Tuesday, June 30, 2009

What A Long, Strange Trip It's Been


I am shedding some "lyte" on milestones today.  My husband and I are celebrating our 25th wedding anniversary.  The silver anniversary, so if you want to send gifts, make sure they are of the precious metal variety.

25 years is a long time.  Many of the couples that started out on this journey with us have fallen by the wayside.  My husband and I aren't special, we didn't practice any marital voodoo.  We faced the same ups and downs that all marriages face, we just did it together.  Most of the time.

There were years were we did not see eye to eye.  At times the mere sound of him breathing was enough to drive me crazy.  I am sure I irritated him as well, though I doubt as much.  We went through the waning of passion, the power struggles.  The life changes:  birth of progeny, loss of jobs, deaths of parents.  We were kids when we married and now we can't believe that twenty five years have passed.  We swear our parents were older when they celebrated their silver anniversaries.

When we got married, Reagan was in the White House and the Berlin Wall still stood.  People were just starting to talk about AIDS.  We were just coming out of a recession. (some things never change!)  There were no cell phones, personal computers, or world wide webs.  The hottest thing was cable TV. People were debating VHS versus Beta.  MTV still played music videos.  Our wedding was video taped, but the camera was the size of Buick and the camera man had to go home and change because he sweated through his clothing during the church service. 

We had our reception at the newly built Moose Lodge.  We served cold cuts and had a kegger.  I heard "Celebration" played for the first time at my wedding reception.  My parents shelled out $5000 for entire wedding, including my dress.  We honeymooned in Michigan.

You see, it isn't how grand your start is, it is in how you finish.  A wedding is just one day, it how you spend the next 9124 days that count.  I am happy to say that passion returns, troubles pass, and power can be shared......sort of.


Monday, June 29, 2009

Here's Your Hat


I am shedding "lyte" on exits today.  I know a lot has been going on:  Michael dying, Maddoff getting sentenced to 150 years, "Transformers II: Revenge of the Fallen" grossing a gazillon dollars.  But if you haven't noticed, we're withdrawing from Iraq.

"Iraq?" I hear you say, "Isn't Iran the new Iraq?"  No, it isn't because we are still occupying the sovereign nation that ends with a "Q" and boy, are they sad to see us go.  Actually, they are having massive celebrations.  Parades, flowers, tears of joy; all the stuff that Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, etc., claimed we would be greeted with.

We pulled all our troops out of Baghdad today, the official handover is at midnight tomorrow.  Wow, it only took 6 years, 4000 American lives, uncounted thousands or possibly millions of Iraqi lives, trillions of borrowed money, to make this day happen.  We should be proud.

I wonder if Keith Olbermann will stop his count on "Countdown"?  He ends every show with the total of days since former President Bush declared "Mission Accomplished" on that aircraft carrier.  Poor guy, what will he count now?

Of course, we are still occupying Iraq.  Our soldiers are just confined to our bases.  The full pullout won't be until 2011.  We still have that enormous "embassy" in Baghdad, bigger that the Vatican, but not as pretty.  And we still have a long way to go in repairing our image and relations in the area.  

But hey, we're sorta, kinda out of there.  We're like an uninvited houseguest who just agreed to stay in the guest room and stop raiding the refrigerator.    

Friday, June 26, 2009

The King Is Dead


I want to shed a little "lyte" on media frenzies.  If you haven't heard already, Michael Jackson is dead.  And the mainstream media is going bats@*t crazy.  It is all Michael, all the time.  He would be so proud.

Poor Farrah Fawcett, her death was totally overshadowed.  Her passing was announced in the morning, but Jacko's happened in the afternoon.  King of Pop and alleged child molester trumps pin up beauty.  

I guess it trumps everything else in the world too.  I bet Governor Mark Sanford is heaving a big sigh of relief, the news cycle pivoted from his affair to Michael's death.  The Iranian government is probably celebrating as well.  The Iranian uprising has now jumped the shark, it is the cardiac arrest and death of a spooky, washed up former pop star that has captured the world's attention. 

