A Quickie

I wanted to thank my reading audience for keeping up with me as I've been away. My apartment is slowly turning to shambles as I pack it in boxes, as I'm anticipating a return to the East Coast in the next month. As I only have the luxury of a couple weeks to do this, I will be attempting to blog but giving you "quickies." (You can laugh if you want - it's the best I can come up with right now!) Anyway, here are some thoughts that have been running around in my head recently:

• There have been rumors that Condi Rice has a shot at being McCain's running mate. Rice's inevitable attachment to the Iraq war label notwithstanding, McCain could take the Democratic rhetoric - can this country elect a black man or a female? - and combine into one neat, perfectly coiffed, toothy package. I'm not so sure that McCain will do this, but then again, could this country elect a black female as the U.S. second in command? (I'm sure she'd be better with a shotgun than some previous Veeps.) All right, I'll stop with the snide comments that aren't funny...
• I don't know about you, but everything I read in the news has something to do with rising gas prices and food costs. The sad thing is, while the middle classes struggle to earn enough money to drive to work, there are two other constants that remain the same: the wealthy know how to stay wealthy, and the poor have nothing to lose and so stay at the bottom of the pile. Also, I am of the opinion that Presidents are either lucky or cursed when it comes to the state of the economy; they have nothing to do with the price of whole grain. President Bush has enough blame on his plate, and he doesn't have the resources to figure out how to end this war and make peace in the East before the end of the year. Quack, quack!
• I just read a Wikipedia entry about conspiracy theories of 9/11. Before you get ants in your pants, rest assured that I don't believe any of them, and I'll tell you why: Some of these theories, such as those for the New World Order, assume that the orchestration of four hijacked planes was for the sake of some global dominance or higher purpose that empowers only few on this entire planet. I think the human condition is too selfish for this kind of thing to be successful. I mean, a New World Order in theory is selfish enough, but there's always someone else who wants have the glory to themselves. If some sort of global government is secretly controlling my every move, then Lord, let me die an ignoramus, because I like the idea that someone else believed so completely in our freedoms that they died overseas for it, New World Order or not.
• Now, did the U.S. have knowledge of an impending attack that they tried to cover up? That's a conspiracy I can swallow. Not one of a bunch of Saudi suicide bombers who participated in 9/11 to appease some worldly organization - they were dying for what they believed was a much higher and otherworldly purpose.
• On a lighter note, I think we can all hold a mirror to ourselves when watching this video. If you want a nice laugh, pause the video at :59 and read her sign.
• And on the lightest note, one of my favorite videos on YouTube thus far. It's one person doing impersonations of her family, and she's pretty good. Click here to meet all the people in her family.

That's all for now, dear readers - thanks for stopping by and continue to check back in. I promise to keep blogging between wrestling with the permanent markers, boxes and tape.

Tough Oats

Hello readers - it's been awhile, and I think I can explain. Between a much-needed vacation to see some friends in Seattle and some life-changing events here at our California Headquarters, I've pushed my poor blog to somewhere in the middle of the to-do list. I've had an article I wanted to blog about for a while, and am just getting to it now.

CNN's Glenn Beck is one of my preferred CNN writers, and last week's article on Michigan and Florida's poo-pooing about not being able to count their votes towards the Democratic primary was something I read with, admittedly, much glee. Glenn, thy name is parental justice!

Glenn's choice of words for telling Florida and Michigan that they had their chance was very simple: Too bad. You broke the rules, you sit in time-out. But my mother had a better name for it: Tough oats. Did your mom ever say that to you? There was probably some two-word phrase that she might have used when withholding your dessert if you didn't finish your dinner. You didn't like the rules of the house? Tough oats. But Mom, can't I stay out until midnight tonight? Tough oats. You're embarrassed by that old fogey car that your father bought? Tough oats. (Side note: I ended up partially buying that old fogey car right after I got married.)

Isn't it strange how this country works? Most people in this country are looking to be able to have their vote and eat it, too. They want to have their voice heard, but when was the last time even 50% of the population showed up for an election? These delegates in MI and FL are charged with representing how the people vote in the state, but alas, the DNC made a few rules, and they broke them. It was all over the news; remember? Michigan and Florida held their primaries way too early, back in January. They flipped the proverbial bird to the parental figurehead of the Democrats, the DNC, and held primaries anyway. To which the DNC put their foot down and said: Well, go ahead. But your vote won't count. Tough oats; too bad.

