. We are far too quick to take offense where none is warranted and to impose punishment that far exceeds the crime.
Let the kids "Tebow" if it allows them to make a harmless statement of support for an underdog, an athlete who seems to be beyond the drugs, sex, and rock 'n roll of so many teen heroes. So much better than flipping the finger or expressing themselves with a string of uncensored profanity.
Get over it: move on. It's just taking a knee, folks.
The pose is the classic "Thinker" pose, and it never hurts anyone to take just a second to stop and think before moving on. We are far too quick to take offense where none is warranted and to impose punishment that far exceeds the crime.
Let the kids "Tebow" if it allows them to make a harmless statement of support for an underdog, an athlete who seems to be beyond the drugs, sex, and rock 'n roll of so many teen heroes. So much better than flipping the finger or expressing themselves with a string of uncensored profanity.
Get over it: move on. It's just taking a knee, folks.
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Nitpicking the Media
Sandra Bullock steps out in a two-piece suit featuring a plunging neckline on the jacket and that becomes a statement about her divorcee status. That is so last year!
Koby’s wife suspects he’s cheated on her again and has filed for divorce after 10 years of speculation about what happens on the road trips: time must be up on the pre-nup.
George Clooney reminds everyone that he was married once; in certain communities, the correct response to that statement is, “So was Rock Hudson.”
Gnute Gingrich assures the country that he and his current wife signed an actual agreement to be faithful to each other: no shacking up with and/or screwing around with anyone other than the legal spouse this time around. Did he miss that part in his first two marriages: the "foresaking all others" pledge that's part of most marriage vows? I'm going to guess he agreed to it both times before, but perhaps it only counts if Gnute puts it in writing?
John Edwards is moving into his home Rielle Hunter and their daughter, the woman with whom he did not have an affair and the child he did not father. Generous holiday gesture to extend to strangers.
Moving right along, Kim K is single and ready to mingle in Lost Vegas this holiday season: does she REALLY expect ANYONE to take her up on her provocative offer?
Christmas tree sales are down 30% at independent tree lots; unemployment is still hovering at 15% in many communities across the country. You do the budgeting.
All those charities to whom I sent a donation for the holiday season have responded with yet another request for yet another donation. Somehow, I expected them to hold off until after the first of the year and give me a chance to use up all the free address labels I earned from supporting their causes.
Finally, the USPS is going broke, but the lines are longer this year than in past years at my local post office. Of course, they are all in line for postal services and not crowding around the in-lobby gift shop, but there still are no plans to shut down the stationery supply stores in favor of staffing the postal service windows.
Whatever.
Koby’s wife suspects he’s cheated on her again and has filed for divorce after 10 years of speculation about what happens on the road trips: time must be up on the pre-nup.
George Clooney reminds everyone that he was married once; in certain communities, the correct response to that statement is, “So was Rock Hudson.”
Gnute Gingrich assures the country that he and his current wife signed an actual agreement to be faithful to each other: no shacking up with and/or screwing around with anyone other than the legal spouse this time around. Did he miss that part in his first two marriages: the "foresaking all others" pledge that's part of most marriage vows? I'm going to guess he agreed to it both times before, but perhaps it only counts if Gnute puts it in writing?
John Edwards is moving into his home Rielle Hunter and their daughter, the woman with whom he did not have an affair and the child he did not father. Generous holiday gesture to extend to strangers.
Moving right along, Kim K is single and ready to mingle in Lost Vegas this holiday season: does she REALLY expect ANYONE to take her up on her provocative offer?
Christmas tree sales are down 30% at independent tree lots; unemployment is still hovering at 15% in many communities across the country. You do the budgeting.
All those charities to whom I sent a donation for the holiday season have responded with yet another request for yet another donation. Somehow, I expected them to hold off until after the first of the year and give me a chance to use up all the free address labels I earned from supporting their causes.
Finally, the USPS is going broke, but the lines are longer this year than in past years at my local post office. Of course, they are all in line for postal services and not crowding around the in-lobby gift shop, but there still are no plans to shut down the stationery supply stores in favor of staffing the postal service windows.
Whatever.
Monday, December 12, 2011
Let's Face It
Meg Ryan always had such a distinctive face, a face that could express without words what most of us were feeling as she captured character after character on the big screen. Then, in the middle of the Hugh Jackman film, the one where he's from the past, Meg's face changed into a scary Jack Nicholsonesque joker caricature: she had a face lift or reconstruction or something that completely changed her look -- and not in a good way. Since that change, I've been uncomfortable with her appearance, so I don't want to see her in films. Perhaps coincidentally, she hasn't been cast in many films since altering her facial appearance.
This past week, I taped a Christmas movie that features Melissa Gilbert, who has brought many chick flick TV characters to life during the past several years. I was horrified to see that the Melissa we all remember has been replaced with a Lisa Renna knock-off: big, fishy mouth and eyebrows way up on top of her forehead. Nothing cute or endearing about the finished product, and certainly NOT the look for a romantic lead in a light-hearted seasonal drama!! Her face became a distraction during the film and I found myself wishing that someone more youthful, more natural looking, had been cast instead of Melissa Gilbert.
It used to be that women who had "work done" came back from a two-week vacation looking rested, relaxed, smoothed out. No one really knew if she had "work done" or not because it was subtle, not startling. Let's face it: it's nice that public people have access to plastic surgery, to the quick pick-up that keeps them forever the way we remember. However, with all the excellent plastic surgeons available to people of means, how the heck did two of the top stars end up with such dramatic -- and not very flattering -- fixes?
This past week, I taped a Christmas movie that features Melissa Gilbert, who has brought many chick flick TV characters to life during the past several years. I was horrified to see that the Melissa we all remember has been replaced with a Lisa Renna knock-off: big, fishy mouth and eyebrows way up on top of her forehead. Nothing cute or endearing about the finished product, and certainly NOT the look for a romantic lead in a light-hearted seasonal drama!! Her face became a distraction during the film and I found myself wishing that someone more youthful, more natural looking, had been cast instead of Melissa Gilbert.
It used to be that women who had "work done" came back from a two-week vacation looking rested, relaxed, smoothed out. No one really knew if she had "work done" or not because it was subtle, not startling. Let's face it: it's nice that public people have access to plastic surgery, to the quick pick-up that keeps them forever the way we remember. However, with all the excellent plastic surgeons available to people of means, how the heck did two of the top stars end up with such dramatic -- and not very flattering -- fixes?
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
So, Sue Me
For the first time in a long time, I somewhat enjoyed watching Glee last night because Sue Sylvester was not featured in the episode: it was about high school glee club singers and a singing competition. Oh, sure, there were still the side issues, including a recently-aged 18-year-old male student banging a single female teacher, and a third party trying to disrupt a gay couple’s relationship, and a teen mother willing to do anything to hold her child’s adoptive mother hostage to get her child back, but that’s almost mild compared to all the other manufactured issues that are presented as the typical high school experience on this … singing show!
If we are to believe the “issues taken from the headlines,” teachers and students are so busy with intra- and extra-curricular activities that it’s a wonder anyone has time to teach or an opportunity to learn. Teachers and students are single-mindedly focused on sex, both heterosexual and homosexual, to the exclusion of all other foci that life has to offer. What’s most important in the curriculum, according to Glee, is that everyone with sexual intimacy and/or gender identity issues must confront them here and now in the most public venue possible so there is never doubt in anyone’s mind what goes on behind closed doors.
Sue Sylvester’s character fuels the chaos, confuses the educational environment with political issues and actions that would result in immediate dismissal in the “real” world, and manipulates students to turn on one another so she can sit back and enjoy the fall-out. Parents are screaming in the media that their children are being bullied: tune into Glee and see an adult pro teach by example. Parents are screaming in the media that their children are being persecuted for their sexual preferences: tune into Glee and see an adult pro teach by example. Parents are screaming in the media that their children are not being presented with an adequate educational opportunity: tune into Glee and it’s easy to see that there is no time in anyone’s day to cope with all the dysfunction and also have time to teach, to learn, to experience something beyond the “desperate housewives” mentality that is alive and thriving in the media.
And, if you believe the writers of Glee, alive and thriving in the high schools of America.
Teaching is a tough gig: today’s academic core teacher no longer has the luxury of class size under 30, the top of the do-able scale based on my 35 years of standing at the podium. Today’s classroom equips every student who walks through the door, oftentimes in excess of 40 per class period, with a desk and not much else; the student provides the electronic device to fill the void where a textbook should be, as well as the seat time served listening to a well-meaning, well-educated professional try desperately to be more engaging, entertaining, and relevant than the Kardashians. For far too many students, class time is more time to text, to twitter, to take and post pictures, to visit one’s wall, to update one’s status, and to pass on any given individual’s take on what is happening at the most boring place on Earth: the totally out of control, dysfunctional American high school run by an out-of-touch administration and staffed by a faculty of buffoons that rivals the Barnum and Bailey Circus!
Add Sue Sylvester to the mix and the scenario goes too far beyond unreal to believe, but many parents believe that Sue’s the way it really is because that’s what their children tell them. Parents believe their children when they are told that “my teacher” did this or that, said this or that – and the parents go in for the kill. It’s hard to convince a parent that a child is making it up as s/he goes along to avoid consequences for their own actions when a very popular TV show seems to affirm that no matter how outrageous a student’s complaint, Sue Sylvester is much worse, with the rest of the fantasy high school staff not far behind! Rather than a microcosm of a typical high school, Glee has become the petri dish of dysfunction that parents would rather believe than the truth.
Glee was good when it was about an a capella choir learning how to function as a unit and then competing to challenge the choir to excel: great message for kids. The last 2 seasons, however, it has gone off-message regarding education and become something with absolutely no value-added, no matter how hard it tries, no matter how hard it pushes, no matter how outrageous the writers take the plot lines. In TV-land, it’s all about the ratings, about being renewed for another season, about making it big on the flat screen; for the educational community, for the first responders, for the hard-working middle class, it’s all about our jobs, our work ethic, our professional lives. Glee is just one more TV show to pit everything I believe and have worked my lifetime to achieve against a Nielson poll and win.
If we are to believe the “issues taken from the headlines,” teachers and students are so busy with intra- and extra-curricular activities that it’s a wonder anyone has time to teach or an opportunity to learn. Teachers and students are single-mindedly focused on sex, both heterosexual and homosexual, to the exclusion of all other foci that life has to offer. What’s most important in the curriculum, according to Glee, is that everyone with sexual intimacy and/or gender identity issues must confront them here and now in the most public venue possible so there is never doubt in anyone’s mind what goes on behind closed doors.
Sue Sylvester’s character fuels the chaos, confuses the educational environment with political issues and actions that would result in immediate dismissal in the “real” world, and manipulates students to turn on one another so she can sit back and enjoy the fall-out. Parents are screaming in the media that their children are being bullied: tune into Glee and see an adult pro teach by example. Parents are screaming in the media that their children are being persecuted for their sexual preferences: tune into Glee and see an adult pro teach by example. Parents are screaming in the media that their children are not being presented with an adequate educational opportunity: tune into Glee and it’s easy to see that there is no time in anyone’s day to cope with all the dysfunction and also have time to teach, to learn, to experience something beyond the “desperate housewives” mentality that is alive and thriving in the media.
And, if you believe the writers of Glee, alive and thriving in the high schools of America.
Teaching is a tough gig: today’s academic core teacher no longer has the luxury of class size under 30, the top of the do-able scale based on my 35 years of standing at the podium. Today’s classroom equips every student who walks through the door, oftentimes in excess of 40 per class period, with a desk and not much else; the student provides the electronic device to fill the void where a textbook should be, as well as the seat time served listening to a well-meaning, well-educated professional try desperately to be more engaging, entertaining, and relevant than the Kardashians. For far too many students, class time is more time to text, to twitter, to take and post pictures, to visit one’s wall, to update one’s status, and to pass on any given individual’s take on what is happening at the most boring place on Earth: the totally out of control, dysfunctional American high school run by an out-of-touch administration and staffed by a faculty of buffoons that rivals the Barnum and Bailey Circus!
Add Sue Sylvester to the mix and the scenario goes too far beyond unreal to believe, but many parents believe that Sue’s the way it really is because that’s what their children tell them. Parents believe their children when they are told that “my teacher” did this or that, said this or that – and the parents go in for the kill. It’s hard to convince a parent that a child is making it up as s/he goes along to avoid consequences for their own actions when a very popular TV show seems to affirm that no matter how outrageous a student’s complaint, Sue Sylvester is much worse, with the rest of the fantasy high school staff not far behind! Rather than a microcosm of a typical high school, Glee has become the petri dish of dysfunction that parents would rather believe than the truth.
Glee was good when it was about an a capella choir learning how to function as a unit and then competing to challenge the choir to excel: great message for kids. The last 2 seasons, however, it has gone off-message regarding education and become something with absolutely no value-added, no matter how hard it tries, no matter how hard it pushes, no matter how outrageous the writers take the plot lines. In TV-land, it’s all about the ratings, about being renewed for another season, about making it big on the flat screen; for the educational community, for the first responders, for the hard-working middle class, it’s all about our jobs, our work ethic, our professional lives. Glee is just one more TV show to pit everything I believe and have worked my lifetime to achieve against a Nielson poll and win.
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
This week ...
Honest to Pete, this is the cold from hell and it simply won't resolve itself. Yeah, I know that technically it's community acquired pneumonia, often acquired by travelers during the holiday season when airlines pack us into a common petri dish for several hours at a time, but I've taken enough drugs to have wiped this out already.
Last Thursday, after teaching class up the hill, I came outside in the icy cold snowy rain to find a flat tire. By the time I had finished dealing with that, I knew there would be consequences, and there were: I spent Friday at the doctor's office, rather than teaching a scheduled class. I've had a chest x-ray, but he wants me to schedule a pulmonary function test just in case as my breathing is still an issue (probably the asthma affect) and my inhaler is close at hand at all times.
Two weeks left in the semester, so I have to suit up, show up, and get the job done. Somehow.
Last Thursday, after teaching class up the hill, I came outside in the icy cold snowy rain to find a flat tire. By the time I had finished dealing with that, I knew there would be consequences, and there were: I spent Friday at the doctor's office, rather than teaching a scheduled class. I've had a chest x-ray, but he wants me to schedule a pulmonary function test just in case as my breathing is still an issue (probably the asthma affect) and my inhaler is close at hand at all times.
Two weeks left in the semester, so I have to suit up, show up, and get the job done. Somehow.
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Doggone It
When Mia came to live with me, it was because I needed her protection after a man tried to get into my house in the middle of the night. The sound of breaking glass woke me from a deep sleep to instant awareness, but I instantly felt almost helpless to stop his progress because I should have known he was there before he was able to break the window. A big, barking dog warns off all but the most determined criminal, so I not only had an all-house alarm system installed, but found a dog to be the first line of defense against the outside world.
In the past, I always had a dog, but my relocation to this house was during a difficult time in my life that I didn't want to complicate with having to care for anything other than myself. After the crime, I looked for a dog and found Mia at a shelter: it was love at first sight. I have come to depend on her for so many aspects of my life, but most especially, the unconditional love and protection she shares with me.
I tested Mia's loyalty and tolerance when Daisy arrived via a friend who took her from a callous owner who had tired of her exhuberance. The first three months, Mia and I both questioned the decision-making that brought Daisy into our family, but once Mia put Daisy into her place, life smoothed out. I now cannot imagine not having my girls here with me, nor, it seems, do they doubt that they were meant to share their lives with each other.