I mean this feeding frenzy puts the one surrounding Anna Nicole Smith to shame.  "Who?" I hear you ask.  Tsk, tsk, we forget so fast and so easily those who once fascinated us so thoroughly.  Jon and Kate can get divorced in peace now.  All paparazzi have scurried to LA.  I bet Brad and Angelina could take the kids out for a walk and have no pictures taken.

I mean Michael Jackson's death has it all.  Incredible backstory, rumors of drug abuse, a potential child custody battle.  Yummy!  His death nearly paralyzed the internets.  My husband called me in route the dentists to tell me of his passing.  He had checked Drudge Report and it was saying that Jackson was dead.  I turned on CNN on my satellite radio and Wolf Blitzer was talking about Michael in the present tense.  I called my husband back and told him that according to CNN, he was still alive.  I walked into the dentist's office and one woman was trying to confirm the news with friend in LA.  Another man was checking Drudge on my advice.  You could hear all of the dental staff murmuring about it.  "Is is true?"  "How sad!"  "I loved Thriller."

It is amazing that the death of a former Motown star who underwent the most extreme makeover in history has captured the attention of everyone on the planet who has access to a television or a computer.  His death also highlights the speed that information is now disseminated.  I bet as soon as his death was called at UCLA medical center, some enterprising technician or nurse grabbed their cell phone and texted the news.  And the avalanche began.  Now excuse me, I got go watch a tribute on E!



 

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Honor and Cherish?


Today I want to shed some "lyte" on infidelity.  In just one week, two high profile, presidential hopefuls, Senator John Ensign (R-NV) and Governor Mark Sanford (R-SC) have been forced to admit to extramarital affairs.  Ensign was tipped off by Faux News that the jilted husband was threatening to go public, Sanford tried to slip away to see his Argentinean mistress and was met by a member of the media when he landed at the airport.  Stunning examples of the dichotomy of integrity that exists in our fourth estate today.

But I don't want to discuss the journalistic ethics of Faux News, that is a rant for another day.  What I want to examine is why do famous politicians cheat?  There is a long and storied list of senators, representatives, governors and presidents that all share one thing in common:  they got caught.  Starting with Gary Hart and ending (for now) with Mark Sanford, most of these privileged, white men have seen their political careers explode with the airing of their dirty laundry.

Why would they take such huge risks?  Surely by now it is known that no one who is a public servant is ever out of the public eye.  John Kennedy wouldn't have lasted 48 hours in today's 24/7 news cycle.  So what is so important about some strange, that you would put your life's work in jeopardy?

I asked an expert on the male psyche, my husband.  He postulates that for most of these men, sex with your spouse is just too tame.  He may be on to something.  Politicians are by nature gamblers.  They willfully expose themselves to risk every two to six years by running for reelection.  Perhaps they feel the need to recreate the high of campaigning by schupting on the side.

Also, most politicians have massive egos.  Let's face it, in any marriage, the "OMG, you're so awesome!" stage is short-lived at best.  I have always suspected that reason men leave their wives for younger women isn't for the perky breasts, but the nubile mind.  Younger women have lower standards.  It is easy to impress a 22 year old if you have a cool car and can pay for drinks.  A 42 year old who has been washing the skid marks out of your shorts for two decades has decidedly higher benchmarks.

Or perhaps these men are simply human.  Infidelity has been around almost as long as fidelity has been.  But why is it always men who are caught?  Quick, name one high profile female politician who has been caught getting her kitty polished.  I'm waiting....... 

 

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Where In The World Was Governor Sanford?


I want to shed some "lyte" on vacations.  South Carolina's governor, Mark Sanford (R), went AWOL.  He took off for a break after a contentious legislative session where he attempted to refuse stimulus money, only to be overridden by his congress.  No one, including his wife and staff, had any idea where he was.

As the media speculation mounted, his staff said he was hiking the Appalachian Trail.  Only problem with that story was there was a government vehicle found at an airport, not a trailhead.  Now, the missing governor has returned and claims he was in Argentina.

Yes, I said Argentina.  He claims he thought about going hiking, but decided to go somewhere "exotic".  Argentinean officials would not confirm the story, citing privacy laws.  The Governor said he drove along the coast of a "beautiful city".

The problems with this story?  One, it is winter in Argentina.  Two, there is only one coastal road you can drive in Argentina and it is only 2 miles long.  So he must have driven up and down that road....a lot.