Just recently, the DNC upheld their decision to not have a new primary in Florida, sending Brother Michigan and Sister Florida to their rooms to sit and think about what they've done, by giving up possibly the most exciting opportunity to participate in a Presidential primary such as this. What a bitter punishment!

What gets me even more is the fact that Sen. Clinton has asked for the primaries to be held in Florida later. Um, Senator? Do you realize you won that state? Of course you want those delegates; you're falling behind. In addition, Michigan did not have Sen. Obama on their ticket. His name wasn't even on the ballot! Do you think it might be fair for either Senator to go head-to-head in a face-off again?

Sure, it would make for some brilliant news. But what was done was done. Those two states made their choice to break the rules; fine. But just as the disobedient, pimpled teenager who breaks curfew on the weekends is stripped of their car and computer privileges, so goes for Michigan and Florida who now sit in their rooms, screaming "IT'S NOT FAIR!" to the DNC. And as all parents know, drawing the line in the sand is the best way to demonstrate between right and wrong, even if we're teaching the lesson to a bunch of adults who feel entitled otherwise.

March D.U.H.

Greetings from Seattle! I'll be here for the next few days on the trusty laptop, so thanks for joining me on my travels.

Seen on the front page of CNN.com, 11:08 AM PST:

"Developing Story: President Bush says 'it's clear our economy has slowed.'"

No kidding, man. Like the foreclosures at an all-time high, the job slump, and credit woes aren't enough to tip us off? Is this really the only news CNN has to offer us as urgent, developing news in the U.S.?

I do have a screenshot to prove it, but Blogger isn't being nice this morning to me. I'll try to post it later.

Media Smorgasbord: Now with less fat

In my post this week "Repeat After Us," I mentioned the likelihood that very few Americans check out the English version of al Jazeera. For those of you who are a bit curious, may I make a few suggestions? These articles are hard to come by on the American media stage, as of today:

Cuba signs human rights accords
Soldiering on after Putin
Denmark to oppose Sudan debt relief
Israel warns of Gazan "Holocaust"

These are some incredible news stories. Within days of Fidel Castro stepping down, the nation agreed to sign these important human rights accords set forth by the UN General Assembly back in 1966 (!), which Cuba previously held that if signed, they would be "cede [ing] to pressure from the US."

Who among us knew Russia was having elections?! I sure didn't. I was flabbergasted when I found Putin was on his way out to make way for a new President. The man was just voted Person of the Year by TIME magazine and has been said to restore some confidence back into Russia as being "more important."

Supporting Sudan debt relief, and the other problems associated with the displacement of refugees there, is about as hip a cause as you can support: All the American celebrities are doing it. So how can Denmark refuse to help these people? Well, it comes down the Muslim community decrying Denmark's publishing of a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad: the country's president asked the Muslim world to boycott Danish goods.

Finally, there's that word again: Holocaust. Because Palestine has been firing rockets into Israel, the country threatens that Palestine is bringing a Holocaust (Hebrew: "shoah") upon themselves. Israel threatens "all [their] might" to defend themselves. Who can point me to Palestine's almighty military that will meet Israel's army if they invade? Not one of you can, because there isn't one. If you're interested in reading a bit of one person's perspective on Palestine and some history thereof, please visit this blog.

Gleaning our news from only American outlets is like overloading your diet on only carbohydrates or sugars: It's unhealthy for you. You need a balance of protein, amino acids, calcium and vitamins to round out your healthy news diet. I think most of us are much too bloated on Britney and Democrats for our own good.

Leap Year D.U.H.

Either CNN is having a slow news day, or they just are too lazy to make a decent headline that doesn't shove down our throats what we already are dreading. C'mon, it's Friday! Give us an incentive to click on those links.

Bush: We're in a slowdown
Bush on $4 gas: I hadn't heard that (this was the headline on the front page of CNN.com yesterday)

I don't know how clearer it can get: we KNOW the economy's in trouble. I don't bat an eye when I pay $3.50 a gallon for gas. My parents sigh heavily every time they look at their portfolio. But instead of publishing this kind of gloom and doom for the masses, how about reading this instead?