A couple of weeks ago, friends were talking about what would happen to their beloved pets if they were to die suddenly/unexpectedly, and it stopped me in my tracks because I don't know the answer to that thought. Neither of my children would take my dogs home to live out their lives as Mia is too old for much change and Daisy is still pretty exhuberant. My children aren't dog people, preferring cats, and both of my dogs HATE cats and would snatch them for a snack in a heartbeat. Neither of my children have fenced yards nor doggie doors, so that would cause problems when everyone is at work and the girls stay home.
Lots of older people have dogs they can care for, talk to, and take for walks, beloved pets that bring a sense of family in the winter years of one's life when so many elderly people live alone for so many reasons. I know that senior living residences encourage family pets to live with their elderly owners, and some full-care facilities even have facility pets they share with residents too infirm to care for them individually. But, I honestly don't know what happens to beloved pets when their owners die and there is no viable alternate living arrangement.
Leonora Hemsley probably had it right after all: earn a whole lot of money and leave it to the dogs so someone can be paid to care for them until it's their turn to head for heaven. I'm not thinking that's going to be in my death benefits' package, but it sure is an issue that's at the forefront of my current thinking.
In the past, I always had a dog, but my relocation to this house was during a difficult time in my life that I didn't want to complicate with having to care for anything other than myself. After the crime, I looked for a dog and found Mia at a shelter: it was love at first sight. I have come to depend on her for so many aspects of my life, but most especially, the unconditional love and protection she shares with me.
I tested Mia's loyalty and tolerance when Daisy arrived via a friend who took her from a callous owner who had tired of her exhuberance. The first three months, Mia and I both questioned the decision-making that brought Daisy into our family, but once Mia put Daisy into her place, life smoothed out. I now cannot imagine not having my girls here with me, nor, it seems, do they doubt that they were meant to share their lives with each other.
A couple of weeks ago, friends were talking about what would happen to their beloved pets if they were to die suddenly/unexpectedly, and it stopped me in my tracks because I don't know the answer to that thought. Neither of my children would take my dogs home to live out their lives as Mia is too old for much change and Daisy is still pretty exhuberant. My children aren't dog people, preferring cats, and both of my dogs HATE cats and would snatch them for a snack in a heartbeat. Neither of my children have fenced yards nor doggie doors, so that would cause problems when everyone is at work and the girls stay home.
Lots of older people have dogs they can care for, talk to, and take for walks, beloved pets that bring a sense of family in the winter years of one's life when so many elderly people live alone for so many reasons. I know that senior living residences encourage family pets to live with their elderly owners, and some full-care facilities even have facility pets they share with residents too infirm to care for them individually. But, I honestly don't know what happens to beloved pets when their owners die and there is no viable alternate living arrangement.
Leonora Hemsley probably had it right after all: earn a whole lot of money and leave it to the dogs so someone can be paid to care for them until it's their turn to head for heaven. I'm not thinking that's going to be in my death benefits' package, but it sure is an issue that's at the forefront of my current thinking.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Trip Commentary
First, a general comment: all 4 flights were booked to capacity. Not one empty seat on any flight. Sardines-in-a-Can syndrome is the new business model, accompanied by news articles in the on-board magazines about how expensive it is to operate an airline. And, as a matter of fact, the day of my return flight is the same day that my airline company announced that it was filing for bankruptcy protection.
Commenting on arrivals/departures: arriving early at a gate means that your plane filled with anxious flyers who want to deplane sits on the tarmac because all the gates are already filled with other anxious flyers who want to push back from the same gate your plane is trying to occupy. The joy at hearing the captain announce that we're 20 minutes early evaporates instantly.
Commenting on baggage fees: the way to avoid the $25 bag fee charged by American Airlines appears to be to stack up as much luggage as you can, breeze confidently through all the alleged screening lines, including the little stand that informs the traveler that all carry-on bags have to fit between the metal bars, then go to the head of the line of passengers wanting to board and feign ignorance when told that you cannot possibly carry all that luggage on board -- and must gate check it. See, using this little trick, you get to check your baggage BUT you don't have to pay the checked baggage fee!! Voila: not only does the savvy traveler get to fly the bags free, but they get to carry on several huge, bulky items, including over-sized duffel bags stuffed with all their worldly possessions.
How did I learn this little trick? Because I cannot lift my bag (which legally fits inside an overhead compartment, by the way) into said overhead compartment, I checked it when I checked in and was shocked to find I had to pay the $25 fee to check my one lonely, legal-sized carry-on bag. When I questioned the "free bag" idea, the clerk smiled and charged my credit card. After talking to seasoned flyers and paying attention to what all the scofflaws were doing, I followed suit and carried my bag to the gate on the trip home. Being in Group 4 for boarding, it is obvious that there will be no overhead bin space left for me upon my boarding, so I went brazenly to the gate and requested a gate check for my bag. Mission accomplished with no fee -- and my bag made it off the plane quicker than I at my destination.
Commenting on boarding: why on earth does first class board first? So we peasants in the cheaper seats can file past the elite, bumping their elbows, staring at them to see if we recognize "anyone" worth recognizing? Has no one thought about boarding from the back to the front? Or from the window seats to the middle seats, and then to the aisle seats? I was the middle on the way to, so moved the arm rests up and out of the way so I could get out when the other row sharers arrived. It amused me to see how quickly the arms came back down after they had claimed their spaces; I usually leave the arms up so we all have more elbow room. On the way coming back, I was the aisle, so I was the person bumped by every single person who walked down the aisle and back, as well as that damned beverage cart that also blocks in 8 rows of passengers at a time and will NOT be moved to accommodate anyone who has to go to the bathroom or deal with a child's dirty diaper.
Commenting on passengers: I recently read about the parents who are complaining about the "kiddie ghettoes" created at the back of planes when young children and their parents are forced to sit in the last rows to minimize the disruption to other passengers. On the flight to my destination, there were a few children; on the two legs returning home, the first leg surrounded me with a total of 5 lively, squirming, babbling, kicking children who threw snacks on the floor, screamed when they dropped their toys, leaned over the top of the seat where they were being held by a parent and reached out for the hapless traveler seated behind them. One child, noticing that I had "nothing" to do, handed me his storybook and demanded that I read him a story. When I politely refused, he complained to his mother, who was absorbed in her own book and ignored him. When he again handed me his book and told me to read to him, I told him to tell his mother to read as she seems to enjoy reading.
But my favorite mom was seated behind me on the way home, the selfish bitch mom who is used to the world accommodating her needs. After being interrupted by her very young female child (probably 4 years of age) who had to go potty, the mother told her to wait until she was done with her conversation, assuring the child that it's rude to interrupt mommy when she's talking on the phone (we had not yet departed). Of course, the child had to go potty, so the war began between taking care of a child's needs and making mommie happy. It escalated when the child wanted to play with mommie's I-Pad, but mommie screamed at her, loudly and quite suddenly, "No! No! No! That's NOT the way MOMMIE plays that game! Give me MY I-Pad. If you can't play the game the right way, you can't play it at all!"
Now, let's not get into the discussion about the appropriateness of entertaining a child with an I-Pad and focus on the lesson mommie teaches the daughter, a lesson that came back to mommie not too much later when the child changed the language on the I-Pad and mommie goes beserk. After mommie's tantrum, she demands of the child to explain why she changed the language. The child's answer was simple: because that's the way she likes HER I-Pad, so DON'T TOUCH IT!! "Leave it alone, mommie," the daughter told her when mommie tried to grab it from her.
Commenting on common courtesy: at the beginning of the last flight, the woman seated across from me, a woman who obviously does not have children (or maybe she had children but abused them viciously), threw her I-Phone onto the floor in a rage because the "damned thing" wouldn't keep its charge, then it dropped her call, and then it connected, but she couldn't hear the party on the receiving end of the call. She retrieved it in a profanity-laced rant, then started making derogatory comments about parents who bring children onto a plane before she realized the little ones were watching her actions and listening to her very, very closely.
At the end of the flight, she jumped up before the seat belt sign was turned off and started retrieving her personal items from a bin stuffed with her belongings (is there not one single airline employee anywhere who enforces the size and quantity requirements for carry-ons?). Swinging her first bag down from the bin, she hit me with it. When I spoke up and told her to be more careful, she turned toward me and told me to "watch it" because she had to get her luggage out of the bin and she had to get off the plane because she was at her limit with the crap she had to put up with on this plane.
Yeah, I stood up and intimidated her with my size, but after staring her down, I offered to help her retrieve her belongings so we all could get off the plane in a safe and orderly manner. Then, when I had her blocked behind me, hemmed in with her half-dozen bags, I directed the family with the 3 kids to gather all their belongings and go out ahead of us, including the fuming volcano behind me. They almost argued with me, but they had heard the constant string of comments about their children, so took advantage of my kindness to round up the troops and deplane.
Commenting on the travel experience, sometimes, you don't get what you want, but other times you get what you deserve.
Commenting on arrivals/departures: arriving early at a gate means that your plane filled with anxious flyers who want to deplane sits on the tarmac because all the gates are already filled with other anxious flyers who want to push back from the same gate your plane is trying to occupy. The joy at hearing the captain announce that we're 20 minutes early evaporates instantly.
Commenting on baggage fees: the way to avoid the $25 bag fee charged by American Airlines appears to be to stack up as much luggage as you can, breeze confidently through all the alleged screening lines, including the little stand that informs the traveler that all carry-on bags have to fit between the metal bars, then go to the head of the line of passengers wanting to board and feign ignorance when told that you cannot possibly carry all that luggage on board -- and must gate check it. See, using this little trick, you get to check your baggage BUT you don't have to pay the checked baggage fee!! Voila: not only does the savvy traveler get to fly the bags free, but they get to carry on several huge, bulky items, including over-sized duffel bags stuffed with all their worldly possessions.
How did I learn this little trick? Because I cannot lift my bag (which legally fits inside an overhead compartment, by the way) into said overhead compartment, I checked it when I checked in and was shocked to find I had to pay the $25 fee to check my one lonely, legal-sized carry-on bag. When I questioned the "free bag" idea, the clerk smiled and charged my credit card. After talking to seasoned flyers and paying attention to what all the scofflaws were doing, I followed suit and carried my bag to the gate on the trip home. Being in Group 4 for boarding, it is obvious that there will be no overhead bin space left for me upon my boarding, so I went brazenly to the gate and requested a gate check for my bag. Mission accomplished with no fee -- and my bag made it off the plane quicker than I at my destination.
Commenting on boarding: why on earth does first class board first? So we peasants in the cheaper seats can file past the elite, bumping their elbows, staring at them to see if we recognize "anyone" worth recognizing? Has no one thought about boarding from the back to the front? Or from the window seats to the middle seats, and then to the aisle seats? I was the middle on the way to, so moved the arm rests up and out of the way so I could get out when the other row sharers arrived. It amused me to see how quickly the arms came back down after they had claimed their spaces; I usually leave the arms up so we all have more elbow room. On the way coming back, I was the aisle, so I was the person bumped by every single person who walked down the aisle and back, as well as that damned beverage cart that also blocks in 8 rows of passengers at a time and will NOT be moved to accommodate anyone who has to go to the bathroom or deal with a child's dirty diaper.
Commenting on passengers: I recently read about the parents who are complaining about the "kiddie ghettoes" created at the back of planes when young children and their parents are forced to sit in the last rows to minimize the disruption to other passengers. On the flight to my destination, there were a few children; on the two legs returning home, the first leg surrounded me with a total of 5 lively, squirming, babbling, kicking children who threw snacks on the floor, screamed when they dropped their toys, leaned over the top of the seat where they were being held by a parent and reached out for the hapless traveler seated behind them. One child, noticing that I had "nothing" to do, handed me his storybook and demanded that I read him a story. When I politely refused, he complained to his mother, who was absorbed in her own book and ignored him. When he again handed me his book and told me to read to him, I told him to tell his mother to read as she seems to enjoy reading.
But my favorite mom was seated behind me on the way home, the selfish bitch mom who is used to the world accommodating her needs. After being interrupted by her very young female child (probably 4 years of age) who had to go potty, the mother told her to wait until she was done with her conversation, assuring the child that it's rude to interrupt mommy when she's talking on the phone (we had not yet departed). Of course, the child had to go potty, so the war began between taking care of a child's needs and making mommie happy. It escalated when the child wanted to play with mommie's I-Pad, but mommie screamed at her, loudly and quite suddenly, "No! No! No! That's NOT the way MOMMIE plays that game! Give me MY I-Pad. If you can't play the game the right way, you can't play it at all!"
Now, let's not get into the discussion about the appropriateness of entertaining a child with an I-Pad and focus on the lesson mommie teaches the daughter, a lesson that came back to mommie not too much later when the child changed the language on the I-Pad and mommie goes beserk. After mommie's tantrum, she demands of the child to explain why she changed the language. The child's answer was simple: because that's the way she likes HER I-Pad, so DON'T TOUCH IT!! "Leave it alone, mommie," the daughter told her when mommie tried to grab it from her.
Commenting on common courtesy: at the beginning of the last flight, the woman seated across from me, a woman who obviously does not have children (or maybe she had children but abused them viciously), threw her I-Phone onto the floor in a rage because the "damned thing" wouldn't keep its charge, then it dropped her call, and then it connected, but she couldn't hear the party on the receiving end of the call. She retrieved it in a profanity-laced rant, then started making derogatory comments about parents who bring children onto a plane before she realized the little ones were watching her actions and listening to her very, very closely.
At the end of the flight, she jumped up before the seat belt sign was turned off and started retrieving her personal items from a bin stuffed with her belongings (is there not one single airline employee anywhere who enforces the size and quantity requirements for carry-ons?). Swinging her first bag down from the bin, she hit me with it. When I spoke up and told her to be more careful, she turned toward me and told me to "watch it" because she had to get her luggage out of the bin and she had to get off the plane because she was at her limit with the crap she had to put up with on this plane.
Yeah, I stood up and intimidated her with my size, but after staring her down, I offered to help her retrieve her belongings so we all could get off the plane in a safe and orderly manner. Then, when I had her blocked behind me, hemmed in with her half-dozen bags, I directed the family with the 3 kids to gather all their belongings and go out ahead of us, including the fuming volcano behind me. They almost argued with me, but they had heard the constant string of comments about their children, so took advantage of my kindness to round up the troops and deplane.
Commenting on the travel experience, sometimes, you don't get what you want, but other times you get what you deserve.
Monday, November 28, 2011
P-New-Moan-Ya
Nothing like flying a coupla thousand miles to spend 10 vaca days sick. I thought the worst of the cold I’d hosted for the previous 10 days was over, so climbed aboard the planes and took off for T’giving. Man plans; God laughs. Evidently, somewhere along the line I introduced either bacteria or virus into my already compromised immune system and my cold became community acquired pneumonia, which seems to be pretty common in older folks especially.
Rather than touristing hither and yon, I’ve sat on a couch, feeling awful and then much worse, and watched the Hallmark Movie Channel. My dotter admits that should have been a clue, but we missed it. Sunday, I felt like death warmed over, so dotter convinced me to go to a walk-in clinic at WalMart, citing my ashen hue as an unflattering complexion color. One look by the receptionist led to the nurse on duty coming out; she said I needed the next level up and sent me to urgent care.
They were both nice and efficient, traits not often seen in CA clinics. The doc came in, assessed the situation, diagnosed the CAP, prescribed several lines of defense against it, told me it’s okay to fly back home BUT, if I am not over it by Friday, directed me to return to an urgent care for chest x-rays and blood work.