I have a sneaking suspicion that there is more to this story.  Sanford will be having a news conference this afternoon.  I can't wait to hear more. 

UPDATE

The South Carolina governor and possible presidential candidate, Mark Sanford (R) admitted to an extramarital affair.  I liked to be shocked, but I'm not.  The obviously lame story, his wife's lack of concern over his whereabouts on Father's Day weekend, the scrambling of his staff, all pointed to some off-the-record nooky.  He met the woman online and the relationship gradually progressed to a physical one over the past year.  The governor's wife, Jenny,  knew of the affair for the past five months.  Wow, this makes two prominent Republican presidential hopefuls that have flamed out over affairs in the last week.  Stay tuned, they say trouble comes in threes.  

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Deep Southed


I want to shed some "lyte" on eccentricity.  My sister came for a visit recently and left me a bag of books.  She goes to a used book sale in her hometown and scores a serious amount of reading matter for very little coin.  Having a huge bag of books saves me from going to the library.  Not that I mind going to my library, but having a supply of books on hand is like money in the bank for me.

I am an avid reader.  I have been on a tear lately, thanks to summer vacation and my sister's bag of books.  But what disturbs me is a trend I have noticed.  It seems that all the interesting people in the United States of America reside south of the Mason-Dixon line.

Book after book recounts the delightful adventures of the denizens of the former Confederate states:  "Divine Secrets of the Ya Ya Sisterhood", "Sweet Potato Queens Book of Love", anything penned by Anne River Siddons.  There are no characters that live in North Dakota, or Oklahoma.  Just page after page of deep-fried craziness with a side of blackened angst.

I could blame Tennessee Williams for the whole trend.  Of course, none of his plays have any humor in them, they bleed pathos.  But he started it, the humor just came later.  Is no one funny or interesting in Ohio?  

Is this the South's revenge for reconstruction?  Sure, we won the war, but they get the bestseller's list.  Is there a Northern equivalent for gumbo?  Or gullah?  Forget about the north, what about the west?  Are gay cowboys and suicidal gamblers the only thing we will ever be remembered for?  So I am calling on all writers who do not reside from the South to get with it!  Cook up some craziness Michigan-style, ya hey der.  Please, your country needs you.   

Monday, June 22, 2009

Do As I Say


Today I am shedding "lyte" on hypocrisy.  Senator John Ensign (R) Nevada, admitted to having an affair last week.  He resigned his chairmanship on the Republican Policy Committee.  Then he took a leave from his Senate post.  A paid leave.  This also puts paid to his hopes for a Presidential run in 2012.

Ensign was forced to admit the affair because the cuckolded husband, Doug Hampton, had sent a letter to Faux News anchor, Megyn Kelly.  Kelly "misplaced" the letter and no follow-up was done on the story, other than to call Senator Ensign and let him know that the story was being shopped around.  Another outstanding example of investigative journalism at Faux News.

Senator Ensign, in a feeble attempt at distraction, claimed that Hampton was trying to extort money from him in exchange for keeping quiet.  Neither the FBI, nor Las Vegas police are investigating those accusations.  The Hampton family:  husband, wife and son,  all worked for the senator.  All were summarily fired when the affair ended.

So, yawn, another Republican caught in a sex scandal.  This one is pretty boring, after all, it doesn't involve airport bathrooms, underage pages, or diapers.  But what makes this scandal juicy is the fact that Ensign campaigned as a "Promisekeeper".  You know, those guys who find it necessary to reaffirm their marriage vows with 20,000 or so other guys in football stadiums.  Who make very public pledges of their undying love and fidelity to their wives and back that up with bumper stickers.  So he not only makes a mockery of his marriage vows, he makes a mockery of an organization that is already pretty easy to mock.

Ensign is born again.  He has used his piety as a campaign tool.  Now he is revealed as just a tool.  Not only was Cynthia Hampton on his staff, she was his wife's best friend.  Ouch!  I give Darlene Ensign serious kudos for not being by her husband's side when he revealed his infidelity.  I hope she kicks him to the curb, since I doubt this was his first affair.  He went underground in 2002 when rumors of an affair with, surprise!, another member of his staff surfaced.  

