The Spirit of Christmas

Exams make me really stupid. During exams, I forget to do things like take my wallet with me to the grocery store.

During the holiday season last year, I stopped at the grocery store on my way home from my niece's holiday concert. I just wanted to pick up a few things: milk, bread, yogurt. Just a few basics. I went to the self check-out line, in a bit of a hurry because there were more exams to study for, and that's when I discovered my lack of wallet.

Needless to say, I was pretty irritated with myself. All the same, I had some cold stuff in my basket that I couldn't let sit out, so I headed back to put everything away.

Yes, I really put the groceries back.

In the frozen foods section, I remembered that there were some cards in a pocket in my purse, but I couldn't remember what was there. Hoping for a VISA, I sat my basket down and started rooting through my purse. Since Kroger's hasn't yet started accepting library cards, I was out of luck. I picked my basket up and went back to returning the groceries to the shelves.

I was aware that there was a woman who saw me rooting through my purse and then start putting food back, but I didn't really pay much attention. After all, it's a public place. There are always people around in a grocery store. When I put the yogurt back, she was there again. She said to me, "excuse me, I don't mean to butt in, but if you're having a hard time I can help you out."

She really took me by surprise. I thanked her and told her that I had just left my wallet at home. She said it wouldn't be a problem. I assured her that I was fine, told her that I'm a student, and explained that I usually carry my wallet in my backpack, but when I took it out today I laid it on the counter and then just forgot about it. Then I thanked her a few million more times. She said if I just wanted a couple of dollars to get the milk, she'd be happy to do that for me. I told her I live just a minute or so away and that I could just come back.

And I thanked her a few hundred times more.

If the woman had been anywhere from her mid 40s up, I wouldn't have been quite as surprised. It's been my experience that women who think they're old enough to be your mother are more likely to help you out in life (they're also more likely to call you "hon"). I always figure they're thinking of their own kids or their kids' friends and how they'd want someone to help them out if they needed it.

Don't get me wrong, I would still have been surprised by anyone offering to buy my groceries, just slightly less so had it been a middle-aged woman. But this woman was younger. She was probably in her 30s. If this woman has children, they're less than half my age.

She wasn't thinking of her kids, she was thinking of me.

She's just a kind person.

I was really touched. But unfortunately, I was also taken so by surprise, that I really didn't say anything beyond thank you. I did manage to tell her how nice it was of her and that I really appreciated it. But I wish I had said more.

I wish I had said that the world needs more people like her.

I wish I had said that I'm not just too proud to take her money, that I wanted her to keep her money so that she would have it to give to someone who really does need it.

I wish I had thought to tell her that she made my day, my whole month, my whole year, really.

I have a friend who lost her mother to breast cancer a couple of months before this happened. The same friend lost her grandmother a few weeks later.

Another friend's mother was in a terrible car accident about a year before finding out that she had colon cancer. [She's now through chemo and is currently cancer free.]

Scott Peterson got the death penalty for killing his wife and unborn son. We're still at war in Iraq. Sadaam is still on trial. Children go missing every day and are either never found or are found too late. Husbands beat their wives. Parents beat their children.

It's easy to believe the world is a dark and evil place. It's easy to be very hard and uncaring.

But a total stranger wanted to help me buy groceries. Add to that Abby's big hug and Hannah's big smile and now Mia's happy face and maybe it'll all be all right after all.

I originally typed this story out as soon as I returned from the grocery store. I typed it and emailed it to everyone I could think of. And now I'm posting a slightly revised version of it here in the hopes that maybe one or two more people will read it. I want as many people as possible to read this because I believe in the butterfly effect.

It doesn't matter that I turned her down. It matters that she offered. It matters that in a world that usually feels as though it really doesn't give a damn about you, a stranger truly did care. It matters that her offer touched me, made me smile, lifted me in a way I'd not experienced before.

What matters is that I'll never forget that woman in the grocery store that night.

What matters is that I hope that I prove to be as kind and caring as a woman whose name I do not know, whose face I do not remember, but whose generousity I will never forget.

Share a smile (or offer to lend a hand or to buy a gallon of milk for a stranger) and you can save the world.

Quote of the Day

we will fight not out of spite
for someone must stand up for what's right

'cause where there's a man who has no voice
there ours shall go singing

...from Hands, by Jewel

A snow-covered world

Snow

Reminds me of the inherent beauty in the world. Restores my hope and my faith in the goodness in people.