Do I feel better? Yes. Do I feel ready to return home? No. I’m tired, really, really tired – and still am plagued with “cold” symptoms that aren’t a cold. I’ll make it home and I’ll make it to work Wednesday, then I’ll sleep until I go to work Thursday. Friday, if I’m not at least 90%, I’ll go to urgent care to find out why and go from there to well again.
Rather than touristing hither and yon, I’ve sat on a couch, feeling awful and then much worse, and watched the Hallmark Movie Channel. My dotter admits that should have been a clue, but we missed it. Sunday, I felt like death warmed over, so dotter convinced me to go to a walk-in clinic at WalMart, citing my ashen hue as an unflattering complexion color. One look by the receptionist led to the nurse on duty coming out; she said I needed the next level up and sent me to urgent care.
They were both nice and efficient, traits not often seen in CA clinics. The doc came in, assessed the situation, diagnosed the CAP, prescribed several lines of defense against it, told me it’s okay to fly back home BUT, if I am not over it by Friday, directed me to return to an urgent care for chest x-rays and blood work.
Do I feel better? Yes. Do I feel ready to return home? No. I’m tired, really, really tired – and still am plagued with “cold” symptoms that aren’t a cold. I’ll make it home and I’ll make it to work Wednesday, then I’ll sleep until I go to work Thursday. Friday, if I’m not at least 90%, I’ll go to urgent care to find out why and go from there to well again.
Friday, November 18, 2011
Another Age-Related Tragedy?
The pilot, 82-year-old former Oklahoma State Sen. Olin Branstetter, and his 79-year-old wife, Paula, also died when the plane spiraled out of control and nosedived into the forest.
There were no survivors.
I blogged about this danger previously, noting that older pilots are engaged in plane crashes far more often than younger pilots. This time, it is an athletic coach and his assistant who are the victims of a very old pilot at the stick in an airplane. I don't want to see an 82-year-old driver behind the wheel of a car, especially on a freeway: today's auto goes far too fast far too quickly for an aged driver to react appropriately in case of emergency. Put that same old-timer behind the stick in a plane that travels in excess of 100 mph and expect the worst because statistically, that's what you're going to get!
There were no survivors.
I blogged about this danger previously, noting that older pilots are engaged in plane crashes far more often than younger pilots. This time, it is an athletic coach and his assistant who are the victims of a very old pilot at the stick in an airplane. I don't want to see an 82-year-old driver behind the wheel of a car, especially on a freeway: today's auto goes far too fast far too quickly for an aged driver to react appropriately in case of emergency. Put that same old-timer behind the stick in a plane that travels in excess of 100 mph and expect the worst because statistically, that's what you're going to get!
Monday, November 14, 2011
J. Edgar: Lights, Camera, but not much Action
J. Edgar is not a bad film, but it’s also not a good film. It’s disconcerting to sit and watch a film, rather than become involved in it, but that is the J. Edgar experience for me this afternoon. I anticipated a better, more engaging movie when I saw the previews, as well as the list of actors, but the totality of the characters, the acting, and the script does not live up to my expectations.
Leonardo DeCaprio is an outstanding actor and he does a credible job in the role of J. Edgar Hoover, but the script doesn’t support his acting ability. In scenes with his film mother (Judith Dench), I had flashbacks to Psycho as the relationship is creepy in a really creepy way. When it appears she is dead (hard to tell life from death due to the make-up) and her son puts on her beads and her dress, I expected him to turn away from the mirror and be in the scene in the basement with dear old mummy in the rocking chair!
And, although I’m sure the director, Clint Eastwood, intends the sexuality to be inferred through the viewer’s point of view, the film ends up as a vehicle for “outing” J. Edgar Hoover without anyone coming out and saying “he’s so gay.” Dear old Mom hints at her own disdain for Daffodils, but it doesn’t seem as if Edgar takes her words to heart. The viewer is left to believe that Edgar and his assistant, Clyde Tolson (Armie Hammer), enjoy a platonic love affair for darned near 50 years, and that strains both gay and straight credulity.
The shift from past to present is distracting, along with using writing a memoir as a tool to make the shifts. I like a story told chronologically so I can develop the "this is what happened, this is why it happened, and this is what resulted from the happening" understanding of the sequence of events. The emphasis on the Lindbergh baby kidnapping is made to become the turning point for the FBI, but it falls flat and feels unemotional and unimportant. The loyalty of his life-long secretary (Helen Gandy) and the secret secret Hoover files purportedly used to blackmail people in high places ends at a shredder; fade to black screen. Not only do I not believe that all those files were shredded, but I also don’t believe that a young, good-looking woman, Helen Gandy (Naomi Watts), would work for almost 50 years for a man who, first, asks her to marry him on date 3 and then turns his back on her to be with his more than loyal male “assistant,” Clyde Tolson (Armie Hammer), who comes across as so totally gay that even those of us who don't have any sense of gaydar know that he's gay!
I was excited when I recognized the actor who plays Michael Weston (Burn Notice), but thought he was playing one of his TV role characters, rather than Robert Kennedy, when he used a phony Boston accent and brushed his hair to the side. He's much more believable on Burn Notice than he is as Robert Kennedy.
See? Even trying to hit the high points reveals that there aren’t many and they aren’t very high. Best scene in the movie? Toss-up between Edgar’s reaction to his mother’s death and/or Tolson's reactions to Edgar’s death – and someone has to die to make the scenes work. Yeah.
Leonardo DeCaprio is an outstanding actor and he does a credible job in the role of J. Edgar Hoover, but the script doesn’t support his acting ability. In scenes with his film mother (Judith Dench), I had flashbacks to Psycho as the relationship is creepy in a really creepy way. When it appears she is dead (hard to tell life from death due to the make-up) and her son puts on her beads and her dress, I expected him to turn away from the mirror and be in the scene in the basement with dear old mummy in the rocking chair!
And, although I’m sure the director, Clint Eastwood, intends the sexuality to be inferred through the viewer’s point of view, the film ends up as a vehicle for “outing” J. Edgar Hoover without anyone coming out and saying “he’s so gay.” Dear old Mom hints at her own disdain for Daffodils, but it doesn’t seem as if Edgar takes her words to heart. The viewer is left to believe that Edgar and his assistant, Clyde Tolson (Armie Hammer), enjoy a platonic love affair for darned near 50 years, and that strains both gay and straight credulity.
The shift from past to present is distracting, along with using writing a memoir as a tool to make the shifts. I like a story told chronologically so I can develop the "this is what happened, this is why it happened, and this is what resulted from the happening" understanding of the sequence of events. The emphasis on the Lindbergh baby kidnapping is made to become the turning point for the FBI, but it falls flat and feels unemotional and unimportant. The loyalty of his life-long secretary (Helen Gandy) and the secret secret Hoover files purportedly used to blackmail people in high places ends at a shredder; fade to black screen. Not only do I not believe that all those files were shredded, but I also don’t believe that a young, good-looking woman, Helen Gandy (Naomi Watts), would work for almost 50 years for a man who, first, asks her to marry him on date 3 and then turns his back on her to be with his more than loyal male “assistant,” Clyde Tolson (Armie Hammer), who comes across as so totally gay that even those of us who don't have any sense of gaydar know that he's gay!
I was excited when I recognized the actor who plays Michael Weston (Burn Notice), but thought he was playing one of his TV role characters, rather than Robert Kennedy, when he used a phony Boston accent and brushed his hair to the side. He's much more believable on Burn Notice than he is as Robert Kennedy.
See? Even trying to hit the high points reveals that there aren’t many and they aren’t very high. Best scene in the movie? Toss-up between Edgar’s reaction to his mother’s death and/or Tolson's reactions to Edgar’s death – and someone has to die to make the scenes work. Yeah.
Updating the Lucky Rooster
Nope, I didn't win the big one, but a couple down the highway hit the lottery for $20 million!! On the other hand, I didn't lose either: I hit 2 of my 5 quick picks for 3 numbers each, a fete I've never done before, much less twice. I don't get millions, but I do get $22.00!
Yeah, I know: don't spend it all in one place.
Yeah, I know: don't spend it all in one place.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
One Special Day for the Rooster
Yesterday was touted as a special day for being lucky, with all the one’s in a row. On Wednesday, my international student from China brought me lunch, and as we shared a delicious feast and spicy chat, he revealed that because I am a Rooster in the Chinese zodiac, it could be a great day for me in many ways, including financial reward. Huzzah! After the thousand dollar vet hit, I could use some financial reward, AND the girls were meeting at a local casino for the all-you-can-eat buffet, just what all of us need prior to gorging during T’giving eating celebrations. With the stars aligned with such potential, it was all systems go.
I decided to walk on the wild side and tucked a twenty into the spending compartment of my wallet and off I went. First, we all signed up for a casino card because we each saved 10% at the buffet: ka-ching. Then, I decided to put my four dollar bills into the penny slots outside the buffet line and, ka-ching, I won $9.00! Of course, the biggest win of the day was the next hour spent sampling the buffet, but when it was time to leave, one of the gals and I decided to spend our way back to the exit. Yep: one dollar in and $10 back, so I left clutching my cash in hand and had a ball in the process.
Deciding that I had something to crow about, I stopped at one of the convenience gas stations that sell all the lottery items and bought 5 scratchers and 5 quick picks for Saturday’s drawing. Another ka-ching: spent $5 on scratchers and had a $5 winner. Won’t know about the quick picks, but I’ve already had so much fun risking it all for instant wealth that regardless of the outcome, it’s been a hoot.
I decided to walk on the wild side and tucked a twenty into the spending compartment of my wallet and off I went. First, we all signed up for a casino card because we each saved 10% at the buffet: ka-ching. Then, I decided to put my four dollar bills into the penny slots outside the buffet line and, ka-ching, I won $9.00! Of course, the biggest win of the day was the next hour spent sampling the buffet, but when it was time to leave, one of the gals and I decided to spend our way back to the exit. Yep: one dollar in and $10 back, so I left clutching my cash in hand and had a ball in the process.
Deciding that I had something to crow about, I stopped at one of the convenience gas stations that sell all the lottery items and bought 5 scratchers and 5 quick picks for Saturday’s drawing. Another ka-ching: spent $5 on scratchers and had a $5 winner. Won’t know about the quick picks, but I’ve already had so much fun risking it all for instant wealth that regardless of the outcome, it’s been a hoot.
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Before You Ring the Bell
Workplace politics make it challenging to report a colleague/co-worker for any suspicious behavior and/or suspected wrong-doing, especially if the colleague/co-worker is an accomplished liar. My personal ethics require me to go to the mat to right what is wrong, but I learned over a lifetime that there are far more protections for the wrong-doer than for the reporter. Reporting can cost the reporter not just the job, but put him/her on the receiving end of a spotlight that taints an entire career.
Joe Paterno has been fired for doing what he most likely was required to do: report an alleged crime to school personnel. Had he dialed 9-1-1 as many suggest he should have done, he may have been fired on the spot from the fall-out of his accusations based solely on alleged victim's statements years after the fact. Instead, he followed protocol and is now fired for reporting alleged crimes up the chain of command. Do or don't do and the result is the same: the alleged perpetrators have all the protections of the law, while anyone standing between them and the alleged victims are fair game to be dragged into the fray.
During my career, I submitted written allegations against colleagues for conduct unbecoming, unprofessional, and illegal. My actions gained me a negative reputation, and one administrator told me I was a trouble-maker and to mind my own business. After vicious rumors spread like wildfire about me, including that I was having sex with both students and colleagues in an office next to my classroom during lunch, an accusation that any one of the dozen or so students in my classroom with me during that time would have refuted, I decided to keep my mouth shut and relocated to another worksite.
Message sent and received: henceforth, I minded my own business to the best of my ability.
A specific instance of physical abuse against a child got me into even hotter water when the male student arrived at class with what looked like evidence of a fierce fist-fight. When I asked him what had happened, he told me that he and his father had gotten into it -- and he came out on the losing side of the argument. As a mandated reporter, I reported to Social Services; later that day, I was called into an administrator's office to join the admin, a deputy, the student, and his father. End result: the father told me to mind my own damned business because his "boy" is 18 years old, old enough to serve his country and to be a man, and if he couldn't take a punch, he was no son of his.
Message sent and received: henceforth, I minded my own business to the best of my ability.
A colleague was accused of providing drugs and engaging in a homosexual relationship with a student. I knew nothing except after the fact, refused to discuss what I thought I knew, and received a subpoena to testify in the trial. I stated that the male student fantasized constantly about his homosexuality, sharing wild stories about this person and that, but that I had NO SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE of anything involving this student and this teacher, which was the truth. The male teacher was found not guilty of all allegations except providing pot to the student, but my reputation was trashed with innuendo by the prosecutor that the male teacher and I were involved in a sexual relationship and I was covering for him. The fact that the alleged sexual activity at the core of the trial was homosexual did not factor into the accusations: trashing me somehow proved that the allegations against a colleague were somehow true.
Message sent and received: henceforth, I minded my own business to the best of my ability.
No bell can be unrung, so it's difficult to decide whether to pull the rope or walk away. If I don't know from first-hand involvement, I walk away because I've learned my lessons the hard way: all people lie, cheat and steal to advance their own agenda and will gladly and forcefully throw anyone under the bus to save their own ass. And, young people also lie, cheat and steal to advance their own agenda. Young people live in a fantasy world wherein they create tangled scenarios that involve unsuspecting people in sometimes shocking situations; before the truth can be unwound, the people unwittingly involved in these fantasies can be dragged into situations about which they either knew nothing or participated peripherally.
Are the adults always innocent? No, of course not -- but is Justin Beiber the father of a baby or is it just another sick girl's fantasy being played out on a very public stage? Were any of the college athletes accused of a gang rape of an alleged prostitute ever found guilty? No, the charges were dropped -- finally -- as unfounded. We rush to judgment based on our own emotional agenda, rather than waiting to let the truth come to the surface of all the media mudslinging.
Unfortunately, both Joe Paterno and the President of Penn State, as well as others caught in the shoulda, woulda, coulda now share my knowledge at the expense of their careers, as well as their personal and professional reputations. They have no protection of the courts, but the persons accused of the actual crimes can take the heat off themselves by fanning the fires that consume other lives. I'm not sure how justice is served by firing Paterno and the President, but I do know how it puts the spotlight on the mandated reporters' alleged failure to do ... something, rather than on the alleged perpetrators of an alleged crime.
By the time justice may be served, it will be far too late on far too many levels for far too many people.
Joe Paterno has been fired for doing what he most likely was required to do: report an alleged crime to school personnel. Had he dialed 9-1-1 as many suggest he should have done, he may have been fired on the spot from the fall-out of his accusations based solely on alleged victim's statements years after the fact. Instead, he followed protocol and is now fired for reporting alleged crimes up the chain of command. Do or don't do and the result is the same: the alleged perpetrators have all the protections of the law, while anyone standing between them and the alleged victims are fair game to be dragged into the fray.
During my career, I submitted written allegations against colleagues for conduct unbecoming, unprofessional, and illegal. My actions gained me a negative reputation, and one administrator told me I was a trouble-maker and to mind my own business. After vicious rumors spread like wildfire about me, including that I was having sex with both students and colleagues in an office next to my classroom during lunch, an accusation that any one of the dozen or so students in my classroom with me during that time would have refuted, I decided to keep my mouth shut and relocated to another worksite.