Glenn Beck: Don't follow the herd on economy

When it comes to American news outlets, I find that you have to wade through the muck before getting to the good stuff. Enjoy and happy Friday/Leap Year, folks!

Repeat After Us

When I first changed the name of this blog to rumi∞nation, I knew that the niche I wanted to settle my writing self in - one that will constantly be populated by new information and one, ironically, populated also by me, the media - was going to be a journey I'd started long ago, sitting in a college classroom in Erie, PA, exploring what we call language.

What is language, exactly? In the most basest of terms, it is merely an organized uttering of sounds from our vocal cords, or a series of dots and lines bent on the page. But then throw in culture, birthplace, geographical location, accent, and several other variables, and we find that these uttered sounds are both a constant and variable in themselves, the way our parents teach us how to understand those sounds and what they mean, even attaching the visual cue of language with those dots and lines, and making it a cohesive way of understanding, and communicating with, other humans. Yet while language is what binds the human race together, so it also forces us apart, in ways such that the utterances of Arabic are vastly different from those of Mandarin or, if you're from the part of the world I hail from, you'd know that language used by folks in Erie and Pittsburgh set themselves apart from the rest of the Northeast US.

(I understand that there are many other ways of communication with other humans, including nonvisual cues and sign languages, secret handshakes and even Morse code, but my interest is in that of what American media uses, chiefly written and spoken language, that I would like to address here today. As you can see, the concept of language is incredibly complicated, and one that I have only started to explore on my own beginning with my college years. This will not be the last time I return to this subject, so please bear with me as we scratch the surface together.)

The American media, as you have all seen, has used a curious way of manipulating language. I truly believe that, with a First Amendment-protected media, one must not take it all at face value, and understanding that what constitutes "news" in my parents' generation is not the same as it is today. It's a curious phenomenon when I visit my in-laws, when we all sit down and watch the 6 o'clock news in the evening. I realized that since I got married, I didn't watch the news anymore; I went online to get it. I subscribed to the local paper just to get the comics and the movie listings, one of those "just in case" situations, and even then I only got the Sunday paper. With the newspapers and news anchors giving me the information, I found that their choice of language (and, therefore, the news) was not something I was fond of.

My nitpicking of this not only found me to start looking at other sources of news other than the American media, but to also realize that I didn't like a news anchor choosing the words for me. Although I worked for the school newspaper in college, I realized that I was given the utterly huge responsibility of choosing the words to tell a story to the rest of the campus, and that their words to describe it were probably vastly different from mine (notwithstanding the fact that I was bound to AP-type rules and a relatively airtight filter of words I was not allowed to use, as well as keeping the reading to a 5th-grade level.)

Coming from this angle, of one person who has both experienced the media language from outside and within, I took much exception with this blog entry by a certain Mr. Jack Cafferty of CNN, who seemed quite on the offensive when he found out that Senator Clinton had thrown a swipe at the media, even accusing her of "whining" about the questions delivered on some of her more recent debates. He says: "It's a tactic as old as politics: things aren't going well, blame the media."

Oh, Jack. If only you knew the influence your words have on some people in this country. Sir, you seem to come from a line of thought that you are reporting "just the facts, ma'am." I beg to differ. While the American media is perhaps not directly responsible for Clinton's seemingly downward spiral in this election, you fail to recognize that too many people take your word as unerring fact, even when you willingly write a blog entry that is not based in cold, hard, number-calculating fact. I heartily disagree with your quickness to separate yourself from the huge influence, good or not, on anyone's campaign. What do you and your media cronies choose to report about Senator Clinton? Let's see: CNN has been quick to report any time Clinton sheds a tear or lashes an angry word. Do you wonder if you or your superiors are making this news because, alas, she is merely a woman and her emotions are fair game to the media? Ah, but now look what words I have put into your mouth!

Let's try a different angle, readers: How many of you have taken a gander at the English language version of al Jazeera online? How many of you just gasped right now for me publishing that in this blog? Al Jazeera is not the enemy, folks; you should check it out sometime. BBC is a pretty interesting read, but there's nothing like reading some of the things that our Muslim counterparts are checking out on their own media outlets.

