Red, Blue, Purple, It's All the Same

You know those ads for "Divided We Fail," with the purple donkeyphant (Elenkey? Delephant? Whatever it is)? It's a great concept. There's nothing better than to reach across the aisle and shake hands with an opponent and to figure out what's best for this country, not bickering about who's conservatively liberal or liberally conservative. Too liberal, too Neocon, religious freaks, baby killers, too female, not black enough, on and on and ON. (What's with the labeling, people?)

In essence, while it's great to have a team to be on and use to identify yourself politically, the game centers around one thing: elections. The Super Bowel* (*hah! True typo there! I shall leave it) or World Series of Washington DC. No matter what elected officials do in office, they do it so they can stay there. And in the USA, elections come down to two teams: Republicans and Democrats, the Reds and Blues. Hence the reason why Divided We Fail asks the two teams to compromise for the sake of the people, to stop playing the game once it's over, and to make some stinkin' progress on issues that mean most (stinkin' progress being my own words).

But Divided We Fail, while a noteworthy cause, also is endorsed by a certain organization that the Reds and Blues would court for reelection, sickeningly, over and over, because they include a huge percentage of the American voting bloc that may very well spell trouble without their support: the AARP. Interestingly enough, the website states this on its front page:

We believe that health care and financial security are the most pressing domestic issues facing our nation.

Considering the baby boomer generation is approaching AARP membership, this statement is not at all surprising. I think of how our health care infrastructure might cripple beneath the declining health of the baby boomers, notwithstanding the fact that most of this country is terribly overweight. Financial security? Just put it into a $75 tank of gas in a rental minivan on a trip to Missouri this past weekend. That's only for one tank of gas. (I'll keep my beat-up 2002 lil ol' Sunfire, thanks.) My IRA rollover is holding surprisingly well, considering I made back about 5% of what I had lost over the past year.

The problem is, the aging generations need these things, but what about the rest of us? I doubt the implied "United We Stand" slogan will happen soon. We like the game too much. We like to sit around the water coolers and argue about who will get to the White House this year. We groan and complain about talking heads on CNN following candidates' every move. But you know what? We like it. Either we like the game or we like to complain about it - either way, we all want a seat in the stadium to watch, to cheer, to boo.

Thusly, both my husband and I have decided that we don't want to belong to either party. We live in an Independent household now. I don't want to be the religious freak or the Neocon (as I've heard pro-life folks tend to be labeled). Nor do I want my environmental activism, freedom of speech and my right to privacy to label me liberal or tree-hugger. I am not either - not even both. Hi, my name's Becky! That's who I am.

Perhaps my aversion to being defined by my political affiliation is testament to the fact that I don't like being tied down to one thing all the time (save my poor husband) - I like trying new things, seeing new places, trying new foods. Then again, I'm also sick of seeing a game that never really quite finds a winner, teams who bicker back and forth constantly in the off-season, and the pressure on me to wear the team colors. Maybe being Independent gives me some other kind of label, but blissfully, I am unaware for now.

Sounding Off

Perusing the online news this morning, I found some interesting tidbits that make me wonder why we listen to them at all. Truly, the more I dig into American media's take on newsworthy items, the more I uncover that there is a pattern we do not like to admit. To wit (in no apparent order):

1.) Vanessa Hudgens, a 19-year-old actress, claims she's found the key to a great relationship: "If you really love someone, you shouldn't have to work at it." Even worse, she told this to CosmoGirl!, which means a bunch of teeny boppers who are clamoring for love advice are looking to this twit and actually going to listen to her. Look, she IS a twit, because she's 19 and she and her boyfriend, Zac Efron, will be broken up sooner or later because - gasp! - they didn't work at their relationship. Girl doesn't know what she's talking about. The reason why I think so many people are dissatisfied in their relationships is that they get so comfortable in them that they forget to do all the little things that made us fall in love in the first place. Ladies start forgoing the makeup and guys forget that we used to like love notes written once in a blue moon. You refuse to learn new things about each other, which is what falling in love was all about: the new, the awkward, the undiscovered. If there's nothing left to discover, what's the point? So, kids, please do not listen to a Hollywood tartlet who thinks love is easy. Remember, no one likes an easy woman!