Message sent and received: henceforth, I minded my own business to the best of my ability.
A specific instance of physical abuse against a child got me into even hotter water when the male student arrived at class with what looked like evidence of a fierce fist-fight. When I asked him what had happened, he told me that he and his father had gotten into it -- and he came out on the losing side of the argument. As a mandated reporter, I reported to Social Services; later that day, I was called into an administrator's office to join the admin, a deputy, the student, and his father. End result: the father told me to mind my own damned business because his "boy" is 18 years old, old enough to serve his country and to be a man, and if he couldn't take a punch, he was no son of his.
Message sent and received: henceforth, I minded my own business to the best of my ability.
A colleague was accused of providing drugs and engaging in a homosexual relationship with a student. I knew nothing except after the fact, refused to discuss what I thought I knew, and received a subpoena to testify in the trial. I stated that the male student fantasized constantly about his homosexuality, sharing wild stories about this person and that, but that I had NO SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE of anything involving this student and this teacher, which was the truth. The male teacher was found not guilty of all allegations except providing pot to the student, but my reputation was trashed with innuendo by the prosecutor that the male teacher and I were involved in a sexual relationship and I was covering for him. The fact that the alleged sexual activity at the core of the trial was homosexual did not factor into the accusations: trashing me somehow proved that the allegations against a colleague were somehow true.
Message sent and received: henceforth, I minded my own business to the best of my ability.
No bell can be unrung, so it's difficult to decide whether to pull the rope or walk away. If I don't know from first-hand involvement, I walk away because I've learned my lessons the hard way: all people lie, cheat and steal to advance their own agenda and will gladly and forcefully throw anyone under the bus to save their own ass. And, young people also lie, cheat and steal to advance their own agenda. Young people live in a fantasy world wherein they create tangled scenarios that involve unsuspecting people in sometimes shocking situations; before the truth can be unwound, the people unwittingly involved in these fantasies can be dragged into situations about which they either knew nothing or participated peripherally.
Are the adults always innocent? No, of course not -- but is Justin Beiber the father of a baby or is it just another sick girl's fantasy being played out on a very public stage? Were any of the college athletes accused of a gang rape of an alleged prostitute ever found guilty? No, the charges were dropped -- finally -- as unfounded. We rush to judgment based on our own emotional agenda, rather than waiting to let the truth come to the surface of all the media mudslinging.
Unfortunately, both Joe Paterno and the President of Penn State, as well as others caught in the shoulda, woulda, coulda now share my knowledge at the expense of their careers, as well as their personal and professional reputations. They have no protection of the courts, but the persons accused of the actual crimes can take the heat off themselves by fanning the fires that consume other lives. I'm not sure how justice is served by firing Paterno and the President, but I do know how it puts the spotlight on the mandated reporters' alleged failure to do ... something, rather than on the alleged perpetrators of an alleged crime.
By the time justice may be served, it will be far too late on far too many levels for far too many people.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Nov 9: First Fire of Fall
Chilly, crisp night that turned dark early, nary a star in the sky, but the almost glow off to the west of the set sun. One-third of a fire log, a cushion on the wrought iron bench, and Mia's blankie next to us, Daisy and I curled up and watched the fire, the night sky, the plane lights, and the first twinkling of the stars.
It takes a lot to get better than this.
It takes a lot to get better than this.
Early Bird
Perhaps Daisy is just preparing for T’giving dinner or maybe she’s suffering from Post Traumatic Dog Attack Syndrome, but she caught, killed, and brought into the living room one of the doves that frequents the backyard bird bath. I don’t like to think of my little girl being so aggressive, but she did turn on the attacking German Shepherd when it took down Mia. She’s no shrinking violet about defending her people and her territory, although I don't see the yard doves as enemies, but a beautiful part of the landscape.
After I removed the bird and cleaned up the mess, Daisy and Mia went outside to bask in the sunshine. I’ve kept Mia’s E-collar snugly fastened around her neck to protect the stitches and the drains until her return appointment Friday, so didn’t think too much about it when the two dogs cuddled together and Daisy began grooming Mia. Imagine my surprise when Mia came back in minus every one of the stitches! Somehow, she must have talked Daisy into pulling out the stitches; thankfully, the drains are still in place.
I cleaned the wound site and it is healing just fine, even without the stitches. We’re going to take our first walk this morning since the attack, but we’ll make it a short walk and not take any of the routes we know are populated with wandering dogs – which is challenging in a neighborhood where far too many dogs have been left behind when the residents abandoned their homes.
Nope: no call-back from Animal Control. I guess the residents were more convincing in telling lies than I was in telling the truth.
After I removed the bird and cleaned up the mess, Daisy and Mia went outside to bask in the sunshine. I’ve kept Mia’s E-collar snugly fastened around her neck to protect the stitches and the drains until her return appointment Friday, so didn’t think too much about it when the two dogs cuddled together and Daisy began grooming Mia. Imagine my surprise when Mia came back in minus every one of the stitches! Somehow, she must have talked Daisy into pulling out the stitches; thankfully, the drains are still in place.
I cleaned the wound site and it is healing just fine, even without the stitches. We’re going to take our first walk this morning since the attack, but we’ll make it a short walk and not take any of the routes we know are populated with wandering dogs – which is challenging in a neighborhood where far too many dogs have been left behind when the residents abandoned their homes.
Nope: no call-back from Animal Control. I guess the residents were more convincing in telling lies than I was in telling the truth.
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
It's a Crime
Mia, Daisy and I were attacked by a German Shepherd in the front yard of a home by which we were passing during our early morning walk Sunday. The dog came at us from behind, chomping Mia’s haunch in its huge jaws and pinning her to the ground.
When Daisy went into attack mode to protect us, the dog dropped Mia’s haunch, clamped its jaws onto Daisy's neck, and began to take her toward the front porch, pulling me to the ground knees-first in the process. What saved Daisy was her sweatshirt, which the dog held onto rather than Daisy’s neck. As I scrambled to get Daisy free, hitting the German Shepherd repeatedly with a strong stick I carry and screaming at the top of my lungs, Mia was still on the ground where the dog had left her. Thankfully, a man from across the street ran to the property to distract the Shepherd, who dropped Daisy before he got all the way to the porch. I grabbed Daisy and Mia's leash and we took off down the street. A woman watching the scene yelled to ask if we were okay, but I just wanted to get the hell out of there as fast as I could, so yelled back, “I don’t know” and kept running toward the corner.
When we arrived back home, I saw the gaping wound in Mia’s haunch, examined it, and decided that I’d better take her to a vet because I didn’t know if the attacking dog had shots or a disease. After calling 5 facilities and getting the same referral to an emergency vet hospital down Valley, I called and said we were on our way. Thankfully, Daisy was okay, shaken up and trembling, but not injured, so she crawled into her canvas casita and stayed home while Mia and I drove the 40 miles to the pet ER. Yes, I was shocked almost speechless when the low estimate for services was $1000, but the high estimate was $1400. I could not risk my dog’s welfare by refusing the necessary treatment for her injury, so I pulled out a credit card when they would not examine Mia without the low estimate paid in full. I did, however, write onto the estimate that I would not pay more than a total of one thousand dollars, so they would have to adjust their services accordingly, to which the vet agreed, and Mia went off to the ER and I headed back home to wait.
I called the local police dispatch to report the attack when I got back home, but the lukewarm response let me know it’s no big deal. He could take a report if I wanted, but I really needed to call Animal Control as it isn’t a police matter, especially since I was vague on the details, such as whose dog it was that attacked us. Realizing it would do me no good to argue, I drove back to scene, took down addresses, and walked across the street to the front door of the house where the woman had been and from which I believe the man who ran across the street also had come. I assured them that I don’t want to get anyone into trouble, but I want to know whose dog it is so I can inform Animal Control, the agency that can make the owners keep it contained. The woman told me that she’s seen the dog in the front yard at the house across the street where we were attacked.
Monday morning, I called Animal Control and left the details, including my contact info. Sure enough, I got a call from the AC officer “investigating” the case, but he was at a standstill because he visited the house and talked to the residents. He toured a fenced yard with a large permanent kennel and told me that he’s sure the dogs there could not get out of their surroundings.
When he questioned me, he indicated that there really was not enough “evidence” to support my accusations because I didn’t know definitively whether it was a German Shepherd (even though I clarified that I knew for certain that it was a German Shepherd), whether it was male or female, whether it had long or short fur, the pattern of dark/light fur, how much it weighed (although I said it seemed to be a bit bigger than Mia, who weighs 80 pounds), and/or whether it came from that property or somewhere else because it came from behind us.
At that point, I stopped him and asked if he had ever been attacked by a large dog, to which he admitted he has. I asked if he had taken the time during his fight for life to note the genitalia of the animal attacking him, which got a slight smile and a more sympathetic ear. He admitted that the residents have 2 German Shepherds, a male (about the size of Mia) and a female (who is a bit bigger than Mia), but they assured him that their dogs never get out of the yard surrounded with a 5’ wooden fence. Well, I argued back, that fence would be nothing for a determined German Shepherd to clear with a running jump, so unless they keep the dogs kenneled, I’m sticking with my story that it’s one of their dogs that attacked us.
That’s when he also admitted that the residents weren’t home Sunday, so they have no idea whether their dogs were behind the fence or in the front yard attacking me and my 2 dogs as we walked by the house. I, however, have physical evidence of my knee injuries, as well as my dog’s injury and vet bill, and a witness to the attack who has also observed the same dogs in the front yard on many occasions. Thus, the preponderance of the evidence indicates that … it’s those dogs at that house. I asked the AC office to DO SOMETHING because next time it could be a child that dog attacks. Had I not been able to beat off the dog with the stick I carried, I doubt that I could have saved either Daisy or myself; a child would not stand a chance against the ferocity of the attack we were subjected to by this dog.
And that’s the crime, that the owners will lie to protect themselves, rather than be concerned with what their dogs could do to another person or pet walking by their home on a Sunday morning.
When Daisy went into attack mode to protect us, the dog dropped Mia’s haunch, clamped its jaws onto Daisy's neck, and began to take her toward the front porch, pulling me to the ground knees-first in the process. What saved Daisy was her sweatshirt, which the dog held onto rather than Daisy’s neck. As I scrambled to get Daisy free, hitting the German Shepherd repeatedly with a strong stick I carry and screaming at the top of my lungs, Mia was still on the ground where the dog had left her. Thankfully, a man from across the street ran to the property to distract the Shepherd, who dropped Daisy before he got all the way to the porch. I grabbed Daisy and Mia's leash and we took off down the street. A woman watching the scene yelled to ask if we were okay, but I just wanted to get the hell out of there as fast as I could, so yelled back, “I don’t know” and kept running toward the corner.
When we arrived back home, I saw the gaping wound in Mia’s haunch, examined it, and decided that I’d better take her to a vet because I didn’t know if the attacking dog had shots or a disease. After calling 5 facilities and getting the same referral to an emergency vet hospital down Valley, I called and said we were on our way. Thankfully, Daisy was okay, shaken up and trembling, but not injured, so she crawled into her canvas casita and stayed home while Mia and I drove the 40 miles to the pet ER. Yes, I was shocked almost speechless when the low estimate for services was $1000, but the high estimate was $1400. I could not risk my dog’s welfare by refusing the necessary treatment for her injury, so I pulled out a credit card when they would not examine Mia without the low estimate paid in full. I did, however, write onto the estimate that I would not pay more than a total of one thousand dollars, so they would have to adjust their services accordingly, to which the vet agreed, and Mia went off to the ER and I headed back home to wait.
I called the local police dispatch to report the attack when I got back home, but the lukewarm response let me know it’s no big deal. He could take a report if I wanted, but I really needed to call Animal Control as it isn’t a police matter, especially since I was vague on the details, such as whose dog it was that attacked us. Realizing it would do me no good to argue, I drove back to scene, took down addresses, and walked across the street to the front door of the house where the woman had been and from which I believe the man who ran across the street also had come. I assured them that I don’t want to get anyone into trouble, but I want to know whose dog it is so I can inform Animal Control, the agency that can make the owners keep it contained. The woman told me that she’s seen the dog in the front yard at the house across the street where we were attacked.
Monday morning, I called Animal Control and left the details, including my contact info. Sure enough, I got a call from the AC officer “investigating” the case, but he was at a standstill because he visited the house and talked to the residents. He toured a fenced yard with a large permanent kennel and told me that he’s sure the dogs there could not get out of their surroundings.
When he questioned me, he indicated that there really was not enough “evidence” to support my accusations because I didn’t know definitively whether it was a German Shepherd (even though I clarified that I knew for certain that it was a German Shepherd), whether it was male or female, whether it had long or short fur, the pattern of dark/light fur, how much it weighed (although I said it seemed to be a bit bigger than Mia, who weighs 80 pounds), and/or whether it came from that property or somewhere else because it came from behind us.
At that point, I stopped him and asked if he had ever been attacked by a large dog, to which he admitted he has. I asked if he had taken the time during his fight for life to note the genitalia of the animal attacking him, which got a slight smile and a more sympathetic ear. He admitted that the residents have 2 German Shepherds, a male (about the size of Mia) and a female (who is a bit bigger than Mia), but they assured him that their dogs never get out of the yard surrounded with a 5’ wooden fence. Well, I argued back, that fence would be nothing for a determined German Shepherd to clear with a running jump, so unless they keep the dogs kenneled, I’m sticking with my story that it’s one of their dogs that attacked us.
That’s when he also admitted that the residents weren’t home Sunday, so they have no idea whether their dogs were behind the fence or in the front yard attacking me and my 2 dogs as we walked by the house. I, however, have physical evidence of my knee injuries, as well as my dog’s injury and vet bill, and a witness to the attack who has also observed the same dogs in the front yard on many occasions. Thus, the preponderance of the evidence indicates that … it’s those dogs at that house. I asked the AC office to DO SOMETHING because next time it could be a child that dog attacks. Had I not been able to beat off the dog with the stick I carried, I doubt that I could have saved either Daisy or myself; a child would not stand a chance against the ferocity of the attack we were subjected to by this dog.
And that’s the crime, that the owners will lie to protect themselves, rather than be concerned with what their dogs could do to another person or pet walking by their home on a Sunday morning.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
The Get
Headline: gas line gets ruptured.
Headline: motorcyclist gets injured.
Headline: team gets beaten in overtime.
Headline: tourist gets robbed in parking lot of casino.
Headline: murder trial gets started
Correction: gas line ruptures.
Correction: motorcyclist is injured.
Correction: team loses in overtime.
Correction: tourist is robbed in casino parking lot.
Correction: murder trial starts
"It's a great get" means, in slangspeech, that the papparrazi was in the right place at the right time to take a photograph that, when published, will provide financial reward and augment the photographer's reputation with his/her peers.
"A great get" means that a talk show host secures an interview with a top name in any of several fields that result in top TV ratings, such as Oprah, the President, George Clooney, Jennifer Aniston.
"Get" means the same as the word "fetch" when teaching a dog to retrieve, as in "get the ball" or "fetch the ball." "Get" also gives direction to a child who is required to go to a place and retrieve something for a parent, as in go get your toys and then put them into the toy box.
"I get it" means that I finally understand the point you are making, although I may have seemed a bit dense when you began the blog.
Headline: motorcyclist gets injured.
Headline: team gets beaten in overtime.
Headline: tourist gets robbed in parking lot of casino.
Headline: murder trial gets started
Correction: gas line ruptures.
Correction: motorcyclist is injured.