I will admit that I do not publish much from non-American news outlets, but then again, my reading audience is interested in popular media, and a good percentage of them are American. But the byline of this blog states what I am trying to do by calling attention and shedding a much less favorable light on American media: an attempt to discover common sense we lost by exploring popular media. I believe that most of the general American public has lost some of their common sense by swallowing a lot of what is fed to us through the media outlets without so much as a morsel of a question mark with it. I'm not attacking when we report on the number of casualties abroad, for instance; it's folks like Jack Cafferty that, while he does echo some of my sentiments about a broad range of subjects, also perpetrate the myth that the American media indemnifies itself from the influence it has on those constantly in its spotlight. This is the language we are trained to understand, but truly, it's not the only one that we have the capability to understand; there are more out there. Many, many more.

So, Mr. Cafferty, you have more influence than you realize, but this is not wholly a compliment to you or your American media chums. While your contribution is most intriguing, understand that if CNN were ignored during Super Tuesday, I predict there would have been a struggle, albeit a successful one, to figure out the language on our own. After all, if this is truly a free media, that means we have the power to create, write, and speak our own media, correct? Could it be that the media is only what we, the American people, can make it? I believe it has the potential to be much more malleable that you or I realize.

Best of the Best of the Best?

Even if it's just for 15 minutes, we all like to have some sort of claim to fame. We like to talk about what famous people we've met and if we've ever been on TV. We like to talk about how far we've traveled and show off the beautiful/handsome person we married when we attend our 10-year high school reunions. Receiving that acceptance letter to college or a new job is even a demonstrate in fame, knowing that someone actually wants you for your accomplishments and thinks you're important enough to recruit to the organization.

But is there such a thing as us feeling too proud of ourselves? Can we take it too far? Let me show you an example: Forbes.com has named the 10 most lustful cities in America. Here, you can also see the other cities that top the list of the rest of the deadly sins: gluttony, avarice, sloth, wrath, envy and pride.

Interestingly enough, I've lived in or near several cities who top out some of these. Rochester and Buffalo NY tied for 10th place in the lust category, based on condom sales in those areas. San Francisco and San Jose topped out avarice and pride, ranking in the top three in both categories. I certainly don't call myself native to these areas, but when I think about Rochester NY beating out such "sexy" places as L.A. and NYC, I have to laugh. Does that mean we just protect ourselves better from STDs? It begs the question of how they gathered this information and came up with the results, and how they correlated those results with its Deadly Sin label. I mean, it's probably easy enough to come up with the average per capita income per person to correlate to "greedy" cities, and average BMI in a city to correlate to the "fattest," but envy based on how many cars are stolen?

Moreover, I find it also interesting that this was one of the most read articles on Forbes.com. It's like a weird way of people figuring out how they fit into the deadly sin superlatives. Who can forget those yearbook photos of smiling seniors rounding out who's most talented or most likely to succeed? Can you imagine your city being named the most envious or slothful, complete with a picture of the city's skyline?

You see it everywhere, though - your hometown probably has some sort of claim to fame or is home to the "World's Largest [fill in the blank]." Rochester is famed for its lilac collection and lilac festival every spring. San Jose was the pride and joy of the dot-com boom, and still boasts as headquarters to nearly everything that's in vogue with technology. San Francisco, well, aren't the bridges iconic enough around the world? My hometown, Erie, boasts itself as once the home of former Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge and close to the hometown of Sharon Stone, and depends on its tourism of its state park, Presque Isle, as a beach getaway and part of the fascinating Great Lakes ecosystem.

Even though we are all different in DNA, we are all still human. Even though our cities brought up different celebrities, they still have a mayor and a City Council and favorite hangout downtown. Even though snowflakes are all different in their crystal shape, they're still all made out of frozen water. A lot of American media is based on the fact that there's lots of things going on that makes people or cities different from one another. When it comes to associations of the famous, the impressive, or just plain different, can we settle with being both different and the same? Does it defeat the purpose of how we look at what is newsworthy now? Can I arm myself with this new information about these sinful cities I've lived in, and boast the facts to strangers and acquaintances for their interest and approval?

We spend our lives trying to be different and yet fit in at the same time. We set ourselves apart from others in a job interview by outlining selected accomplishments, yet yearn to be part of a work force that works for the same board of directors. I attended college with many other students who yearned to be part of the Penn State family, but made sure I involved myself in different clubs and activities to set my accomplishments far apart from those students who would eventually become my professional rivals after graduation. So when it comes to figuring out if we've lived in a city that boasts itself as the most lustful, does that mean we're trying to associate with a group of citizens who can boast the same thing, or set us apart from the rest of the country vying for the same boasting rights? Perhaps it's a dichotomy that the U.S. media will always use to its advantage.