2.) Found this ditty on CNN today, and while it's relatively an unremarkable bit, I started to get that weird, uncomfortable feeling that they wrote the article for all the wrong reasons. Not only is the headline a bit misleading, but it also highlights the human panic that might be induced by something that we can't even control. In short, the Easter Island statues are in danger because of record numbers of tourists visiting the tiny, 10 x 15 mile island. All right, I can understand that tourists walking on these things would accelerate the process, but sun, surf, winds and humidity? That has nothing to do with record numbers of tourists. Is anything truly resistant to Mother Nature? To be honest, I'm more worried about preserving this climate for my daughter and her children than saving the Easter Island statues from the elements. It's similar to the idea that we think all forest fires are dangerous: it's actually the way the forest cleanses itself. To be sure, a fire started by human hands rather than nature (lightning) may have different implications, but we all choose to live somewhere that is particularly vulnerable to the earth's rages: Flooding plains, insatiable heat and dryness, unbearable cold, tornado valleys, venomous creatures, earthquakes. Everyone has to deal with something; it's all about your priorities. Love to visit Easter Island; not a priority if Mother Earth gets to it first, though.

3.) CNN is a pretty popular American media outlet, and I don't know if I should be surprised or not about this: Earlier this morning, I found a headline on the Gmail Ig homepage, and the BBC reported that a man in Kentucky shot four people at a plant before killing himself after an argument with his supervisor. BBC = British Broadcasting Corporation. Erm... I checked CNN to see if they got wind yet. Nothing. I went back to the Gmail Ig page and found the New York Times had picked up on it. Not until an hour or more later did CNN post something on their front page. How the heck did the BBC get to this first? Maybe it's because they were fascinated with the fact that the man was able to go home, retrieve his own firearm, and return to work with no one suspecting. My ideas about gun control and gun ownership are null and void here, but I know most European countries are fascinated with the fact that U.S. civilians have a right to arm themselves. That probably has nothing to do with the BBC reporting on it first, but you don't hear much about school and workplace shootings in Britain, that's for sure.

I'm just glad the BBC still gives the U.S. some kind of air time on their media pages. The problem with U.S. media is this: If something happens overseas and the U.S. doesn't hear about it, does that mean it's not news? I had a conversation in college about the tree in the woods conundrum, and one of my professors argued that in order for a sound to exist, the soundwaves had to hit an eardrum. Therefore, if a tree fell in the forest and no one was around to hear it, there was no sound. I didn't have much of an answer to that. But now I ask, what if the person is deaf? Go chew on that, dear readers, and please let me know your thoughts.

Pass Me a Cane

Spotted on Slate.com, "The Facebook Commandments":

While college kids can get away with huge numbers of friends, the geezers among us should be a little more selective. And by "geezers," I mean everyone born before Ronald Reagan's first inauguration.

Reagan was inaugurated the year I was born, in 1981. (You lazy dolt, go get the calculator and figure my age out yourself!) Once you figure out my age, you will know why I'm still flabbergasted. I am nearly a geezer on Facebook. Pity party!

Some Randomness Just for You

1.) Read on a 14-year-old's Yahoo! profile:

I hate most people- mostly posers and jerks that try to talk **** for fun and try to mess **** up. I AM getting a TATTOO in June. I have 8 piercings- done myself. Add my myspace is u want [removed address for privacy] I LOVE ICP- if you don't **** you! Peace!

If a girl says peace, but also remarks the big "eff you" if you don't like her favorite band, do you think she realizes her own irony? Most 14-year-olds think they're not of this world, anyways. If we met, she would hate my guts and I would love it. Also, her mother needs to take away the computer and tell her no tattoo artist will touch her baby-soft skin until she's 18.

2.) Brand names are sometimes worth it. Spend on Windex; save on toilet paper. Spend on garbage bags; save on prescription drugs. Spend on dishwasher detergent; save on children's clothing. Feel free to add your own "Spend on, Save on" favorite.

3.) Lisa Kogan and Glenn Beck are two of my favorite columnists on CNN. Check out Lisa's column here - she also writes for "O" magazine. I don't necessarily meet eye-to-eye with her all the time, but she makes me laugh. And Beck, a baby-faced conservative radio talk show host, always provides a good read.