Correction: team loses in overtime.
Correction: tourist is robbed in casino parking lot.
Correction: murder trial starts
"It's a great get" means, in slangspeech, that the papparrazi was in the right place at the right time to take a photograph that, when published, will provide financial reward and augment the photographer's reputation with his/her peers.
"A great get" means that a talk show host secures an interview with a top name in any of several fields that result in top TV ratings, such as Oprah, the President, George Clooney, Jennifer Aniston.
"Get" means the same as the word "fetch" when teaching a dog to retrieve, as in "get the ball" or "fetch the ball." "Get" also gives direction to a child who is required to go to a place and retrieve something for a parent, as in go get your toys and then put them into the toy box.
"I get it" means that I finally understand the point you are making, although I may have seemed a bit dense when you began the blog.
A Sob Story
People will fall for anything, especially if it involves kids, schools, and fundraisers. Picture, if you will, a typical school fundraiser, one of the annual holiday events that includes cards, gift wrap, and over-priced, useless Christmas tokens that can be given as gifts to classroom teachers and grandparents. Then, picture little kids selling fund-raising junk in a tough economy, in a poverty-stricken community, in a neighborhood populated by many, many families on public assistance.
Does this scenario add up to $20,000 in cash/checks available to be stolen from behind two locked doors contained within the locked school office -- and no clues as to whom may have committed the crime? None of it adds up: not the alleged $20,000 in cash/checks, nor the lack of leads. How many fundraisers actually amass $20,000 in cash/checks at all, much less in a mere 2 weeks? How many people have all 3 keys necessary to get into the main office, then through the 2 locked doors behind which the cash/checks are secured? How many people would take the checks when they cannot be cashed?
To be perfectly cynical, this whole blown-up local story is hooey!! There may have been a fundraiser, but the public is supposed to believe that $20,000 was collected from sales in a poverty-stricken community during a recession from families that rely on public assistance for their basic survival. We're supposed to believe that somehow an unnamed fund-raising genius was able to engineer that award-winning achievement, which would, in theory, require 500 students each to sell $40 in merchandise and collect the cash/checks at the time the order is placed. And, we are supposed to believe that there is no explanation for the perp to have access to the 3 different keys during a time that no one was on campus to witness the theft.
Right: no suspects; no clues; no witnesses. Just $20,000 missing in cash and checks. Uh, that would be a hell no.
The media is on-board to make this the story of the pre-holiday season, with all the holes filled in with crying children and outraged parents. So far, the stories about the theft have resulted in donations from the community, including, allegedly, $11 from a student who is confined to a wheelchair, but who feels that the theft from the students is far worse than his disability/confinement to the chair.
Nice touch to a story that simply does not hold up under scrutiny.
Does this scenario add up to $20,000 in cash/checks available to be stolen from behind two locked doors contained within the locked school office -- and no clues as to whom may have committed the crime? None of it adds up: not the alleged $20,000 in cash/checks, nor the lack of leads. How many fundraisers actually amass $20,000 in cash/checks at all, much less in a mere 2 weeks? How many people have all 3 keys necessary to get into the main office, then through the 2 locked doors behind which the cash/checks are secured? How many people would take the checks when they cannot be cashed?
To be perfectly cynical, this whole blown-up local story is hooey!! There may have been a fundraiser, but the public is supposed to believe that $20,000 was collected from sales in a poverty-stricken community during a recession from families that rely on public assistance for their basic survival. We're supposed to believe that somehow an unnamed fund-raising genius was able to engineer that award-winning achievement, which would, in theory, require 500 students each to sell $40 in merchandise and collect the cash/checks at the time the order is placed. And, we are supposed to believe that there is no explanation for the perp to have access to the 3 different keys during a time that no one was on campus to witness the theft.
Right: no suspects; no clues; no witnesses. Just $20,000 missing in cash and checks. Uh, that would be a hell no.
The media is on-board to make this the story of the pre-holiday season, with all the holes filled in with crying children and outraged parents. So far, the stories about the theft have resulted in donations from the community, including, allegedly, $11 from a student who is confined to a wheelchair, but who feels that the theft from the students is far worse than his disability/confinement to the chair.
Nice touch to a story that simply does not hold up under scrutiny.
Blog One Thousand
I use my writing to resolve external issues, ask questions, comment on what I see around me, but I seldom write about what I feel inside, where it really matters. There is a pattern of judgment in everyone’s life, judgment made by outside forces who believe they see/know the “real” me because it’s easier than actually knowing the “real” me. I know, however, that I am yin and yang, a light side and a dark side, because I know how hard it has been for my life to be shaped by what used to be called manic depression syndrome, but now seems to have morphed into bi-polar disease.
My childhood was, just as most other people’s childhood, a roller coaster of emotions. I was never an easy child, nor a well-loved child, nor a particularly well-liked child. I knew from an early age that I didn’t fit into most social situations, but that was easy to understand as I grew up with parents who were also alienated from an easy fit. I could look into the mirror and see that I didn’t fit into the “pretty” child social circles, and I also could look within myself and know that there were some serious internal issues that I did my best to hide, but that scared me to death. I desperately wanted to be a normal child, a laughing child who had friends, as well as siblings, who would accept and love me regardless, but I had no idea how to be that child. I wanted a close family, a loving family, a fully functional family, but the years taught me that few children have that family, while many, many children learn to live with what life provides for them.
I don’t remember much from my childhood, but I do remember being sick once, in my bed in the house on Mission Street, which means I was very young. My mother came to check on me before I fell back to sleep and woke up in a field of flowers, dressed in a beautiful little girl’s dress that was starched and blowing in a gentle breeze. There was such a sense of absolute freedom and love surrounding me that I stayed in that field for what felt like hours, running, playing, dancing, singing, and smiling and laughing. I awoke, back in my bed, very sick, with a high fever, and life continued. That one single memory remains the only time in my entire life to date that I have ever felt entirely free just to be – or loved unconditionally.
More often, I remember the rages: my own; my mother’s; my siblings’. I remember running away, scared, hiding. I remember the man at the beach who sought me out, talked to me, and tried to make me go with him. I remember the man who stopped me one time as I walked home from Kearney’s, carrying a box of things she had so kindly given to me. He, too, wanted me to go with him; perhaps his offer was genuine and sincere, but he scared me, so I ran away and hid from him. I remember far more darkness than sunlight, far more fear than love, but it was not until after my father died that I remember the manic depression that became the controlling force in my life.
Teaching has been my salvation, a venue where my manic side thrives, providing me with energy to get through thirty-five years of days filled with hundreds of students, changing classes, changing course content, mountains of papers to grade and deadlines to meet. It also cursed me with alienation from my own family, from a spouse who did not deserve my inability to love, and from children who learned how to accept my compulsions and question my fevered constant movement as I ran a race against myself just to make it through another day. The frenetic whirlwind of energy was a symptom, a coping mechanism, a better alternative than the crashing blackness that descended when my life was too quiet, too empty, too introspective.
Of course, I’ve crashed; I’ve crashed big time. It was inevitable: no one could keep up the frenetic whirl of activity that I used instead of a life, including me. I retreated into intense depression after my father died, depression that manifest in excruciating migraine headaches. A collapse occurred during college, brought on by so many factors about my life that I simply could no longer control, contain, nor confront. There was a long stretch when I just worked myself into exhaustion so I didn’t have to bring reality to the surface and face what an absolute sham my life was from beginning to end, but, eventually, I crashed again.
And then, one summer I was selected to attend a Shakespeare experience in Maryland and received a grant to cover expenses. That felt like such an honor and I was beyond excited about participating, but not everything that begins well ends well. In the middle of the night, one of the other participants broke into my room and assaulted me. He wanted sex, but that did not happen; perhaps it would have been easier if that’s all it had been because the middle of the night is still my panic time. I shared that experience with a friend, but no one else, because when I reported it at the time, I was told that because “nothing happened,” I should just move on.
[Recently, when I was called for jury duty, the case involved a rapist who broke into a woman’s home in the middle of the night and assaulted her. Because, in her effort to save her son from harm, a son who came into the room to help his mother, she screamed at the rapist that he could do with her what he wanted as long as he left her son alone, the rapist was actually pleading consensual sex. In a flash I was reliving my own assault, an assault that occurred 25 years ago in real time, but happened again instantly in my own memory. The hardest thing I’ve done in a really long time was to return to that courtroom and wait for my name to be called, so I could plead with the judge to excuse me from service.]
It helped when I was honest about what a mess my life was and finally set both myself and my ex-husband free with a divorce from our marriage, as well as our relationship, but that was merely a postponement, not a cure, for the darkness inside me.
In 1997, I imploded, an implosion brought about by people I considered friends, a trust that was sorely misplaced. This time, the depression that preceded the implosion almost won as I no longer had any reason to continue to exist. No matter how much I worked, no matter how hard I worked, I was doomed to failure because that’s what the person wanted when she made me the focus of her own dysfunction. She was relentless and I was literally unable to stop her because I kept trying to fix it, to make it all better, rather than defending myself. Before I fully accepted that my actions/ reactions had no effect on her relentlessness, it was too late. I still experience PTSD symptoms from this time in my life, but I’ve learned to remove myself at the first sign of personal attack, rather than stay around and become the bull’s eye of someone else’s target practice.
And, for whatever reason, after this total implosion, my manic/depressive cycles lessened and became almost unnoticeable, as well as very manageable. Although I’ve used medication in my past to help me level my life, diet, exercise, and adequate sleep seem to work just as well as chemicals.
When my mother died, I had no idea if remorse or relief would be my reaction, but I knew it would not be grief – which is not a good commentary on my relationship with her, but it is accurate. Manic depression is organic, but it’s also triggered, and my mother was my biggest trigger. When my sister stepped into my mother’s shoes before mom’s body was even cold, as they say, I reacted the only way I could to protect myself and my sanity: she’s out of my life. There is no contact because there cannot be contact if I am to survive. The popular saying is that God never gives us more than we can handle, but explain suicide to me, the last desperate attempt to survive that which we cannot handle. Believe me, I know how close I can come.
I’m waking up in the middle of the night, my mind seeking answers that aren’t there. I have lived in fear of myself and my life for so long that I have no idea how not to live that way. When I’ve tried to join back in, to trust that it’s okay for me to have a life, it’s bitten me in the ass, sometimes in an almost comical way – including the time I decided to accept the invitation to join a bowling league and ended up in the ER with a shattered shoulder and a cracked collarbone! However, on my recent birthday, I vowed that I am going to take strong, positive steps to try what may pass for more normalcy and see how it goes. My clock is ticking, and I don’t want to leave with regrets for the shoulda, woulda, coulda that I’ve allowed to control my life.
I have spent money without feeling devastatingly scared that I won’t be able to pay my bills, especially to finish off the backyard project by hiring people to help me, rather than giving into the uncontrollable compulsion to do it all myself. I took a trip to a state I had wanted to visit since I was a child and read a cowboy story set in Wyoming. I had a party, which may not seem like a big deal, but it is to me for personal reasons I don’t feel comfortable sharing publicly. I actually had a great time: no bad memories from the experience. I’ve decided to go to Greece, a place I’ve always wanted to see in person, and when I asked a friend if she would go on the cruise with me, she not only agreed, but is genuinely happy to go with me. I bought a ticket to see some favorite entertainers from my youth who are performing in concert at a local venue. And, I’ve been getting out and doing things that are positive reinforcement, rather than only those things that need to be done.
So far, so good, but I’ll admit that I’m still holding my breath while waiting for the other shoe to drop.
For some people, I’m simply doing what everyone else does all the time, but for me, it’s big steps for me to do what I want, rather than what needs doing. In my past, there have always been negative consequences to the times that I’ve done what I wanted to do, rather than what needed to be done, so I stopped doing them. This time, however, I’m going to assume that it’s all good and go for it. If there is an adverse reaction, well, I cannot say that I don’t have experience with that and, evidently, I can survive.
My childhood was, just as most other people’s childhood, a roller coaster of emotions. I was never an easy child, nor a well-loved child, nor a particularly well-liked child. I knew from an early age that I didn’t fit into most social situations, but that was easy to understand as I grew up with parents who were also alienated from an easy fit. I could look into the mirror and see that I didn’t fit into the “pretty” child social circles, and I also could look within myself and know that there were some serious internal issues that I did my best to hide, but that scared me to death. I desperately wanted to be a normal child, a laughing child who had friends, as well as siblings, who would accept and love me regardless, but I had no idea how to be that child. I wanted a close family, a loving family, a fully functional family, but the years taught me that few children have that family, while many, many children learn to live with what life provides for them.
I don’t remember much from my childhood, but I do remember being sick once, in my bed in the house on Mission Street, which means I was very young. My mother came to check on me before I fell back to sleep and woke up in a field of flowers, dressed in a beautiful little girl’s dress that was starched and blowing in a gentle breeze. There was such a sense of absolute freedom and love surrounding me that I stayed in that field for what felt like hours, running, playing, dancing, singing, and smiling and laughing. I awoke, back in my bed, very sick, with a high fever, and life continued. That one single memory remains the only time in my entire life to date that I have ever felt entirely free just to be – or loved unconditionally.
More often, I remember the rages: my own; my mother’s; my siblings’. I remember running away, scared, hiding. I remember the man at the beach who sought me out, talked to me, and tried to make me go with him. I remember the man who stopped me one time as I walked home from Kearney’s, carrying a box of things she had so kindly given to me. He, too, wanted me to go with him; perhaps his offer was genuine and sincere, but he scared me, so I ran away and hid from him. I remember far more darkness than sunlight, far more fear than love, but it was not until after my father died that I remember the manic depression that became the controlling force in my life.
Teaching has been my salvation, a venue where my manic side thrives, providing me with energy to get through thirty-five years of days filled with hundreds of students, changing classes, changing course content, mountains of papers to grade and deadlines to meet. It also cursed me with alienation from my own family, from a spouse who did not deserve my inability to love, and from children who learned how to accept my compulsions and question my fevered constant movement as I ran a race against myself just to make it through another day. The frenetic whirlwind of energy was a symptom, a coping mechanism, a better alternative than the crashing blackness that descended when my life was too quiet, too empty, too introspective.
Of course, I’ve crashed; I’ve crashed big time. It was inevitable: no one could keep up the frenetic whirl of activity that I used instead of a life, including me. I retreated into intense depression after my father died, depression that manifest in excruciating migraine headaches. A collapse occurred during college, brought on by so many factors about my life that I simply could no longer control, contain, nor confront. There was a long stretch when I just worked myself into exhaustion so I didn’t have to bring reality to the surface and face what an absolute sham my life was from beginning to end, but, eventually, I crashed again.
And then, one summer I was selected to attend a Shakespeare experience in Maryland and received a grant to cover expenses. That felt like such an honor and I was beyond excited about participating, but not everything that begins well ends well. In the middle of the night, one of the other participants broke into my room and assaulted me. He wanted sex, but that did not happen; perhaps it would have been easier if that’s all it had been because the middle of the night is still my panic time. I shared that experience with a friend, but no one else, because when I reported it at the time, I was told that because “nothing happened,” I should just move on.
[Recently, when I was called for jury duty, the case involved a rapist who broke into a woman’s home in the middle of the night and assaulted her. Because, in her effort to save her son from harm, a son who came into the room to help his mother, she screamed at the rapist that he could do with her what he wanted as long as he left her son alone, the rapist was actually pleading consensual sex. In a flash I was reliving my own assault, an assault that occurred 25 years ago in real time, but happened again instantly in my own memory. The hardest thing I’ve done in a really long time was to return to that courtroom and wait for my name to be called, so I could plead with the judge to excuse me from service.]