Reminds me of a child. Of the innocence. The honesty. The trust shining from their eyes.

Reminds me what a miracle life really is.

As it blankets the shawdowy corners and the graffiti-covered benches in layers of sparkling flakes, it reminds me that things are not always as they seem. That the surface is just that.

When the blizzard comes and neighbors join together, I wonder if perhaps there really is some good in all man.

As the crisp, cool air fills my lungs I forget about the problems in the world.

And then as it melts, I remember.

As the piles of snow disappear and leave behind fast food bags and syringes, I remember.

As my breathing once again becomes more shallow--my lungs do not like this filth we call air--I remember.

As the rivers flood and tempers fray, I remember.

I remember the crime, the hate, the intolerance, the greed.

I remember the innocence that is now lost so young.

I remember the eyes of untrusting children who have already seen more than I ever have.

I remember the rape and the murder, the hate and the uncaring.

And I wish, in that moment, for a snow-covered world.

Picture of the day

A t-shirt in the crowd at the Kerry rally last year. Still worthy of a chuckle, though it's a sadder chuckle this year, this month, this week.

And what a week or so it has been. There's so much to say. And yet, I'll spare you. For now.

Over the rainbow

This is a picture I took along Conor Pass in Ireland. One of the most beautiful moments of an overall gorgeous trip.

I would love to go back.

Pretty bows and shiny ribbons

They're trying to distract us. The point is not whether Rove used Valerie Plame's name or just called her "Wilson's wife." That is not the point and that does not matter.

The point is that Rove said he knew nothing about it, said nothing about it. Well, I am so sorry, sir, but if you spoke about "Joe Wilson's wife" then you did indeed know something, you did indeed say something.

I'm not that stupid.

I'm not that easily diverted.

First you said you knew nothing, then you said you didn't use her name. Well which is it? You've contradicted yourself.

As for the diversion, it's about identifying her. It's really quite simple. "Joe Wilson's wife" = Mrs. Wilson = Valerie Plame.

It does not matter which name or label you used for her. It matters if you identified her. Clearly you did. You said you did (but not by her name...).

But at some point, you lied about it. Regardless of what you knew about Valerie Plame, regardless of what you said about Valerie Plame, misleading the grand jury, lying to the grand jury, is obstruction of justice. And if you did that, it's illegal.

And yes, lying about whether or not you outed a CIA agent (as a, let's face it, very bitchy way to try to discredit Joe Wilson so that people would not attend to his report that said there was no reason to go to war with Iraq; a war, let's please remember, in which 2,000 American soldiers have now died) is a much bigger deal than lying about who's gone down on you in the oval office.

The Righties are trying to say this is all a political game of those mean Lefties. There's a key problem with this argument: the Lefties are not the reason this investigation got started.

Harm was done to a CIA agent. The CIA didn't take kindly to that. The CIA took the issue to the DOJ.

How is that a Lefty political game?

Two days left. Will anyone be indicted? We shall see. The clock is ticking...

Things fall apart

That's the name of a book. A book I read many years ago. I don't honestly remember much about it. Something about an African tribe and missionaries. Maybe about old ways of life and new ways and how one way is not automatically better than the other.

Maybe. Like I said, I don't really remember.

Sure seems right though, doesn't it?

Things fall apart.

You don't always mean for them to. Actually, I think you never mean for them to.

Whenever I've heard this phrase in the past, I've always thought of a whole falling into pieces. A whole what didn't matter. Just a whole that fell apart.

But what if there was never a whole? What if instead you had gathered together pieces from here and there throughout your life. And what you do, day after day, is hold those pieces together.

Then one day, you just lose your grip.

Doesn't matter why. You just do. And when you lose your grip, all the different pieces start to fall in all different directions. You were holding together so many pieces and you spent so many years gathering them all together, you just really can't imagine gathering them all back up again.

So what do you do now?

Keep on keeping on and start gathering new pieces?

Try to gather up the old pieces?

Ignore all pieces, old and new, and just take a nap?

It's getting late on a Sunday and I have class in the morning, so I'm going for the sleep.

What's with all the china?

In the last week, I've heard new versions of the two main takes on the situation in Iraq and what we should do about it. We know the two main takes:

1. We can't leave now. We have to stay until we've restored order to the area, until democracy is in place, until the current administration is no longer in office.