4.) So. Our country is ready to elect a black man before a woman to lead our country; that's all right. It was nearly split 50/50, but who knows if either of them had run against a white male Democrat? Considering the US government allowed women to vote before people of color (yes, the Voting Rights Act included many more than just black folks), I'd say this country is, for once, taking a step in the right direction. (Not to say John McCain is a step backwards... but... all right, look, Ireland is on their second female president, and she's been in office since 1997. This country can't go around thinking it's better than others when we can't elect someone who is Hispanic, black, female, gay, Buddhist or Muslim, especially considering the fact that we pride ourselves on the fact that we are a free country who are a mish-mash of lots of nationalities and ideologies. I mean, it was hard enough to listen to the media squawk about Obama's middle name, when it had NOTHING to do with his policies. JUST SAYING.)

5.) Echoing some of Kogan's sentiments in her article this week, I am asking my readership to vote. VOTE. VOTE. VOTE. No freakin' excuses allowed. You are NOT allowed to complain if you don't vote. While you might say you voted for the other guy in 2000 and 2004, at you least you made an effort. If you didn't vote, get thee to a DMV. (This is one of many public offices you can register to vote.) Don't like donkeys or elephants? Take the independent road and make a statement that you're sick of going bipartisan. Don't like who's running? Take advantage of this free country and vote Nader. Or, even better, write in your own candidate. Write in yourself, for Pete's sake, if you think you can handle the job. JUST VOTE. (You can deal later with the narcissistic comments when you tell people who you voted for.)

While We're Making Up Words... Does "Dragee" Count?

I guess I should try to make up my own. Along with such American terminology such as bling and truthiness, the newest rage is hypermiling, in light of $4 gallon of gas that has hit the nation swiftly, with no chance of decelerating.

Granted, maybe I've started a few hypermiling ways of my own. I usually don't go out more than three days during the week, and I try to combine my errands so I don't have to run out piecemeal every day. I moved from California to avoid the idling process of stop and go traffic (ok, that's not really a tip, but I do a lot less idling). And since I've started driving my husband's sporty little manual transmission car when I get the chance, I started shifting my automatic transmission into neutral every time I approach a red light or stop sign. Slow acceleration and braking are apparently gas savers, too.

The one that bothers me the most, however, is the fact that on the thruway, there are folks who take advantage of the drag that cars create in front of them, and coast along on their bumpers. Taking advantage of someone's drag is fuel saving for the hypermiler, yes, but you are causing the dragee (made-up word) to lose much more fuel. It's a selfish move, effectively; not only are you making the person in front of you pay more for their gas, but you're also not cutting back on the pollution you create, which is honestly the REAL reason why we should be hypermiling.

Anywho. These people drive me nuts. I frequently drive between parents' home and my home town now, so I get plenty of thruway driving, and I hate the action of drifting. These people make my blood pressure rise, and I tend to get anxious, angry, and I can usually effectively shake them by slowing down or weaving between traffic (neither good options on a thruway).

Unfortunately, this hypermiling craze is not going to fix the real problem, which is that energy costs will rise regardless of how many times we shut off our engines while driving on the road (no matter how illegal it is in many states). We drive gas-guzzling SUVs that, we're just realizing now, are hard to sell in favor of a smaller car. People are purposefully running out of gas on the road to get a free gallon of gas. An article newly minted on CNN says that GM is closing four pickup and SUV plants, build smaller and more efficient cars, and even dispose the Hummer brand.

Which I say: ABOUT TIME. I never really bought into the SUV craze. I love my little zippy cars. In fact, I'm actually considering purchasing a manual transmission vehicle for my next car, when my winter beater bites the dust (bites the snow? Bites the salt? For Nor'easters, it's all the same!) because I've learned to effectively watch my RPMs and learn how to upshift from a low RPM to save gas. My husband does a great job in teaching me how to get my miles to stretch, especially since he has to drive an hour to work (this translates into $500 of gas per month right now, which will inevitably rise as the months go on).