It helped when I was honest about what a mess my life was and finally set both myself and my ex-husband free with a divorce from our marriage, as well as our relationship, but that was merely a postponement, not a cure, for the darkness inside me.
In 1997, I imploded, an implosion brought about by people I considered friends, a trust that was sorely misplaced. This time, the depression that preceded the implosion almost won as I no longer had any reason to continue to exist. No matter how much I worked, no matter how hard I worked, I was doomed to failure because that’s what the person wanted when she made me the focus of her own dysfunction. She was relentless and I was literally unable to stop her because I kept trying to fix it, to make it all better, rather than defending myself. Before I fully accepted that my actions/ reactions had no effect on her relentlessness, it was too late. I still experience PTSD symptoms from this time in my life, but I’ve learned to remove myself at the first sign of personal attack, rather than stay around and become the bull’s eye of someone else’s target practice.
And, for whatever reason, after this total implosion, my manic/depressive cycles lessened and became almost unnoticeable, as well as very manageable. Although I’ve used medication in my past to help me level my life, diet, exercise, and adequate sleep seem to work just as well as chemicals.
When my mother died, I had no idea if remorse or relief would be my reaction, but I knew it would not be grief – which is not a good commentary on my relationship with her, but it is accurate. Manic depression is organic, but it’s also triggered, and my mother was my biggest trigger. When my sister stepped into my mother’s shoes before mom’s body was even cold, as they say, I reacted the only way I could to protect myself and my sanity: she’s out of my life. There is no contact because there cannot be contact if I am to survive. The popular saying is that God never gives us more than we can handle, but explain suicide to me, the last desperate attempt to survive that which we cannot handle. Believe me, I know how close I can come.
I’m waking up in the middle of the night, my mind seeking answers that aren’t there. I have lived in fear of myself and my life for so long that I have no idea how not to live that way. When I’ve tried to join back in, to trust that it’s okay for me to have a life, it’s bitten me in the ass, sometimes in an almost comical way – including the time I decided to accept the invitation to join a bowling league and ended up in the ER with a shattered shoulder and a cracked collarbone! However, on my recent birthday, I vowed that I am going to take strong, positive steps to try what may pass for more normalcy and see how it goes. My clock is ticking, and I don’t want to leave with regrets for the shoulda, woulda, coulda that I’ve allowed to control my life.
I have spent money without feeling devastatingly scared that I won’t be able to pay my bills, especially to finish off the backyard project by hiring people to help me, rather than giving into the uncontrollable compulsion to do it all myself. I took a trip to a state I had wanted to visit since I was a child and read a cowboy story set in Wyoming. I had a party, which may not seem like a big deal, but it is to me for personal reasons I don’t feel comfortable sharing publicly. I actually had a great time: no bad memories from the experience. I’ve decided to go to Greece, a place I’ve always wanted to see in person, and when I asked a friend if she would go on the cruise with me, she not only agreed, but is genuinely happy to go with me. I bought a ticket to see some favorite entertainers from my youth who are performing in concert at a local venue. And, I’ve been getting out and doing things that are positive reinforcement, rather than only those things that need to be done.
So far, so good, but I’ll admit that I’m still holding my breath while waiting for the other shoe to drop.
For some people, I’m simply doing what everyone else does all the time, but for me, it’s big steps for me to do what I want, rather than what needs doing. In my past, there have always been negative consequences to the times that I’ve done what I wanted to do, rather than what needed to be done, so I stopped doing them. This time, however, I’m going to assume that it’s all good and go for it. If there is an adverse reaction, well, I cannot say that I don’t have experience with that and, evidently, I can survive.
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Washing a Chicken
Mercury must be retrograde again as life is going wonky and that’s the best/only explanation I’ve heard for oddness; well, other than global warming, which is a catch-all phrase for “who the hell knows why the world's getting weird?”
Prior to settling in for some TV watching and working on craft projects, I had to address the issue of blood spatter from the kitchen into the living room, all the way down the hall, into my bathroom, and drenching my clothes. Mia and Daisy, who get along well, got into a tussel last night that ended in blood pouring from Daisy's mouth, which she exacerbated by snuffling it into the environment, creating quite a crime scene. Mia was licking gravy off a plate and Daisy wanted to join her, but last night Mia wasn't sharing, so she turned physical on Daisy. Mia is about 90 pounds, a Rott mix, and Daisy is about 15 pounds, a Jack Russell Terrier, so their personalities are pretty feisty to begin with, but they've made their peace mostly. I chastised Mia, cuddled with Daisy instead of working on craft projects, then put Daisy into her little casa for the night so I didn't have to worry about another attack.
Believe me, no walk today as that's a treat for GOOD girls, not a reward for drawing blood! Anyhoo, still got to watch some shows, so all was not lost. Thankfully.
Last night, Maks told the world that DWTS is HIS SHOW, that HE’S made it what it is, so Len? Take a hike. I agree that the judges are nitpicking, critical, negative, and definitely pick their favorites to either support or dis, but really? DWTS is what it is because MAKS has made it so? Perhaps what Maks is trying to express is his frustration that HE’S never danced with a winner. Last season, Derek Hough was on hiatus, so Maks had a shot to take the mirror ball trophy, but, alas, once again he came up short. Derek, on the other hand, is back this season and kicking some fine ass with his partner Ricki Lake, who was absolutely NOT one of the frontrunners when the season began, which leads me to believe that Maks is not the hot stuff he thinks he is – and DWTS is not all about Maks.
On the Sing-Off, my absolutely favorite reality show, the Yellowjackets stayed to compete again next week, while the Collective was voted off, exactly opposite to what I would have done. The Yellowjackets have already peaked and are on their way down, but the Collective is still growing, challenging themselves and the music. I was sure the boys in yellow would be singing their farewell song, but not last night.
The sexual chemistry/tension between Castle and Becket has also peaked, and now it’s so contrived that it’s just not interesting. Because they appeared to have moved on, so did I, and I’m not willing to go back there and regenerate the feelings. If I want to go there again, I have the 3 Richard Castle Nicki Heat mysteries that I can reread; however, the TV show has gone in a different direction, so let it be. Please.
Finally, I caught the clip of the “real” housewife of Beverly Hills flummoxed by the challenge to find even one of her 3 ‘fridges, and then LMAO when she tried to follow her friend’s directions re: preparing the chicken for cooking. Washing the chicken with soap and water probably made sense on some level, but the incredulity on both women’s faces, the one giving the directions and the other taking them, was the best laugh I’ve had in a week. And the caution to let the chicken “stand” for about 15-20 minutes prior to carving was met with the deer-in-the-headlights stare that confirms total incompetency. My best cooking advice for this housewife? Hire a cook.
Been places, done things, met people – and November promises to be an interesting, exciting, challenging month with few breaks for catching my breath. ‘bout time!!
Prior to settling in for some TV watching and working on craft projects, I had to address the issue of blood spatter from the kitchen into the living room, all the way down the hall, into my bathroom, and drenching my clothes. Mia and Daisy, who get along well, got into a tussel last night that ended in blood pouring from Daisy's mouth, which she exacerbated by snuffling it into the environment, creating quite a crime scene. Mia was licking gravy off a plate and Daisy wanted to join her, but last night Mia wasn't sharing, so she turned physical on Daisy. Mia is about 90 pounds, a Rott mix, and Daisy is about 15 pounds, a Jack Russell Terrier, so their personalities are pretty feisty to begin with, but they've made their peace mostly. I chastised Mia, cuddled with Daisy instead of working on craft projects, then put Daisy into her little casa for the night so I didn't have to worry about another attack.
Believe me, no walk today as that's a treat for GOOD girls, not a reward for drawing blood! Anyhoo, still got to watch some shows, so all was not lost. Thankfully.
Last night, Maks told the world that DWTS is HIS SHOW, that HE’S made it what it is, so Len? Take a hike. I agree that the judges are nitpicking, critical, negative, and definitely pick their favorites to either support or dis, but really? DWTS is what it is because MAKS has made it so? Perhaps what Maks is trying to express is his frustration that HE’S never danced with a winner. Last season, Derek Hough was on hiatus, so Maks had a shot to take the mirror ball trophy, but, alas, once again he came up short. Derek, on the other hand, is back this season and kicking some fine ass with his partner Ricki Lake, who was absolutely NOT one of the frontrunners when the season began, which leads me to believe that Maks is not the hot stuff he thinks he is – and DWTS is not all about Maks.
On the Sing-Off, my absolutely favorite reality show, the Yellowjackets stayed to compete again next week, while the Collective was voted off, exactly opposite to what I would have done. The Yellowjackets have already peaked and are on their way down, but the Collective is still growing, challenging themselves and the music. I was sure the boys in yellow would be singing their farewell song, but not last night.
The sexual chemistry/tension between Castle and Becket has also peaked, and now it’s so contrived that it’s just not interesting. Because they appeared to have moved on, so did I, and I’m not willing to go back there and regenerate the feelings. If I want to go there again, I have the 3 Richard Castle Nicki Heat mysteries that I can reread; however, the TV show has gone in a different direction, so let it be. Please.
Finally, I caught the clip of the “real” housewife of Beverly Hills flummoxed by the challenge to find even one of her 3 ‘fridges, and then LMAO when she tried to follow her friend’s directions re: preparing the chicken for cooking. Washing the chicken with soap and water probably made sense on some level, but the incredulity on both women’s faces, the one giving the directions and the other taking them, was the best laugh I’ve had in a week. And the caution to let the chicken “stand” for about 15-20 minutes prior to carving was met with the deer-in-the-headlights stare that confirms total incompetency. My best cooking advice for this housewife? Hire a cook.
Been places, done things, met people – and November promises to be an interesting, exciting, challenging month with few breaks for catching my breath. ‘bout time!!
Saturday, October 22, 2011
It's All About the Hat for Some People
Those favorite regional sayings have a way of cutting through any situation; this week, it was on The Mentalist that the words captured the spirit of my recent weeks. In response to Jane's observation that a ranch owner isn't much of a rancher, the cowpoke replies, "He's all hat and no cattle."
Yeah, that says it all on so many levels and in so many situations that I don't even have to write the essay!
Yeah, that says it all on so many levels and in so many situations that I don't even have to write the essay!
Friday, October 21, 2011
Pull the Plug
Maybe it takes one public figure to become the face of what’s wrong with the incredible sense of entitlement that pervades today’s young people. It’s all about me goes only as far as it interferes with or impacts another person’s life, but far too many young people warn the rest of the world to get the hell out of their way because they are coming through, like it or not. It’s difficult to know how to stop a runaway train, but it appears that a judge in Los Angeles is standing in the midst of a train wreck, hoping to contain it before there are any further casualties.
Lindsay Lohan is circling the drain and it's time for someone to pull the plug!
Lindsay Lohan was a great child actor, but she’s a failure as an adult. I’ve listened to the litany of it’s all her parents’ fault, but that doesn’t wash for me: children live their own mistakes, so they must accept responsibility for them. Yeah, we all have parental issues, but not many of us have the luxury of reliving them endlessly to avoid our own responsibility for the decisions we make. Lohan, on the other hand, seems to want a life-long free pass to act with impunity because … she’s Lindsay Lohan, whatever that means to someone, somewhere. And what a huge “fuck you” to the judge by failing to show up the day after your arrest for probation revocation.
There is a part of me that always wants to help, to guide, to support young people during their journey from then to now, but there are also those individuals who simply are past their expiration date, who make it far too hard to extend the helping hand when they bite it at every single turn. Will it somehow help Lindsay to be thrown into jail for many months or even a year? Perhaps not, but if it’s done right, it may impact her life enough to give her time to think about what’s she’s doing, rather than just continuing to act with assumed impunity.
Sadly, when I contact media coverage of Lindsay Lohan, my mind goes to Casey Anthony: peas in a pod. The intensity of the narcissism, of the total self-indulgence, without any sense of responsibility for their actions, is beyond belief in both of these women, who, incidentally, are in the same age bracket. Perhaps the only redeeming aspect of Lohan is that, so far, she does not have a child’s life to destroy while living in her own little narcissistic world.
Lindsay Lohan is circling the drain and it's time for someone to pull the plug!
Lindsay Lohan was a great child actor, but she’s a failure as an adult. I’ve listened to the litany of it’s all her parents’ fault, but that doesn’t wash for me: children live their own mistakes, so they must accept responsibility for them. Yeah, we all have parental issues, but not many of us have the luxury of reliving them endlessly to avoid our own responsibility for the decisions we make. Lohan, on the other hand, seems to want a life-long free pass to act with impunity because … she’s Lindsay Lohan, whatever that means to someone, somewhere. And what a huge “fuck you” to the judge by failing to show up the day after your arrest for probation revocation.
There is a part of me that always wants to help, to guide, to support young people during their journey from then to now, but there are also those individuals who simply are past their expiration date, who make it far too hard to extend the helping hand when they bite it at every single turn. Will it somehow help Lindsay to be thrown into jail for many months or even a year? Perhaps not, but if it’s done right, it may impact her life enough to give her time to think about what’s she’s doing, rather than just continuing to act with assumed impunity.
Sadly, when I contact media coverage of Lindsay Lohan, my mind goes to Casey Anthony: peas in a pod. The intensity of the narcissism, of the total self-indulgence, without any sense of responsibility for their actions, is beyond belief in both of these women, who, incidentally, are in the same age bracket. Perhaps the only redeeming aspect of Lohan is that, so far, she does not have a child’s life to destroy while living in her own little narcissistic world.
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Much Ado About Something
Do the Wall Street Campers understand what it is they want to accomplish with their protest? The appearance is that younger people want something they cannot define, they want it now, and they want it free of charge. On the opposite side of the media coverage are the senior citizens who want to keep what they've spent a lifetime earning, including their homes, their health, and end-of-life quality experiences that celebrate their lifetime accomplishments. Between the two is a chasm of "change we can believe in," change that has little chance of happening because the people who want change don't have the power to effect the change they want.
The media sliced and diced The Tea Party movement, dismissing it without a qualm as some sort of aimless rebellion against the first African-American president, rather than a valid outcry against the callousness of both politicians and financial institutions. It is reasonable to say, based on the past 5 years, that both politicians and financial institutions have eroded the faith of the American people and are not making progress at reforming either their callousness or business practices. However, if the media would not accept the protests then, what makes protesters now think that their efforts will be different? that they will succeed in effecting change that simply is not going to happen?
Camping out results in mild amusement from the media, but using one's financial and political resources as weapons does have merit. NetFlix, with the smug brush-off of their price increases as the cost of a couple of lattes, now has to deal with the significant loss of consumer base and revenue stream that resulted from their actions. Removing financial resources from financial institutions "too big to fail" does impact them if the actions are taken by significant numbers of depositers, but it appears that protesters lack the financial resources required at the base of their own plan. An action plan to attack financial institutions begins with ... financial assets, not camp-outs.
Don't like the monthly debit card fees? Cancel the cards. Don't like the increase in cable rates? Cancel the account. Don't like the increases at the gas pump? Don't drive. Don't like the interest rates on credit cards? Cancel the cards or pay the balance due when the bill arrives. Cell phone plan too expensive? Cut your usage to basic services or (gasp) buy a prepaid minutes phone and wean yourself off 24/7 technology addiction. If you want prices to realign to reasonable, don't stand in line to purchase the newest, the latest, the most expensive "must have" gadget just because it's the newest, the latest, and the most expensive.