Saturday D.U.H.

Woman says being dead ruins life

"Baby... you ain't kidding." -Bill (Kill Bill Vol. 2)

A Guilty Pleasure

Most of the celeb gossip sites online remind me of the days in high school when kids would try to out-do each other's insults of the class [dork/jock/insert favorable stereotype here], inevitably droning on with more and more heartless drivel to see how many snickers they can get out of their audience. And I'm not talking about the Perez Hilton types of gossips who worship the own ground they walk on; it's the ones who probably loathe Perez Hilton and all others with the surname "Hilton."

But sometimes I come along some humor that is well-appreciated and written with a bit of care - dare I say nearly high-brow humor? - shining some truth on an otherwise ironic and painfully obvious situation. To wit: Click Here. (In order to avoid any copyright infringement on my part, you'll have to read the blog post at the site, since it includes a picture.)

Gossip blogs aren't known for their high-brow humor; how many nicknames can you come up for Paris Hilton? I've read so many, and none of them are safe for a family blog like this. I think the cleanest one I've read ever is Parasite Hilton. Now that's saying something.

Ballot Power

War time is never a good time for any people. If you think back to World War II, there were very few good things about it - sure, the economy remained buoyant because of the working female class while their husbands fought against all sorts of Axis evil forces. But remember how thousands upon thousands died? Remember Pearl Harbor? You didn't have to be alive; strikes against U.S. soil have notoriously been swiftly returned with brute force. There's death, there's finger pointing, there's arguments and, most of all, plenty of anger.

This country is seeing a lot of anger right now: Anger about the war, anger about subprime mortgages, anger about the sinking economy, anger about gas prices. Yet when I read articles like this, I find that anger (when incorrectly used) becomes a dangerous motivator that will, essentially, bite you in the ass.

You know, I was never a fan of the California left, even when the Governator was elected and re-elected. He's a great governor, don't get me wrong; but there really is a thing as flying too far left for my own comfort. Here, in Berkeley, the City Council has taken it upon themselves to pass a measure urging the U.S. Marines office downtown to vacate their offices. They urge locals to nonviolently protest these offices of "uninvited and nonwelcome intruders." The protesters who took up City Council's invitation claim that the military has given fake promises to our youth promising money, education and jobs, and have not capitalized on that promise. Further, they allege that the military is merely recruiting people to go die in the senseless war in Iraq.

In Charlotte York's first husband's words: All righty. You want the military to leave your city? Then watch as the conservative right swings back: the Semper Fi Act of 2008 has been introduced, and if it passes, it stipulates that because of Berkeley City Council's measure, they will rescind more than $2 million from Berkeley and transfer it to the Marine Corps.

Of course, neither side is backing down. A spokesperson for the Corps recruiting branch issued a statement that there's no way they're leaving, especially when folks are merely exercising their First Amendment rights. The protesters argue they're not going to give up until they pack up and leave, and one goes as far to say "We are the civilian population; we control the military. We the people have to take back control of our military."

Ok, look. This is true; we would not be a free country if we did not have control over our military. But we don't tell our folks where to go in times of war - our President does. That's the way we control our military, by electing their Commander in Chief. We the people have control over a lot of things in our country, but it's only because WE ARE ALLOWED TO VOTE for those in office, not because we ourselves determine the law. We elect people to represent our feelings about these kinds of things; that's the only control we have. If they're so incensed with the war, they should be using their time to research which candidate they're electing to Pennsylvania Avenue in 2008. The ballot is the true power that the American people have. They should not be driving a small constituent of protesters asking the Marines to leave their city.

Further, I would like to see what would happen if someone voluntarily rescinded their right to military protection. I sleep in a warm bed at night because my government, no matter what dingbats we claim them to be, still protects our home land. I don't sleep, eat, walk, work or blog in fear because I wonder if my government will come take me away if I say something wrong against them. I can have as many or few babies I darn well please. I can leave my house with or without a head covering; it's my choice. I can choose to go to a church or mosque or not even believe in a God, because no government official is going to care what otherworldly things I do or do not believe in.