For GM to make this move is smart and beneficial to the American consumer market. Our European counterparts are probably doing the point-and-laugh right now, because not only is public transportation a fact of life there, but $9 gas is as well. We've got it made with $4 gas! Furthermore, this is the precise response that a large employer of working-class citizens needed to make in order to keep their appeal to the American consumer, instead of watching them walk off their lots in favor of the more fuel-efficient Japanese brands. Maybe this will also get the annoying tailgaiters off my bumper too.

In order to keep this fresh and on topic of how the media figures into this whole brouhaha, I just like the fact that Americans can come up with terminology and let it slip into mainstream talk. In fact, most civilized countries these days are keen on making up their own vocabulary that separates it from the established language of the land (look up "cosplay"; also see "bloody," "bugger," "cheesed off," etc. in British colloquialisms). The evolution of language has forever been changed by media - once the written word became printed word, the media could reach legions of people in ways no one ever dreamed. Then the printed word became the electronic word, and the term "globalization" seems ever present in our vocabulary now. Not only do adults make up their own terms, but so do the teenage population.

When you think about it, who doesn't make up their own language once in a while? Parents do it with their kids. Pet owners do it with their dogs. In fact, the beauty of language is that it's all made up by us. While there's a standard to help us understand each other, there's also the fact that humans at some point made it up in the first place. When you hear English and Mandarin spoke in tandem, you really understand how language evolution seems so easy to do.

A No-Panty Line D.U.H.

Weekends are usually slow news days, so imagine my surprise when I crawled out of bed this morning (look up SpongeBob Squarepants' episode on "Suds," and you'll know exactly how I felt) and saw this.

I've played softball before, and I'm quite familiar with baseball's ongoing fascination with superstition, but this... this?! Sharing a gold thong to break out of a hitting streak? Please Lord, tell me it's a rumor. Please.

Is It Hot in Here?

Case in point: I get up at 9 a.m. this morning, enjoying a bowl of cereal with blueberries and vanilla soy milk, and I see that the most read article on CNN today is Star Jones "blasting" Barbara Walters' memoir.

Oh, my! It wasn't that long ago that another former "View" member, Rosie O'Donnell, responded to the memoir as well. It wasn't enough that Walters spilled the beans about her affair with former U.S. Senator Edward Brooke, which is the reason why Jones addressed Walters as being an "adulterer" in the public spotlight; Walters also wrote about Star Jones in reference to her drastic weight loss, and how she and the other members of "The View" had to go along with the lie that she lost weight with diet and exercise. In fact, after she left the show, only then did Jones admit to having gastric bypass surgery.


The reasons of why Walters had an affair or why Jones lied about how she lost her weight on the show are nearly moot now; the question that should be asked, really, is if it was our business in the first place. Another great example is the tongue-wagging about Lindasy Lohan and her female friend Samantha Ronson: all of the gossip blogosphere wants to know if they're together. As an item. As a couple. (Most signs point to yes, according to them.)

Is it really our business? When did popular media become about getting into everyone's pants - I mean, business? Unless Walters was sure that she wouldn't get hit with a defamation suit by the attorney Jones, she (and her legal counsel) figured it was safe to dish the dirt.

I think most people have this love-hate relationship when it comes to honesty in the media. Jones chose to keep her surgery a secret, but also asked others around her to do the same; if she were a politician, she'd be firing her campaign manager. Lying to the public is a big no-no. Then again, how many families are kept together with the little white lies we hide from each other? Who's got bad habits that they don't like to be honest about? Why do we expect the utmost in morality from the two cities in the U.S. - New York and Los Angeles - when we all know they're clearly short on it?

Most of us would probably say that as public figures, these people have chosen the responsibility to demonstrate the proper way to act. (Funny I typed that word: "act." Most public figures are required to "act," whether in an honorable way or off a script!) But I wonder if it's just a way for the rest of us to hope that someone can truly have it all: love, fame, money, integrity. I don't know anyone who has it all, and public figures sure make it seem like they do. Could it be that when we try to look deep into mirror of ourselves, or into the mirror of humanity, public figures creates the steam to gloss things over, blurring the lines between what we see and what's really there? And who has the right to wipe away that steam, reflecting - what? The disappointment? The surprise? - in what really exists? Maybe Barbara Walters did have the right to wipe away the steam off Jones's mirror, even if it was just a minor fact in the entire autobiography. Maybe the media does have the right to wipe away the steam and expose if Lindsay dates women.