It's simple to understand: those with money/financial resources have the power. If you want to fight them, you have to join them. If you cannot put YOUR money where YOUR mouth is, don't expect either politicians or financial institutions to put THEIR money where YOUR mouth is!
The media sliced and diced The Tea Party movement, dismissing it without a qualm as some sort of aimless rebellion against the first African-American president, rather than a valid outcry against the callousness of both politicians and financial institutions. It is reasonable to say, based on the past 5 years, that both politicians and financial institutions have eroded the faith of the American people and are not making progress at reforming either their callousness or business practices. However, if the media would not accept the protests then, what makes protesters now think that their efforts will be different? that they will succeed in effecting change that simply is not going to happen?
Camping out results in mild amusement from the media, but using one's financial and political resources as weapons does have merit. NetFlix, with the smug brush-off of their price increases as the cost of a couple of lattes, now has to deal with the significant loss of consumer base and revenue stream that resulted from their actions. Removing financial resources from financial institutions "too big to fail" does impact them if the actions are taken by significant numbers of depositers, but it appears that protesters lack the financial resources required at the base of their own plan. An action plan to attack financial institutions begins with ... financial assets, not camp-outs.
Don't like the monthly debit card fees? Cancel the cards. Don't like the increase in cable rates? Cancel the account. Don't like the increases at the gas pump? Don't drive. Don't like the interest rates on credit cards? Cancel the cards or pay the balance due when the bill arrives. Cell phone plan too expensive? Cut your usage to basic services or (gasp) buy a prepaid minutes phone and wean yourself off 24/7 technology addiction. If you want prices to realign to reasonable, don't stand in line to purchase the newest, the latest, the most expensive "must have" gadget just because it's the newest, the latest, and the most expensive.
It's simple to understand: those with money/financial resources have the power. If you want to fight them, you have to join them. If you cannot put YOUR money where YOUR mouth is, don't expect either politicians or financial institutions to put THEIR money where YOUR mouth is!
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Balls to the Wall
An interesting phrase was used by one of the DWTS judges last night to encourage a dancer to "man up" by leaving his "balls" on the dance floor, as it were; however, it seems that manning up has little to do with either balls or dancing success this season as the most effusive praise goes to Carson Cressley and Chaz Bono, neither of whom can DANCE.
I get it: we're breaking boundaries. It's okay with me to go where no man has ever gone before, but THIS IS A DANCING COMPETITION. The couples who absolutely kick ass with their performances are brushed to the side so the judges can gush over the contestants that are marginal at best, but represent social demographics that want to make a statement about sexuality. Can they make a statement but also DANCE?
It's awkward, uncomfortable, and embarrassing to have the performers who are DANCING well have to find a way to say, "Ah, come on, man" when their visibly more competent performances are scored less enthusiastically than the WORST DANCERS in the competition. If I were one of the top performers, I'd be tempted to tell them to shove it: why work your ass off to do the best dance and earn the highest score of the week if it doesn't matter?
This show has become a popularity contest that detracts from the goal of the show to take well-known personalities out of their comfort zones and teach them how to DANCE well enough to win a ridiculous mirror ball trophy. It used to be fun, a little bit campy, and I looked forward to cheering for those stars who went from two left feet to a passable paso doble. This season no one seems to care about what the feet are doing as much as what goes on behind closed doors.
If this is what DWTS is going to be, a popularity contest that ignores the performance indicators, I'll move on. If, however, DWTS is going to be a DANCING competition, the show has to find another way to decide who stays and who goes, rather than allowing the popular vote to sustain contestants WHO CANNOT DANCE!
I get it: we're breaking boundaries. It's okay with me to go where no man has ever gone before, but THIS IS A DANCING COMPETITION. The couples who absolutely kick ass with their performances are brushed to the side so the judges can gush over the contestants that are marginal at best, but represent social demographics that want to make a statement about sexuality. Can they make a statement but also DANCE?
It's awkward, uncomfortable, and embarrassing to have the performers who are DANCING well have to find a way to say, "Ah, come on, man" when their visibly more competent performances are scored less enthusiastically than the WORST DANCERS in the competition. If I were one of the top performers, I'd be tempted to tell them to shove it: why work your ass off to do the best dance and earn the highest score of the week if it doesn't matter?
This show has become a popularity contest that detracts from the goal of the show to take well-known personalities out of their comfort zones and teach them how to DANCE well enough to win a ridiculous mirror ball trophy. It used to be fun, a little bit campy, and I looked forward to cheering for those stars who went from two left feet to a passable paso doble. This season no one seems to care about what the feet are doing as much as what goes on behind closed doors.
If this is what DWTS is going to be, a popularity contest that ignores the performance indicators, I'll move on. If, however, DWTS is going to be a DANCING competition, the show has to find another way to decide who stays and who goes, rather than allowing the popular vote to sustain contestants WHO CANNOT DANCE!
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Clooney Does Caesar
After purchasing my ticket, I headed toward the theater entrance and handed it to the door greeter, who acknowledged me with a big smile as he confirmed that I was going to see “Ideas About March.” Indeed a teachable moment, but not one worth pursuing when I could hear the distinctive sounds of freshly-popping corn in the lobby of a theater outfitted with rocking reclining loungers, instead of hard plastic seats. I’d keep my little secret that the movie is actually entitled “Ides of March,” which refers to the quarterly “hump” day of the 15th of seasonal months, including March.
More importantly, in this film, for which Clooney is not just the director, but also one of the writers, the Ides of March is the first clue that Clooney is doing Julius Caesar. No, he never utters the classic “et tu, Brute?,” but his piercing stare conveys the message almost more effectively than words. The Ides of March were foretold to Caesar to beware, advice that he ignored because he was too big to be brought down.
It’s a complicated plot, a subtle massage of the Shakespearean classic, but it’s just as powerful as the Bard intended: the deepest betrayal comes from those closest to us. I found myself guessing who dunnit throughout the film, trying to hone in on the cast of characters: Caesar emerged; Brutus revealed himself; but Cassius is still clouded in maybe for me. The cast uses the highest professional skills to create the conflict, rather than tossing it into the viewer’s face. Subtlety is one acting craft I appreciate because it involves me in the film, rather than the usual cinema technique of putting it all out there so no one, and I mean no one, can miss the point.
I’d like to see Ides of March again from an informed perspective because just as I enjoy reading Shakespeare’s plays more than once, Clooney’s film needs a second experience to appreciate fully the nuances of plot, character, and conflict. The resolution is perfect and cannot be revealed without spoiling the moment. As the country song says, “You say it all when you say nothing at all.”
More importantly, in this film, for which Clooney is not just the director, but also one of the writers, the Ides of March is the first clue that Clooney is doing Julius Caesar. No, he never utters the classic “et tu, Brute?,” but his piercing stare conveys the message almost more effectively than words. The Ides of March were foretold to Caesar to beware, advice that he ignored because he was too big to be brought down.
It’s a complicated plot, a subtle massage of the Shakespearean classic, but it’s just as powerful as the Bard intended: the deepest betrayal comes from those closest to us. I found myself guessing who dunnit throughout the film, trying to hone in on the cast of characters: Caesar emerged; Brutus revealed himself; but Cassius is still clouded in maybe for me. The cast uses the highest professional skills to create the conflict, rather than tossing it into the viewer’s face. Subtlety is one acting craft I appreciate because it involves me in the film, rather than the usual cinema technique of putting it all out there so no one, and I mean no one, can miss the point.
I’d like to see Ides of March again from an informed perspective because just as I enjoy reading Shakespeare’s plays more than once, Clooney’s film needs a second experience to appreciate fully the nuances of plot, character, and conflict. The resolution is perfect and cannot be revealed without spoiling the moment. As the country song says, “You say it all when you say nothing at all.”
Saturday, October 8, 2011
Tread Lightly: A Measureable Outcome
The banker's bruhaha grows in size and shape: after being fired a few days after his public questioning of a local city manager at an open city council meeting, the former banker's former boss sent the terminated employee a letter that puts him "on notice" that he will be the target of a lawsuit for destroying the bank's reputation after a firestorm of media coverage and public pressure erupted.
In a classic case of covering one's own assets, the banker's boss says that he "warned" the employee to "tread lightly," evidently a "warning" with an implied "or else" that the employee failed to heed and which led to his firing. However, according to the boss, the firing decision was NOT based on the employee's public appearance at a city council meeting, nor any of the coercive tactics used by the city manager and/or city mayor and/or city council members that preceeded the firing.
The banker's boss is now at the center of the situation that began at a city council meeting. The media firestorm arose AFTER the boss fired his employee because the employee raised the question whether he has the Constitutional right to ask questions of his elected representatives in a public forum. The banker's boss created the appearance of giving into the city manager's coercion when he fired the employee, even though he adamantly denies that allegation. Perhaps, however, he's a football fan, and most fans of football believe that the best defense is a really strong offense.
In this case, I doubt that the banker's boss is going to get out from under his own actions regardless of how offensive he becomes.
One of the readers of the online paper sent this quote from a press release made by the bank executive (Kavanaugh) upon the hiring of the recently-fired employee (Libby):
"It's always been in our business plan to develop some kind of presence in the Coachella Valley where many of our investment advisory practice clients are at least part-time desert residents," says Kavanaugh. "The timing is now right for us based on having many clients with homes and other assets in the region plus having been fortunate to find a professional with Haddon Libby's expertise and community connections available. With several community and major banks in the area experiencing a wide range of problems that are hindering their lending capacity and Haddon becoming available, this became an opportunity we just couldn't pass up." [http://www.ff-inc.com/news/default.aspx?id=221]
I don't see the clearly-defined "goals" that Mr. Kavanaugh justified as "cause" for firing the employee after the city council meeting, nor do I see failure to "tread lightly" as a reason to terminate an employee. What I honed in on is the joy at finding "a professional with Haddon Libby's expertise and community connections" in praise of the recent new-hire.
That seems to be the key to the whole mess: the bank values its "community connections" far beyond Mr. Libby's Constitutional rights!!
I'm going to guess that even a casual examination of financial records will reveal a banking relationship between the city, the city mayor, the city manager, members of the city council (both public and private accounts), and Mr. Kavanaugh's bank. When push came to shove, Mr. Kavanaugh shoved Mr. Libby under the bus. However, after the past several days of intense, unrelenting media exposure, Kavanaugh did indeed achieve his goal to "develop some kind of presence in the Coachella Valley."
In a classic case of covering one's own assets, the banker's boss says that he "warned" the employee to "tread lightly," evidently a "warning" with an implied "or else" that the employee failed to heed and which led to his firing. However, according to the boss, the firing decision was NOT based on the employee's public appearance at a city council meeting, nor any of the coercive tactics used by the city manager and/or city mayor and/or city council members that preceeded the firing.
The banker's boss is now at the center of the situation that began at a city council meeting. The media firestorm arose AFTER the boss fired his employee because the employee raised the question whether he has the Constitutional right to ask questions of his elected representatives in a public forum. The banker's boss created the appearance of giving into the city manager's coercion when he fired the employee, even though he adamantly denies that allegation. Perhaps, however, he's a football fan, and most fans of football believe that the best defense is a really strong offense.
In this case, I doubt that the banker's boss is going to get out from under his own actions regardless of how offensive he becomes.
One of the readers of the online paper sent this quote from a press release made by the bank executive (Kavanaugh) upon the hiring of the recently-fired employee (Libby):
"It's always been in our business plan to develop some kind of presence in the Coachella Valley where many of our investment advisory practice clients are at least part-time desert residents," says Kavanaugh. "The timing is now right for us based on having many clients with homes and other assets in the region plus having been fortunate to find a professional with Haddon Libby's expertise and community connections available. With several community and major banks in the area experiencing a wide range of problems that are hindering their lending capacity and Haddon becoming available, this became an opportunity we just couldn't pass up." [http://www.ff-inc.com/news/default.aspx?id=221]
I don't see the clearly-defined "goals" that Mr. Kavanaugh justified as "cause" for firing the employee after the city council meeting, nor do I see failure to "tread lightly" as a reason to terminate an employee. What I honed in on is the joy at finding "a professional with Haddon Libby's expertise and community connections" in praise of the recent new-hire.
That seems to be the key to the whole mess: the bank values its "community connections" far beyond Mr. Libby's Constitutional rights!!
I'm going to guess that even a casual examination of financial records will reveal a banking relationship between the city, the city mayor, the city manager, members of the city council (both public and private accounts), and Mr. Kavanaugh's bank. When push came to shove, Mr. Kavanaugh shoved Mr. Libby under the bus. However, after the past several days of intense, unrelenting media exposure, Kavanaugh did indeed achieve his goal to "develop some kind of presence in the Coachella Valley."
Friday, October 7, 2011
Crossing a Dangerous Line in the Desert Sand
Let’s pretend that an American citizen, a resident of a local community, has concerns about what he believes is an inflated salary for a local city manager, who receives in excess of $253,000 in annual salary, as well as a premier benefits package that provides him with a city car, free gas, and a credit card, as well as top tier insurance and retirement benefits. As a concerned citizen, the local resident attends a city council meeting and, during the 3 minutes allotted for him to express his concern and ask questions, is verbally accosted by the city manager who tells him, in effect, to mind his own business. The local citizen, a taxpayer/home-owner/white collar professional, argues that it is he and the other local citizens who pay the salary, so he is well within his Constitutional rights to question it. Thus, according to the tenets of this country, it is his business.
Here comes the turning point: let’s also pretend that a pissed-off city manager takes his anger out on the citizen not just at the time he is questioned publicly, but also in a series of emails that are copied to various city officials. Then, he follows up with direct phone calls to the citizen’s employer, phone calls that result in the firing of the local citizen from his job at a local bank. After his firing, the former employee questions, “Hey, wait a minute! Why did you fire me for asking questions of the city manager at an open public meeting? What does one have to do with other?”
And that’s the question creating a fire storm of protest in the desert sand these days. Imagine that anyone who attends a city council meeting and questions the processes, the procedures, the decision-making – is fired from his/her job for doing so. Isn’t that a direct violation of one’s Constitutional rights? And the city council members who were copied in on the city manager’s memos never raised the question of, “Say what?” And the bank manager never realized that there would be blow-back from firing the employee?
Are people really this stupid? Do all people in positions of authority act with impunity? Have the American people strayed so far from the founding principles of this country that it has become okay for a personal grudge to turn into coercion that results in the firing of a private citizen for exercising his Constitutional right to the freedom to ask any question s/he wants to ask of a public official?
Afraid so.
At last night’s city council meeting, a week after the firestorm hit the media, the offensive city manager apologized half-heartedly for his lapse in judgment, but somewhere during the 3-hour closed door city council session, he either resigned or was fired; hopefully, he loses his very generous termination benefits. But that action does not address the city council’s complicity, nor does it hold the employer to account for his firing of an employee for asking questions in a public forum, nor does it get the man his job back.
Local citizens are enraged, but so what? Who cares? If it isn’t my problem, it isn’t my problem – you know what I mean. And the city manager did toss off a "sorry" after he realized how deep a pile of excrement in which he is not just standing, but created all by his lonesome. Who knows? Perhaps the bank official will contact the fired employee today, also offer up a "sorry," and offer the man his job back because the goal now is let's move on, people, before any more of the fit hits the shan.