The senator has  been an outspoken opponent to gay marriage, citing the sanctity of marriage.  I guess that sanctity goes by the wayside when confronted with temptation.  When the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal broke, then Representative Ensign was quite vocal in his denigration of President Clinton's behavior.  He voted for impeachment.  Hmmm, how the sanctimonious have fallen.  Maybe Senator Ensign should spend less time thumping his Bible and more time following its teachings.

Friday, June 19, 2009

None of Your Beeswax


I want to shed a little "lyte" on choice.  Former governor and presidential candidate, Mike Huckabee appeared on "The Daily Show" last night to discuss abortion rights with host, Jon Stewart.  Huckabee is a former pastor so it is no surprise that he is anti-choice.  Stewart is pro-choice.

I take issue with this debate.  First of all, neither of the debaters have a dog in this fight.  Both being male, an unwanted pregnancy will never be a problem.  Now, I know everyone is entitled to their opinion, but in the debate about choice, I have a hard time listening to two members of the ruling class, safe in their gender, pontificating about an issue they will never have to face.

To his credit, Huckabee gave an impassioned and reasoned argument.  Stewart was concise and witty as always.  But Stewart even backpedaled in his arguments, his position as a father makes him more sympathetic to the anti-choice argument.

Notice I call it anti-choice, not pro-life as they like to be called.  Ever since this side of the argument decided to start killing people to make their point, they lost the right to call themselves pro-life.  According to their own doctrine, even Dr. Tiller's life is sacred.  But I noticed a decided lack of outrage after he was gunned down in his own church.

But I digress.  Last night's debate angered me.  Frankly, I don't think men have any right to an opinion unless it is their partner who is contemplating ending her pregnancy.  I am bewildered by a political party that claims to be against the interference of government in our lives, but has no problem allowing government into my body.

Here's an idea, if Roe v. Wade were to be rolled back, and women everywhere forced to bear any and all children conceived, then let's even out the burden a bit.  Make every male over the age of 18 donate sperm and then receive a vasectomy.  That would solve the problem of unwanted children.  Every conception would be consensual and planned.  Every child would be wanted.

"Whoa," I hear you say, "That's crazy!  Government has no business sterilizing a man!"  Well, government has no business nationalizing my womb.  If you are against abortions, don't have one.  But your choice is not my choice.

And it enrages me when the other side conflates an unwanted pregnancy with an unplanned pregnancy.  One is a surprise, the other is a tragedy.  Unwanted children are more likely to be abused and neglected.  Many unwanted children end up turning to a family that does want them, a gang.  How do we know this?  One theory as to why the crime rate has dropped in recent years is that legal, accessible abortions mean less unwanted children.  Less unwanted children means less potential criminals.  Less criminals means less crime.

Another aspect of the anti-choice argument that angers me is their insistence on abstinence as the only form of birth control.  Keeping young women ignorant on how to prevent pregnancies, and then insisting that they have the child, is a potent form of control.  Nothing ends the nascent dreams of a young woman faster than having a baby to be responsible for.  Funny, I don't see a strong push for young men to take responsibility, no that is left to the woman to sort out.  I have never seen a home for unwed fathers.

So while I applaud the reasonable discourse that took place on "The Daily Show" last night, I think the time has come for the anti-choice supporters to shut up and stay home.  Make and have all the babies you want.  After all, the rabid right is growing increasingly white and old, if you want to be a majority again, you better get busy.   

Thursday, June 18, 2009

Oh No He Didn't


Today I am shedding "lyte" on the intrinsic value of silence.  Wednesday night in Erie, Pennsylvania, former President Bush decided to start critiquing President Obama.  Now, he was careful not to mention the current president by name, but we all caught the gist of his complaints nonetheless.

Not surprisingly, the former occupant of the White House felt that Obama's economic strategy was too reliant on government and not reliant enough on private enterprise.  Thanks George, it was that over reliance on private enterprise that got us into this mess in the first place.  Maybe if you had spent a little more time actually governing and less time vacationing, I would still have money in my IRA.