In the end, does it really matter to you? Us? Is this how we're letting the media make their big bucks?

Me vs. The World

For all the complaints I've written about the American media and questioning the true "freedom" of such (have you seen who owns the media companies? Only a handful... hmmm), it sure pays to have the Internet wide open and fancy free to search most anything my heart desires. While my IP address is probably on a government watch list because I've pinged al Jazeera, thanks to the Patriot Act, I still embrace the fact that I can visit the site whenever I want. Not only that, but where else would I have been able to find a dependable moving company by utilizing such tools as MovingScam.com?

Now comfortably seated among the many boxes I still need to unpack in Pennsylvania, I get to reflect on a time when there was no TV or Internet available for news delivery. In the hours before the movers arrived with our 7,100 lb. load, I sat on the floor in our townhome, sitting in eerie silence while I caught up with my transcription work. I had no Internet connection or TV, and was still new to the area that I did not get the newspaper, and so only had the opportunity to look out the window and see what was going on. I could figure out the weather: Sunny, humid, promising a warm day with perhaps a chance of showers later on because of the mugginess. I met my new neighbors, who kindly welcomed me to the neighborhood and chatted amicably with each other, thus demonstrating to me the kind of folks who lived in a neighborhood such as this.

As I've mentioned before, I think most Americans are starting to realize that we can obtain news sources on our own rules, on our own time. No more scrambling to finish dinner before the 6 o'clock news; no more rolling out of bed early to catch Good Morning America before the long morning commute. No more talking heads having to feed us the information we can oh-so-aptly get at our fingertips when we want to.

The individualization of America has been a long time coming, with the boom of self-transportation and now the ability to live and function effectively from our Internet connections. Sometimes I wonder if this kind of fulfillment also stands in the way of how we function with the rest of the countries on the globe. As we sink further into our couches, laptops and cell phones readily available, how further do we sink away from the rest of the people on this Earth who don't have that luxury? Sure, we can connect with any corner of the world, but even that limitation is show by the frustrating inability for us to deliver the $100 laptop to folks in need, the seeming "independence" that we build from our dependence on the Internet, and the mere fact that there are people out there who live off the fat of the land alone, still, in 2008. It's hard to believe, if you think about it. How many different versions of the Ages can we see with a trip around the world? Even in Central Pennsylvania, the ultimate Amish country, you can find a way of life that even our grandparents don't remember.

So upon my first day in our new townhome, I sat on the floor and wondered what life was like before the Internet; kind of like how parents try to remember what life was like before the kiddies showed up. But we also have to remember some folks don't even know what life is like *after* the Internet. The fact that I can peruse the Internet freely seems like a moot point now, thinking about how my life would have been different if I were born to a parents of a small African tribe, or perhaps an Amish family as one of many children who learn to function without the modern, foreign conveniences that humankind has gone on to discover. However many steps you and I might take into the future of human livelihood, perhaps we should try to remember those who keep their feet planted in ways of old, but also do not ever worry about what would happen if they lost power, couldn't pay the cable bill, or pined for a Wal-Mart in their neck of the woods.

Those Look New, Mommy

I have a list of gossip sites that I like to peruse on a daily basis as my guilty pleasure before scrounging through my email, paying bills online and working. So imagine what kind of face I made when I found this: "My Beautiful Mommy," a book that a Florida plastic surgeon wrote to help mothers communicate to their children why they get plastic surgery.

I'm still somewhat speechless. My first instinct was the nasty look - the kind of nose sneer that you do when you smell the effects of a meal gone terribly wrong - and an incredibly huffy attitude when the book explains that Mommy is getting surgery to help her feel "better." Um, Doc? You might want to explain the difference between having a busted spleen out versus a confidence boost. Feeling "better" because of the pain of an injured organ of the body isn't the same as feeling better about one's image they have to look at in the mirror every day.

But then I sat down and thought about it for a while. Kids are scared when their parents have to get surgery, no matter what the reason, and if it's going to happen, then who better than a plastic surgeon to help choose some gentler words to explain it to kids who think their mommy is hurt and in trouble?