Of course, anyone with half a brain can see the lawsuit train leaving the station. It may take decades, but heads are going to roll or deals are going to be struck to avoid the courtroom because there are some criminal actions involved in this mess, too. Where does it begin? With the complicit city council members who could have said “oh, hell no” to the city manager after receiving the alarming emails – but didn’t. With the bank official who was blackmailed into firing a valued, long-term employee? With the city manager who obviously grew much too big to fit his publicly-provided britches?
Or with a corporate attitude that is pervasive in this country and destroying our fundamental rights from the inside out? The Constitution allows citizens the right of redress, but that only happens if the power brokers allow it to happen. If it’s in the best interests of the top tier to stonewall, then the legal walls are built high and tight: woe be unto the little guy upon whom the foundation is laid! It does not matter if the little guy is right because might makes right, and being right no longer matters. Meanwhile, the now unemployed banker has to come up with the means to fight not just to get his job back, but to pay for the lawsuits that will come with it.
The Great American Way we do business is seriously flawed.
Here comes the turning point: let’s also pretend that a pissed-off city manager takes his anger out on the citizen not just at the time he is questioned publicly, but also in a series of emails that are copied to various city officials. Then, he follows up with direct phone calls to the citizen’s employer, phone calls that result in the firing of the local citizen from his job at a local bank. After his firing, the former employee questions, “Hey, wait a minute! Why did you fire me for asking questions of the city manager at an open public meeting? What does one have to do with other?”
And that’s the question creating a fire storm of protest in the desert sand these days. Imagine that anyone who attends a city council meeting and questions the processes, the procedures, the decision-making – is fired from his/her job for doing so. Isn’t that a direct violation of one’s Constitutional rights? And the city council members who were copied in on the city manager’s memos never raised the question of, “Say what?” And the bank manager never realized that there would be blow-back from firing the employee?
Are people really this stupid? Do all people in positions of authority act with impunity? Have the American people strayed so far from the founding principles of this country that it has become okay for a personal grudge to turn into coercion that results in the firing of a private citizen for exercising his Constitutional right to the freedom to ask any question s/he wants to ask of a public official?
Afraid so.
At last night’s city council meeting, a week after the firestorm hit the media, the offensive city manager apologized half-heartedly for his lapse in judgment, but somewhere during the 3-hour closed door city council session, he either resigned or was fired; hopefully, he loses his very generous termination benefits. But that action does not address the city council’s complicity, nor does it hold the employer to account for his firing of an employee for asking questions in a public forum, nor does it get the man his job back.
Local citizens are enraged, but so what? Who cares? If it isn’t my problem, it isn’t my problem – you know what I mean. And the city manager did toss off a "sorry" after he realized how deep a pile of excrement in which he is not just standing, but created all by his lonesome. Who knows? Perhaps the bank official will contact the fired employee today, also offer up a "sorry," and offer the man his job back because the goal now is let's move on, people, before any more of the fit hits the shan.
Of course, anyone with half a brain can see the lawsuit train leaving the station. It may take decades, but heads are going to roll or deals are going to be struck to avoid the courtroom because there are some criminal actions involved in this mess, too. Where does it begin? With the complicit city council members who could have said “oh, hell no” to the city manager after receiving the alarming emails – but didn’t. With the bank official who was blackmailed into firing a valued, long-term employee? With the city manager who obviously grew much too big to fit his publicly-provided britches?
Or with a corporate attitude that is pervasive in this country and destroying our fundamental rights from the inside out? The Constitution allows citizens the right of redress, but that only happens if the power brokers allow it to happen. If it’s in the best interests of the top tier to stonewall, then the legal walls are built high and tight: woe be unto the little guy upon whom the foundation is laid! It does not matter if the little guy is right because might makes right, and being right no longer matters. Meanwhile, the now unemployed banker has to come up with the means to fight not just to get his job back, but to pay for the lawsuits that will come with it.
The Great American Way we do business is seriously flawed.
Thursday, October 6, 2011
There is NO justification for greed!
As people stand in endless lines for unemployment benefits, attend job fairs carrying a college diploma to set themselves above the other applicants who want to learn how to bartend in these tough economic times, and try to avail themselves of government programs to help save their homes from foreclosure, Bank of America reps tell the American people that ... "Bank of America has the right to make a profit."
Really? That's your defense for adding a $5 monthly charge for customers to use a debit card? We all were forced into using debit cards to "save the banks money" a decade ago, whether we agreed with putting ourselves into the jeopardy of having our personal information stolen and used to defraud us. Now that we all have them and few other options, thanks to the endless cost-cutting measures instituted by the banks that always end up costing the consumer more money, we have to pay a monthly usage fee because YOU have the right to make a profit? Are you trying to sell the American people with the idea that WE are keeping YOU from making a profit?
I don't think so: according to a recent press release, Apr 15, 2011 – Bank of America reported profit of $2 billion compared with $3.2 billion last year, which may be a downturn to you, but the $2 BILLION seems to qualify in anyone's thinking as "making a profit" that in no way warrants crying poor me to the American people!
I'll bet you also don't have to cut back on your Starbucks' lattes to pay the additional charges recently dropped onto Netflix customers' monthly bills because Netflix is practically giving away their services free. Stop shoveling bullshit and think outside the box you are hiding behind: the American people are financially devastated, not sipping lattes at Starbucks, wearing designer clothes, dining out every night, and drinking pricey champagne! That's YOU FOLKS, not US FOLKS. How about you give US a break, rather than voting yourselves more profit?
Oh, that's right, you DO give SOME customers a break: any customer with a bank balance that remains above $15,000 will not be charged the debit card usage fees. I'll bet that exemption applies to ... someone, somewhere, but surely does not fit the banking experiences of most Americans who, according to recent articles, have an average of less than $1000 in savings that accumulates at the average rate of $372 annually! It would only take that average American 40 years to save the $15k minimum balance to qualify for no debit card usage fees, while paying $2400 in monthly debit fees during the savings' period.
Who are these people? How do they rise to the top of these businesses? Who teaches them to act with impunity just because they can? Without their $4k tailored suits, shirts, ties, and shiny shoes, they would be criminals in any other enterprise, but put them in charge of a financial institution and they chastise the peasants for denying them the "right" to make a profit. There is NO justification for this kind of greed.
None.
Really? That's your defense for adding a $5 monthly charge for customers to use a debit card? We all were forced into using debit cards to "save the banks money" a decade ago, whether we agreed with putting ourselves into the jeopardy of having our personal information stolen and used to defraud us. Now that we all have them and few other options, thanks to the endless cost-cutting measures instituted by the banks that always end up costing the consumer more money, we have to pay a monthly usage fee because YOU have the right to make a profit? Are you trying to sell the American people with the idea that WE are keeping YOU from making a profit?
I don't think so: according to a recent press release, Apr 15, 2011 – Bank of America reported profit of $2 billion compared with $3.2 billion last year, which may be a downturn to you, but the $2 BILLION seems to qualify in anyone's thinking as "making a profit" that in no way warrants crying poor me to the American people!
I'll bet you also don't have to cut back on your Starbucks' lattes to pay the additional charges recently dropped onto Netflix customers' monthly bills because Netflix is practically giving away their services free. Stop shoveling bullshit and think outside the box you are hiding behind: the American people are financially devastated, not sipping lattes at Starbucks, wearing designer clothes, dining out every night, and drinking pricey champagne! That's YOU FOLKS, not US FOLKS. How about you give US a break, rather than voting yourselves more profit?
Oh, that's right, you DO give SOME customers a break: any customer with a bank balance that remains above $15,000 will not be charged the debit card usage fees. I'll bet that exemption applies to ... someone, somewhere, but surely does not fit the banking experiences of most Americans who, according to recent articles, have an average of less than $1000 in savings that accumulates at the average rate of $372 annually! It would only take that average American 40 years to save the $15k minimum balance to qualify for no debit card usage fees, while paying $2400 in monthly debit fees during the savings' period.
Who are these people? How do they rise to the top of these businesses? Who teaches them to act with impunity just because they can? Without their $4k tailored suits, shirts, ties, and shiny shoes, they would be criminals in any other enterprise, but put them in charge of a financial institution and they chastise the peasants for denying them the "right" to make a profit. There is NO justification for this kind of greed.
None.
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
No Apology Necessary
A few times, I've felt a bit bad about bagging on Obama for his apparent disconnect from the American people. However, this week he came on-board and actually said in a speech that this is NOT working. Okay, I took his comment out of context, but if he actually realizes this is NOT working on any level for anyone, perhaps he can come back around to humming the "change we can believe in" theme song and actually write the lyrics to define that change.
Obama's chances of being re-elected are slimming down to none as he continues to berate the public for apparently failing to understand what it is he is trying to accomplish, as well as his agenda for so doing, but when anyone asks him to define himself, he repeats himself, rather than explain. He hammers at Republicans in Washington as solely responsible for the Titanic disaster of the past couple of years, while failing to realize that there are millions of other Republicans (potential voters) he's alienating along with his Washington targets. The poor, who not only continue to be poor, but have become poorer, may not catch his TV appearances, nor attend his upperclass fund raisers and/or purchase the published media that continues to support an increasingly unpopular President, but I feel confident that even the poorest among us accept that it's not getting better under Obama's presidency.
I gave up after the address to the United Nations: no matter the words that were carefully crafted by the speech writers, Obama's facial expressions and tone of voice sent the silent message: it's all your fault, people, not mine. Americans have learned to turn a deaf ear to being berated by the American president, but Obama was speaking to the world!
I am well-read, well-educated, interested in politics and make carefully-considered political decisions for my life in general. I have ideas for change we all can believe in, primarily involving curbing out-of-control government spending, but my President denigrates my ability to grasp the complex concepts of assets, liabilities, and debt load that keep money in my savings account, my mortgage current, and my bills paid in full and on-time, while his grasp of the same concepts puts the country in financial peril. I know that to keep America working, we have to keep Americans working, but my president fails to grasp that basic concept, believing instead that all Americans should be able to live the American dream without lifting a finger to make it happen for themselves or others.
His solution to complex problems: the government pays for whatever the people (think they) need. That, Mr. President, is NOT change I can believe in, nor will I support your efforts toward that goal. If you want MY vote, insist that all people work to earn what they want, what they need, what they value. What we get free we do not appreciate, nor value.
Mr. Obama, the people need to be involved not just in the problem, but in the solution to the problem. It is only through my personal investment in my own success that others benefit. It's a basic economic principle, but there are still millions of us living in the USA who believe that we each have to work for what we have and resent the hell out of creating even longer lines of free goods and services for those who sit on the stoop waiting for the gravy train to roll on by.
Obama has the opportunity to moderate this train wreck, although I believe it's far too late to turn it around, but he fails to recognize that his total polarization of political parties, as well as his basic failure to understand common economic concepts of supply and demand, makes him a very unattractive candidate for anything except retirement to private life... .
Obama's chances of being re-elected are slimming down to none as he continues to berate the public for apparently failing to understand what it is he is trying to accomplish, as well as his agenda for so doing, but when anyone asks him to define himself, he repeats himself, rather than explain. He hammers at Republicans in Washington as solely responsible for the Titanic disaster of the past couple of years, while failing to realize that there are millions of other Republicans (potential voters) he's alienating along with his Washington targets. The poor, who not only continue to be poor, but have become poorer, may not catch his TV appearances, nor attend his upperclass fund raisers and/or purchase the published media that continues to support an increasingly unpopular President, but I feel confident that even the poorest among us accept that it's not getting better under Obama's presidency.
I gave up after the address to the United Nations: no matter the words that were carefully crafted by the speech writers, Obama's facial expressions and tone of voice sent the silent message: it's all your fault, people, not mine. Americans have learned to turn a deaf ear to being berated by the American president, but Obama was speaking to the world!
I am well-read, well-educated, interested in politics and make carefully-considered political decisions for my life in general. I have ideas for change we all can believe in, primarily involving curbing out-of-control government spending, but my President denigrates my ability to grasp the complex concepts of assets, liabilities, and debt load that keep money in my savings account, my mortgage current, and my bills paid in full and on-time, while his grasp of the same concepts puts the country in financial peril. I know that to keep America working, we have to keep Americans working, but my president fails to grasp that basic concept, believing instead that all Americans should be able to live the American dream without lifting a finger to make it happen for themselves or others.
His solution to complex problems: the government pays for whatever the people (think they) need. That, Mr. President, is NOT change I can believe in, nor will I support your efforts toward that goal. If you want MY vote, insist that all people work to earn what they want, what they need, what they value. What we get free we do not appreciate, nor value.
Mr. Obama, the people need to be involved not just in the problem, but in the solution to the problem. It is only through my personal investment in my own success that others benefit. It's a basic economic principle, but there are still millions of us living in the USA who believe that we each have to work for what we have and resent the hell out of creating even longer lines of free goods and services for those who sit on the stoop waiting for the gravy train to roll on by.
Obama has the opportunity to moderate this train wreck, although I believe it's far too late to turn it around, but he fails to recognize that his total polarization of political parties, as well as his basic failure to understand common economic concepts of supply and demand, makes him a very unattractive candidate for anything except retirement to private life... .
Friday, September 30, 2011
Just a Cuppa Joe
We decided to try out the new downtown restaurant, Lulu's, the one that took a former nightclub and turned it into an eatery. Heard good things about it, read great reviews in the local paper, and we've been looking for new breakfast experiences, so we agreed on 8 AM this fine day to try it out.
Multiple pages of menu, but I wasn't all that hungry, so I looked for something easy, light, and less filling: a blueberry muffin. I waited, talking and drinking my coffee, for the meals to be delivered, along with my muffin. However, that was not to be because the highly-touted new diner was out of blueberry muffins, even though we were there when the doors opened this morning. Would I like to enjoy a chocolate chip muffin instead? That would be not only no, but really no.
Had our server come immediately back to the table and told me that there were no blueberry muffins this fine morning, I would have had time to order another meal. But not knowing that the one item on the menu I wanted was not available until the entire table had been served, I was not going to order my meal after everyone else had started eating.
The server said, "Sorry," but no offer of my coffee free of charge because he blew the service, which is customary at most restaurants. So ... no blueberry muffins? No problem; I'll go to a restaurant I know will either serve what I order or let me know in a timely manner that I have to select another meal option.
UPDATE: One of the gals said it was the worst French toast she's ever eaten and another became very ill after she returned home from her eggs Benedict. She said they were runny, but obviously they also were not cooked properly. Yep, LuLu's off our dining list!!
Multiple pages of menu, but I wasn't all that hungry, so I looked for something easy, light, and less filling: a blueberry muffin. I waited, talking and drinking my coffee, for the meals to be delivered, along with my muffin. However, that was not to be because the highly-touted new diner was out of blueberry muffins, even though we were there when the doors opened this morning. Would I like to enjoy a chocolate chip muffin instead? That would be not only no, but really no.
Had our server come immediately back to the table and told me that there were no blueberry muffins this fine morning, I would have had time to order another meal. But not knowing that the one item on the menu I wanted was not available until the entire table had been served, I was not going to order my meal after everyone else had started eating.
The server said, "Sorry," but no offer of my coffee free of charge because he blew the service, which is customary at most restaurants. So ... no blueberry muffins? No problem; I'll go to a restaurant I know will either serve what I order or let me know in a timely manner that I have to select another meal option.
UPDATE: One of the gals said it was the worst French toast she's ever eaten and another became very ill after she returned home from her eggs Benedict. She said they were runny, but obviously they also were not cooked properly. Yep, LuLu's off our dining list!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)