Yes. There are a lot of things I can and cannot do because of our elected officials; ergo, our military. That'll be the day if I ever dismiss that kind of protection.

February D.U.H.

Hovering parents need to step back at college time
Don't try to invest like the pros
Hamilton saddened by abuse (what, is he supposed to be happy?)
United to start charging for second bag (this just makes me mad)
Jamie Lynn ready to run away from Lynne

Super Tuesday, Super Election

I know none of us can get away from the Presidential elections, but in all honesty, I have to pose this question: Has there been any election in the past decade (dare I say two decades?) that has garnered such coverage because we know that the Democratic party has made history by guaranteeing either a minority or female candidate in the final dash?

Let's face it, the election is starting to get somewhat exciting. There are candidates actively asking for my vote because I'm young (WASP-ish candidates never really cared for the young vote in times past - you always hear about the minority vote, the retired/elderly vote, and the female vote, even the working class vote, but no "youth vote.") As Super Tuesday approaches, and as I prepare to face the Republican poll machine, I'm already wrestling with this choice: How do I vote now if I decide to cross party lines in November?

I think this article in TIME shows that the primaries have changed, not only to make history for this country electing a minority or female President, but that there is someone in the election speaking specifically to the under-30 crowd. Someone who has Pennsylvania Ave. in their sights is telling me that my vote is important to them. No one's ever done that before. I feel so special!

All joking aside, though, I think this is also what Ron Paul had going for him on the Republican side, but he just doesn't have the star power that Obama does. He doesn't talk as smooth, either, but the man has appealed to youth by speaking with a fresh voice that doesn't use such politic-esque language, the same talking-head gibber-gabber that we've been accustomed to listening to since the discovery of newspaper, radio and television (and that's a freaking long time, dear readers.) Even when the words "gold standard" crept into references about Ron Paul, he was still able to raise startling amounts of money while clinging to the primaries, outlasting Rudy Giuliani and hoping to slough off some votes from the now-popular war hero McCain, smooth-coiffed Romney and conservative WASP-next-door Huckabee.

I remember in the 1980s my parents crossing party lines when they found out that Democrats were pro-choice, staunchly walking away from the liberal half and discovering that their once-liberal views weren't so liberal any more. I faced a similar decision once Bush was elected again and watched the body count tick higher and higher in Iraq and Afghanistan, but not because my once-conservative views weren't so conservative any more. Even after this election, I'm not so sure I want to be affiliated with either party.

But who did I have to choose from in the primaries since I was legally able to vote? Well, if I could have voted in 1996, I doubt I would have voted for Bob Dole, but that didn't matter, because there was the male Clinton, who was already in office when I turned 18, and was the sound favorite for reelection. After that, I've had the immense enjoyment of having to choose between Bush and, well, no one else in 2004; and McCain or Bush in 2000. To be honest, I have no clue who Alan Keyes was, and at 20 years of age, I had no interest in researching him, and so had crossed him off my list.

Perhaps this is why the youth vote has not been discovered until now. Presidential candidates and the under-30 crowd never were able to find a language they could speak together. If there was a campaign at a campus, they sure weren't at the one I was at, and I have an inkling that the only ones who cared were the ultra-conservative campus newspaper reporters and the college brass. But even I worked for the ultra-conservative newspaper and was more worried about securing pictures for the water polo match than figuring out who was getting my vote. But now, even if it's just a handful, there are Presidential hopefuls calling my name and telling me my vote is important to them - nay, that "we" are important and a crucial part of the election process. For Generation-Y, that's just the ego booster we need to begin caring about the elections.

The Child Victim

I've been really bothered by the kind of news that permeates the news that includes children dying or suffering at the hands of those who should know better. To wit, I did a search on January 11, and here is what I have found on CNN in the last five days before that date:

Man Killed Baby Daughter Because He Wanted Son
Pregnant Marine Dead
Killer's Parents Cry, Hug With Parents of 2 Slain Teens
Washington Mayor: City Failed 4 Slain Children (Related article here, and here, and here)
Dad Denies Throwing Kids off Bridge
Madeline Parents in Movie Talks
Court hears of Child Army Terror
Police: Teacher Exchanges Nude Photos with Freshman
12-year-old Beats Toddler To Death With Bat, Police Say
Cells, Texting Give Predators Secret Path to Kids

In November, I brought up the story of little Riley, whose mother and her mother's boyfriend confessed to killing the little girl because she refused to say "please" and "yes sir," and I wondered why Riley suffered at the hands of a man who she was not related to, and why her mother allowed him into their lives. When we all found out what Andrea Yates had done to her five children, and the life that Rusty Yates had to live after that, we scratched our heads wondering why five innocent souls had to suffer at the hands of a psychotic disease that took over their mother. How many other names can we think of? JonBenet Ramsey? How about the other nameless children out there who suffer at the hands of adults, lost forever in the continuum of being born in the wrong place at the wrong time?