The mother who Newsweek first profiles says she got a tummy tuck because her stomach looked "pruney" (a term her child used) after pregnancy. Yea, I'd probably want that fixed, too. Then again, the mother in the book gets a boob job, a nose job and a tummy tuck. Good golly Ned. What kind of self-image issues would that parent's daughter have? How do you explain that to your child? "Honey, Mommy's not happy with the genes she was given, so I'm going to let someone fix them for me."

There are always things that we all - and I'm talking to the ladies out here, mostly - want to have fixed. Maybe it's the weird-looking veins that started popping out of our legs after pregnancy, or the stretch marks that ripped us apart, or the facial acne scars we'd like to have lasered away from childhood. But what kind of mindset are we setting up our kids for when we reject the physical traits that our parents gave us? Sure, there are parts that might not be up to Hollywood standards, but... all right, that's probably not the best example in the world, but it's the standard that American girls pine after.

The book probably has its place in pop culture history, but I don't understand why parents are so worried about explaining their choices to their kids. Kids have a curiosity and reasoning that so much simpler than ours, and some days I wonder if we should let kids ask the tough questions and help us think about why we do the things we do. For example, the comedian Lewis Black mentions in his "Rules of Enragement" album that instead of letting the CEO crooks (think Tyco and Adelphia) be convicted in conventional manners, they should like a 9-year-old kid take care of that. He imagines that the kid, upon being questioned on what he thinks of three people taking a $1 billion, he would probably say "That's f$%*ing NUTS!"

What I'm worried about is not my self image, but the one I'm teaching my daughter. If she sees her mom hating on herself all the time, she's going to learn the same thing and do it to herself. So I know that, if I ever decide to go under a cosmetic knife, I better be prepared with a statement for my daughter that is 1) easy to understand, and 2) should tell her that Mommy still likes herself.

Besides, plastic surgery is one of those habits that are probably best left to less than moderation. Like gambling and drinking, most folks use it to feel better about themselves until they eventually don't recognize who they were in the first place.

LOL?

Because I'm appreciative of dorky humor, and because this kind of humor is so completely lost on me (I suspect because of my age), I often wonder how many pop references I see every day which pass by my old peepers. One of my personal favorites, even though I have yet to locate what movie/pop culture this is in reference to.

It reminds me of this kind of humor I found on One Horse Shy. p.s.: If I ever wanted to wear my own kind of pop culture on my sleeve, I'd want this shirt the most. (Ok, maybe this one, too!)

My Affair with Craigslist

I have to admit, when I first used Craigslist, I didn't think it would go this far. Sure, I had an apartment to sublet; not a big deal. It was in Rochester, NY and while Craigslist was somewhat popular, there weren't too many people on there. I got two people interested in the apartment, and one of them settled with the apartment, and I was happy. I got what I needed from Craigslist without paying one cent, and so ended the relationship satisfied.

Now I am in a land where Craigslist is the ultimate standard, and I have come crawling back to it, begging for any kind of recognition or answer to my pleas. I receive emails of those who are interested but never respond again, the anonymity a blessing for those who surely think their perfect match is out there, somewhere. My post competes with hundreds upon hundreds of other desperate folks needing to find a way out of the real estate bubble by renting their too-expensive houses to somehow pay the mortgage. Out here in California, it's quite depressing; almost no one lives in a home they can afford.

So now Craigslist of the Bay Area has become the paramour of the desperate, not one who offers his services for the quietly skeptical. I've broken down to snapping at my husband and pushing my work to the side to find the perfect match. (I am self-employed, so I deal with the crunching deadlines by giving myself a kick in the pants.)

Enticing people with smaller successes to come back for more, Craigslist has become my daily obsession as I spend hours upon hours scouring ads to respond to, waiting for the day that I will finally get what I need and leave the relationship for good. Maybe it's not the healthiest way to get what I want, but it worked once before; I'll keep going back for more until he gives me what I need.

Fun for April 1

One of the reasons I like April Fool's is that some people can pull a hoax without embarrassing others or hurting their pride; it's just in good fun. Google does this kind of thing every year. I know it's only 4.5 hours into April Fool's Day out here in the Western frontier, but I spotted Google's joke of the year. Can you? (Remember, it's only up for 24 hours, so don't miss it!)

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)