Former President Bush would neither confirm nor deny that Obama was socialist.  Wow, Obama must be underwhelmed by the support you are showing.  It is kind of sad that Obama has had to spend all his time so far cleaning up the messes Bush created, but Bush can't bring himself to back up the one guy who might save his "legacy".

Am I surprised?  Hell to the no.  Bush is a weiny.  He had never taken responsibility for anything, and he gets pissy as all get out if you criticize him.  Watching Obama undo all the damage he has done, I am shocked he managed to keep his less than articulate mouth shut for this long.

Look, the Republicans and the rabid right believe that you should only support people that agree with you 100%.  That leaves 80% of us open to attack.  So much for the United States of America.  But you would think that someone who had wrecked so much damage on so many people might just keep quiet.  But that someone would have to have 1) a brain, and 2) a conscience.  George was blessed with neither.  
  

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Birds of a Feather


I want to shed some "lyte" on analogies.  Apparently, some House Republicans think that the current situation in Iran mimics their plight.  Yes, the minority party in the US is the opposition party in Iran.  They're like brothers of a different mother.

Maybe these folks didn't notice, but the elections that took place here in November didn't involve mass riots, media shut-downs, and killings.  The whole transition of power went off seamlessly in January.  Everyone's votes, Minnesota excepted, counted.  Election results were not announced before the votes were tallied.  

Oh!  They are comparing the protests and unrest to how they feel when they are treated like the minority party in the House.  I get it.  So, when you don't have enough votes to continue adding amendments to a bill and they cut you off, it is the same as having a presidential election stolen from you.  Yeah, it's the exact same thing.

The House Republicans also bond with the Iranian protestors over Twitter.  They claim that both are oppressed minorities using social media to get their message out.  Hmmm, last time I checked, CNN, MSNBC, Fox, ABC, CBS,and NBC were all still broadcasting and letting House Republicans on their networks to blather.  Rush Limbaugh, the sad, junkie clown that is the de facto leader of their party, was still shouting at the rain on his nationally broadcasted radio show.  Oh, and Drudge Report is still drudging.  But I think House Republicans like to Twitter because it doesn't require grammatical or spelling skills. 

So Nancy Pelosi would be Ahmedinejad?  Would Obama be Khameni?  Who is the Republican's Mousavi?  Boehner?  They are both tan, so that might work.  Though to be honest, I think Boehner is a bit darker, but figuratively and literally.

So if House Republicans in 2009 are Iranian protestors, what were House Democrats in say, 2003?  Does North Korean have a parliament?

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

The Shareef Don't Like It


I am shedding "lyte" on the electoral process today. In case you haven't noticed, Iran held it's elections. And it didn't go so well.  I mean, someone got re-elected, but something smells about the whole deal.

The opposition candidate, Mir Hossein Mousavi, held a substantial lead in the polls.  But current President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won by an almost 2 to 1 margin.  Could there have been a "Bradley effect" at work in Iran?  Or are we talking a good, old-fashioned theft of an election?  Methinks it is the latter, as Ahmadinejad carried areas, like Mousavi's hometown, and groups, like young adults under 30, that defy the imagination.  And it didn't help that they announced the results before the votes were counted.

The first rule of election rigging is don't get caught, but equally important is to make the results believable.  And the election results in Iran are freakin' unbelievable.  So unbelievable that Iranians are taking to streets to protest, with deadly results.  Eight people have already lost their lives, and that is the death toll that the Iranian government will admit to.

The government has banned foreign press from Iran's streets and ordered reporters to stay in their hotels.  They have cracked down on electronic media as well.  Most of the information is coming out via Twitter.  This revolution will not be televised, but it will be brought to you in 160 characters or less.  

Even Iran's true leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has called for a partial recount.  But it may be too little, too late.  He has hitched his wagon to Ahmajinejad's star, and his position may be challenged as a result of this less than stellar display of democracy/theocracy at work.

I have no idea how this going to end.  Mousavi is calling for a new election.  Ahmajinejad is calling Iran the "most stable country in the world".  The rest of us can only wait and hope.  Hope that this revolt echoes those in Berlin rather than those in Beijing.  But only time, and Twitter, will tell.  