Further, the fascination that the media has with children suffering makes the majority of mothers pull their children closer to bosom and probably help spawn ridiculous inventions such as the child leash. And when I refer to "media," it's not just the news outlets: Seen the movie "Ransom" lately? How about "The Ring" or "The Exorcist" or "The Sixth Sense"? Suffering children at the center of every movie. The movies themselves were wildly successful, and nothing makes someone's skin crawl more than watching a defenseless human dealing with some very adult-like situations.

There are even situations in which a child suffers, and there's no adult to blame. Then what? Bindi Irwin had one of the most lovable dads in television, with bravery and balls to match, and nature took its course when Steve Irwin died doing what he loved best. We all looked to Irwin's children and wondered what they'd do, and thankfully, Bindi picked up and, with a little help, is trying to start where her father left off.

But we don't hear as much about Bindi in the news as we hear about the Rileys and Madelines and JonBenets; child victims are a dime a dozen in the media industry, but still catch human attention every single time. I think those of us who are parents would love to see their child in the spotlight, but the chances of that being under good conditions are next to nothing. Some days, I do try to be careful what I wish for, because if I asked God for my child to be famous, what are the chances she'd be famous for her death rather than her life?

A Frozen D.U.H.

It's freezing across the country (yes, even here in glorious California, where the temps are in the 30s at night and making people scurry for their parkas), so check out the brain freeze headlines I found:

Mysterious reptile deaths puzzle scientists
Amy Winehouse enters rehab
Parents crashing online party
Newspaper Web sites draw record viewers
It's official: mail is slow as snails
Too cold to walk for car thieves

P.S. To my fellow readership in PA and NY, don't worry. I don't think it's cold in California. (You've not felt cold until your tears freeze in wind chill...)

Creepy Old Ads

Thanks to 2Spare and Mental Floss for providing this lovely bit of American truth-in-advertising history. *Shiver*

'Japan Today'

My husband loves the Japan Today website, especially because it throws light on unusual items of the news that involve things other than the GOP, Britney and bickering Democrats. Here's some headlines that caught my eye:

Drunk driver parks car on Utsunomiya tracks: The train was able to stop, but only seven meters from her car. Seven meters separating her from a grisly death! She was lucky there was someone alert operating the train.

Woman hospitalized after eating blowfish dies: This has always made me fascinated, the fact that there are special licenses to sell poisonous blowfish (called "fugu"). Because the Japanese, and many others, will still eat it if properly prepared; Wikipedia confirms that because of its potential toxicity, fugu has become a "celebrated" dish. Better if you find a chef who has the license to prepare it than trying it yourself, as this woman failed to do. The poison paralyzes your muscles, making it impossible to breathe, and you are conscious while you basically suffocate to death. How lovely.

Activists use 'stink bombs' to harass Japanese whalers: Hayden Panettiere should have used this instead of a surfboard. No telling what would have happened if the Japanese police made good on their issuance of an warrant for her arrest, though.

Prince lectures at women's college: That's crazy. Prince? The "Purple Rain" Prince? Goes to show you what American pop culture has done to my brain - I forgot there are still real princes on this planet.

16-year-old boy held after extravagant spree at Saitama bar: This shows how distrustful America has become of youths' ability to be active in their upbringing and maturation into society. This kid was able to get into the bar, not get carded, and carry himself in a way that fooled everyone. Do they have bouncers in Japan? Do they even card people? Who knows. It seems to me that, if every time we reported on how a minor was caught getting into a bar, we'd have nothing else to talk about. It happens all the time over here. But, yea, the kid did run up a tab of $4,000...

To top it off, here's two pictures that make me want to travel to Japan just to people watch. Some Japanese youth are so crazy and fun, and they dress the part. And, they know how to wear a pink wig.

Britney = Diana?

Rosie O'Donnell has had her share of hits in the past, what with being coined one of the most annoying celebrities ever, and her unforgettable sparring with La Hasselbeck on "The View." But I could not, for the life of me, find much wrong in Rosie's writing of this blog entry, in which she echoes the death of Princess Diana while painting a scene of insanity that took place at an LA courthouse yesterday.

People.com's headline proclaims that she is comparing Britney to the late Princess, but as usual, I think this is unfairly accurate. Why would Rosie would be dumb enough to take a Starbucks-addicted pop tartlet and compare her to a highly-esteemed woman who was a good mother and always associated with charity? Right now, it's generally agreed that Britney is not a good mother right now, and her face was never associated with charity, but only smooching the face of Madonna. Upon seeing this headline, I was incensed that Rosie would take this still-living Train Wreck and compare her to a woman of such natural beauty and grace with a huge heart for her two sons, as well as those who were less unfortunate than here. Alas: I have learned not to wholly trust misleading headlines, least of all from People.com, and read the blog entry myself.

There's no doubt that Diana and Britney are tied together by tragic consequences, although it seems to me that Diana at least held it together in the paparazzi swarm. Brit can't even get that far. They both did choose a life of publicity, Diana by marrying into the royal British family, and Britney dancing away on a Disney show (which, in all honesty, also demonstrates the carelessness that child stars' parents handle their children's rise to stardom, but that's for another day.) But Rosie's blog entry doesn't necessarily draw a direct comparison of Princess Diana and Princess of Pop - the sickening scene of the tunnel where Diana lost her life is used as a background to illustrate the crush of photogs when Britney finally arrived at the courthouse and then, apparently, at a church where Britney stopped at, apparently to find sanctuary for a few minutes, but also knowing that there is nothing sacred to the press.

I was impressed with the blog entry, all things considered. For all the weird things that she's doing, Britney seemed genuinely scared that she had to walk through the paparazzi to get to the courthouse. Rosie is rightfully empathetic with Britney's plight as a celebrity herself, what with this humble blogger being on a first-name basis already with these and other celebrities, as is the price to pay for a life of publicity: the right to free press tends to elucidate its prisoners.

Being some sort of free press myself, I wouldn't give it up for anything. There are soldiers overseas fighting for my right to blog in my jammies in this moment. But there are reasons why we don't know everything about other celebrities who are leading parts of their lives privately, and they've learned to play the game. With free press, they know the rules, written or unwritten, and learn to manipulate them: There's nothing like a dose of a real, boring life to make the camera flashes turn towards brighter targets. Victoria "Posh Spice" Beckham probably said it best: "I'm actually quite boring."

She's not, but boredom is certainly the poison that makes paparazzi scatter.

Whoops

Unknowing twins marry each other

During a debate in front of the British House of Lords, former British MP David Alton brought up the case while discussing donor conception. With better efforts at keeping adopted siblings in contact with each other, this probably won't happen again.

But two words gave me the willies: "Inevitable attraction." Can you imagine what the judge, who had to deal with their separation and annulment, had to listen to? I wonder what poor person had the duty of telling these folks they were sister and brother.

Have my digits, Facebook!

I noticed that there are a lot of "Lost my Phone" groups on Facebook, which I think is a brilliant way to get your friends to send their digits to you ASAP if the phone goes on the fritz. But as I send a private message to the person who did lose their phone, with my number in it, I visited the group and found that people were putting their phone numbers on the group Wall. Just... digits. Essentially placing their phone numbers on a free public listing.

Is it me, or is that purely insane? I go so far as to tell the salespeople at stores that I'm unlisted (I only own a cell phone) because I don't want/need strangers calling my number. I've had enough wrong numbers coming in that I don't even introduce myself if someone asks "Who is this?!" Does anyone in the next generation realize the Internet is a public place? Granted, you have to be careful with what you put into any website, as I mentioned in my phising post last year. Who knows how these websites store data? Do they wipe it out every year, two years, three years?

I love the word flabbergasted, but I'm even beyond that right now. Either they don't know that some freak could get their number and harass them, or they just don't care. Is there an Internet Sensibility group on Facebook I could point them to?

New Year D.U.H.

'Subprime' named Word of the Year
Spears loses custody of children
Cell phone users slow traffic, study finds