Monday, June 15, 2009

"Ill"ustrated World


Today I am shedding some "lyte" on trends.  I had family in town over the past week, and we went down to the infamous Las Vegas Strip.  Such a trip is almost mandatory when you live here, and is practically the only time I go down to the Strip.  I am an avid people watcher and truly there is no better place to get my fix.

It is also a great place to spot trends in fashion.  I have noticed a marked increase in the number of tattoos, especially on women.  And I saw a lot of piercings in noses and spikes in ears and also those large rings in men's ears as well.

I find it amusing that so many white, middle-class youth are emulating African natives and going totally tribal.  These markings also hallmark a classic trait of the young, the inability to picture oneself growing old.

My cardinal rule of tattoos is pick your spot and your image wisely.  Since tattoos are permanent, it is important to place them in or on a body part that ages well.  That leaves your feet.  Everything else will sag or droop or migrate.  Plus, you need to consider if your tastes at 22 will be the same at 44.  An image that sings to your youthful soul may mutter, "What the hell were you thinking?" in your middle age.  

Now piercings are another matter.  Punching a hole in your nose, tongue or labia isn't a lifelong mutilation, these holes could theoretically close if left alone.  But those rings of every-increasing size in your earlobes?  Not so much.  I had the opportunity to be assisted at a video store by a young man who chose to leave his rings out of his lobes.  Yuck.  His earlobes reminded me of dripping wax.  

I am convinced that in a decade or so, there will be a boom in reconstructive surgeries and tattoo removal.  You know what they say, "Illustrate in haste, repent at leisure."  

Friday, June 12, 2009

NIMBY


Today I want to shed some "lyte" on self-interest.  At the beginning of his presidency, Barack Obama signed an executive order closing Guantanamo Bay.  Now that order is beginning to look a little premature.  No one wants the detainees.

Well, Bermuda is going to take four of them. But they are not the scary, dangerous Islamic terrorists.  They are Chinese Uighurs, who are Muslim, but neither scary nor dangerous.  You must come from a country that a) ends in "stan", or b) supplies us with oil, in order to qualify as scary and dangerous.

We don't even want these guys on our soil.  Apparently our Supermax prisons are not secure enough to hold these wily fellows.  Never mind that there has never been a successful prison break at a Supermax prison.  Never mind that we have federal facilities that are totally surrounded by military bases. Never mind that we already have terrorists serving their time right here on American soil.  Nope, these guys are too hot to handle and can only be secured on a island that is a whopping 90 or so miles from our precious soil.

Speaking of islands, some suggested that we could house these folks at Alcatraz.  What an awesome idea!  There's just that small problem that it is a tourist attraction.  Maybe we could combine the two?   I can see the t-shirts now, "My parents were waterboarded at Alcatraz but all I got was this slightly damp t-shirt".  

So, I want to make sure I understand this; it was okay to snatch these guys from their countries of origin, often on trumped-up charges.  It was okay to subject them to "enhanced interrogation" techniques.  It was okay to suspend habeas corpus.  But it is definitely not okay to imprison them in the country that totally fucked up their and their family's lives and trashed said country's international reputation.  That is just too much of a violation.  

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Crystal Balls


I want to shed a little "lyte" on right wing extremism.  Yesterday, an avowed neonazi opened fire at the Holocaust Museum in Washington D.C., killing a security guard. He was reportedly upset with his Social Security benefits being cut.

Now, I don't expect crazy people to make logical connections, but come on, 6 million murdered Jews are responsible for your retirement benefits being reduced?  If you are going to hold someone responsible, why not go shoot up a Social Security Administration office?  

But more importantly, this latest shooting gives further support to the report that was issued by the Department of Homeland Security a couple of months ago.  Remember?  It warned that such attacks could increase.  Now, in less than 2 weeks, we have a pair of killings linked to, yep, you guessed it, right wing extremists.

DHS took a beating from the rabid right when the report was released.  They were chastised for even suggesting that such groups would put their words into action.  They were criticized for maligning extremists.  They were accused of trying to stifle free speech.  

Well, now it looks like they were just accurate.  And the rabid right hates that.  Once again, facts and reality triumph over feelings.  Remind me, how many people  were murdered by violent, left wing groups during the dark days of the Bush years?  Oh, that's right, none.  There was that guy that set himself on fire to protest the Iraq invasion and occupation, but killing yourself is not the same as murdering someone else.

What a strong sense of entitlement it must take to decide that someone must die in order for your point to be heard.  But maybe they are just following their leaders, after all, look at the body count that former President Bush tallied after deciding that 9/11 "changed everything".  Unfortunately, using force to get your way is the oldest and stupidest form of persuasion.

So, I want to give a shout out to DHS for standing up and identifying these lowlifes and criminals.  These are not freedom fighters, they are domestic terrorists.  And they richly deserve to spend some time at Club Guantanamo.  Quick!  Before it closes!  

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Echo Chamber


Today I am shedding a little "lyte" on leadership.  A new Gallup poll shows that 47% of Republicans have no clue who the leader of their party is.  The sad, junkie clown, Rush Limbaugh was the next, with a whopping 13% of those polled saying he is the de facto leader of their party.  The unholy trinity was rounded out with Newt Gingrich, and Dick Cheney.

Hmmm, what do these three people have in common?  They are all white, male, and old.  These are the faces that will lead the Republicans?  It's so "Back to the Future".  First of all, only one of them could possibly, well probably, run for president.  And Newt seems to be basing his appeal on racist attacks on Supreme Court nominees and worrying about all the pagans that surround him. 

But the sad thing is, there is no one leading the Republicans.  And they are a group that is accustomed to leadership.  You need one boss lemming to show the other lemmings where to jump and when.  How can Republicans keep us safe without a daddy to lead them?  Oh! and what about "mommy"?  Sarah Palin was named by a mere .05%. 

It says a lot about a political party when the members of said party cannot name their leader.  Where is the message?  What is the message?  Who will push the Republican "brand"?  Not only are they out of ideas, they are fresh out of leadership.

Funny, the same people polled had no problem naming the leader of the Democratic party. 

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Right Here, Right Now


I want to shed some "lyte" on life stages.  I got a call from a friend of mine the other day.  She has had her first baby, and is adjusting to married life at the same time.  Her frustrations and struggles caused me to do some serious reminiscing about my early married life and the dark days when my kids were babies.

Our society over-romanticizes beginnings.  Look at all the time, money and effort that is put into a wedding, when you really need to focus on all the days, weeks, years, and decades that follow that one day.  Or look at the cornucopia of books dedicated to a baby's first year.  Yep, it's all about the start of things.  But middle is where all the interesting things happen.

Now, new moms, and newlyweds, don't jump down my throat.  I applaud you for your courage in starting out.  But beginnings are always full of energy and optimism.  When you are in the middle of something, that's when patience and courage really come in handy.  Slogging it out as a spouse or a parent, or both, is not for weinies.  Marriage is a difficult enterprise and it requires a certain amount of empathy and selflessness to make it work.  Parenting is harder and easier at the same time.  Let's face it, kids are cuter than adults.  So it makes dealing with their shortcomings a little simpler.  But kids cannot reason like adults, so it makes dealing with their shortcomings a little harder.

I look at my marriage, now in it's twenty-fifth year, and I am surprised.  Surprised that I truly love my husband more now than in our hot and heavy beginnings.  More importantly, I like my husband more now.  Everyone knows that the obsessive, thrilling beginning of love fades over time.  What is less documented is the gradual increase of your respect and genuine appreciation of your life's partner.  This respect is earned over time and is tested by adversity, something you cannot find in the nascent beginnings of marriage.

I look at my kids.  Both are teenagers and there is no shortage of angst and drama in my house, but again, I like them alot more now than when they were babies.  Babies are cute, but teenagers are interesting.  I enjoy the company of my kids so much more now than when they were little.  They are growing up to be smart, funny, engaging young adults and seeing the results of my parenting is much more satisfying than all the projecting and imagining you do when you are first introduced to your children.

So while I wholeheartedly empathize with my friend, I don't envy her.  So many plot lines of movies and books involve getting the chance to start over, but I like where I am; right here, right now.  

Monday, June 8, 2009

It's On Like Donkey Kong


I want to shed some "lyte" on the healthcare debate.  The opening salvos are starting to be fired over the public option.  Predictably, the Republicans are against it.  This doesn't surprise me, Republicans hate anything that a) benefits real, live people and b) puts a hurt on any big business.  And make no mistake, healthcare is a very big business.

Insurance companies want a trigger for the public option.  The idea is if they don't reform sufficiently, then a government-run public option would become a reality.  Yeah, let's wait and let them reform themselves, with no competition from an existing public option.  Like that is going to happen.  The insurance companies know that if a public option isn't created now, it never will be.  So let's set up a mythical trigger and just wait it out.

Not to be outdone, the Blue Dog Democratic Caucus is starting to backslide.  I love my party, but damn it! Can't we just all move in one direction at the same time?  Just once?  Pretty please?  I swear, Speaker Pelosi must get sick of herding cats.  

What Washington is missing is a sense of reality.  70% of Americans want healthcare reform.  A majority want a single payer option.  The  AARP and most major corporations want serious healthcare reform.  Insurance companies know that if they had to compete with a government-run program, most of us would opt for the government program.  Despite all the fear-mongering on the right, government run healthcare works.  Medicare's administrative costs are significantly lower than any private insurer.  Citizens of countries with single payer healthcare systems live longer and have lower infant mortality rates.

I would like to see the Democrats pull together and deliver, but my party has a history of pulling defeat from the jaws of victory.  I realize that single payer won't happen, but a public option, without a trigger, is achievable.  It would be a huge step to make healthcare not only affordable, but provide an incentive for our healthcare system to actually care about health, not just profits.  So let's get ready to rumble!  

Friday, June 5, 2009

The "Muslim World"


I want to shed a little "lyte" on President Obama's speech in Cairo.  Candidate Obama promised to address Muslims across the world early on in his term if he was elected President. He delivered on that promise yesterday, giving a nuanced speech that contained quotes from the Quran, the Bible, and the Talmud.

The President again demonstrated his stellar speaking skills.  He showed sensitivity to a people long inured to being lectured by American Presidents.  His speech was an exercise in understanding, showing a substantial knowledge of the Arab's love of deliberate word choices and surprising humility.

It was the humility that drove the rabid right and it's mouthpiece, Fox News, into the stratosphere.  Sean Hannity used some creative editing to make it sound like Obama was supporting 9/11 sympathizers.  Pundits again trotted out the idea that Obama was apologizing for the US.  They had some serious issues with the President calling the invasion of Iraq a "war of choice".  Conveniently forgetting that it was.

Oh! Not to move off topic, but did anyone notice that the new leader of the Republican party, Dick Cheney, admitted this week that there was no link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11?  After beating that drum incessantly for the last 6 years, now he says there was no credible intelligence supporting that contention.  He obviously forgot to tell his daughter, Liz, who got into it with ABC's Andrea Mitchell.  Demonstrating the right's complete denial of reality, Ms. Cheney simultaneously said that her father never tried to link Saddam Hussein and 9/11, while also trying to insinuate that such a link did exist. I got to find my Motrin. 

But back to Obama's speech.  It was well received in the mythical "Muslim World".  Since 9/11, the incredible diversity of nations that have a majority of citizens that follow Islam has been reduced to the term "Muslim World".  Now, I grew up in the suburbs of Chicago, and there advertisers have created a place they call "Chicagoland".  I have noticed that there is no "New York Land" or "LA Land".  This is a moniker reserved just for the Second City.  But now we have the "Muslim World".  It sounds like a amusement park dedicated to the Prophet Muhammed.  Where is the "Christian World", or the "Hindu World"?  And we wonder why they don't like us?  After being colonized, invaded, and exploited, we now just refer to them as the "Muslim World".

Obama's speech made some inroads into the damage.  But his words will have to be followed by action.  Specifically in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.  This conflict is the one issue that unites the "Muslim World".  Most Americans are totally clueless about this. When former President Bush met with Indonesian imans, he was shocked to find out that the issue they wanted to talk about was the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.  So if Obama and his team could help bring about a two state solution, they would dramatically improve our relations with all Muslim nations and remove a major recruiting tool used by Muslim extremists.  But hey, I was just happy that he didn't call the Egyptians Austrians.