Okay, so that last part is my little addition.

2. Get out. Get the hell out.

Again, my take. The kinder, gentler way is to say that we should withdraw as soon as possible. That we need to leave the business of rebuilding that nation to the people of that nation.

So now on to the new versions. They are the same old stories, the same scenarios, the exact same theories. Just repackaged. So we'll keep the same numbers.

1. "It's like broken china." Broken china that we broke. So as we learned in kindergarten, since we broke it, we should stay and fix it.

2. "It's like a bull in a china shop." You can imagine the chaos and destruction. Everywhere the bull turns, it breaks more china. It doesn't mean to. It may even try to stop. But it's a bull and it's china. It's inevitable. And the only way to stop it is to get the bull out. Get it the hell out.

Unfortunately, I don't actually remember who said what. And the explanations are in my own words. But you get the picture.

Apparently the mouths have gotten tired of talking about Iraq and what we do now. Apparently they're actually tired of saying the exact same thing all the time, day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year. So they were repackaging a bit last week. I guess even they get bored with the same story being in the news for so very long.

Should white girls speak up?

I attended a panel discussion on Hurricane Katrina and the media-race links today. One thing I noticed at this discussion was that only one of the white audience members (there were perhaps 20 people, 30 at most, in the audience) commented. The white faculty and staff added their thoughts (and actually, two members of the panel were white) without hesitation. I was struck by this and sat wondering about it.

The panel didn't raise any issues that I have not already considered myself. And I had thoughts. I had lots of thoughts. But I didn't contribute. Why? Because somewhere along the way, I learned that it wasn't my place. I'm a middle-class white girl (though at 33, some would probably claim that I'm no longer a girl), what right do I have to talk about racial issues, to talk about poverty, to talk about the suffering that goes with both in our society? I have a bachelor's degree, a master's degree, I'm in law school. No, I'm not independently wealthy. Yes, I have debt. Yes, the cash flow is restricted. But come on, who can't recognize that I'm a "have"? That I even had access to get these degrees is something that not everyone can say. I'm privileged in that way.

Wow, how stupid was I? Sheesh. Sometimes the vast level of my stupidity surprises even me.

How exactly will anything ever change if the "haves" think they have no place in the conversation? The "haves" create and dictate the damn conversation (in terms of the media and the public sphere, not necessarily in terms of the private sphere and the local level). For changes this big, this encompassing, this important, the change happens on the small, personal level. It happens by starting the conversation, and keeping it going, with your friends and your neighbors and your coworkers. It happens on your block, in your neighborhood. It happens with your children. It happens when people like me speak up and join the conversation and in that way become a part of the solution. Actions aren't enough here. You can't just not discriminate. You have to talk about it. You have to have the discussions, the conversations.

My master's is in public administration. At heart, I'm all about the public sector. I want to make a difference, to make a change, to make our world better for all of us. And yet, there was still a part of me that thought I didn't have a place in the conversation? How can that be? How can any of us not participate?

I'm such an idiot sometimes.

Why?

Why can we not yet talk about who was to blame in the mess that is the Gulf Coast? What do you mean, it isn't time yet? When will it be time? Will it ever be time?

Why is "Brownie" being paid to help with FEMA's investigation? Since when do we hire those at fault to investigate themselves?

Why is it that the Republicans praise the Democrats and nonpartisan politics when they get their way, but scream and holler and jump up and down and have fits and whine about partisan politics when they don't get their way?

Why are the Republicans yelling about political motives being behind the DeLay indictments when there have been more Dems investigated in TX than Republicans? (Oh wait, perhaps I should see the question above for a clue with this one...)

Why are we still pretending to be surprised about the flooding in New Orleans?

Why are we pretending to be surprised about the forecast that came out today predicting a bad October in terms of tropical storms and hurricanes? Wake up people, if you've actually managed to miss it, we're in for a bad year! Actually, we're in for a bad decade. Be prepared.

Why are we ignoring the fact that all of those displaced people from the Gulf Coast will never come "home" again? They didn't have the means to leave, you're not kidding yourself into thinking they magically found the means to get back, are you? Did you know that there's no plan to bring them back?

Why is the United States of America, the Melting Pot of the world (or to be more hip and current, the "Salad Bowl" of the world), talking about building a fence to keep people out? If the Native Americans had done that back in the day, where would we all be?

Why is the senior legal analyst on CNN so shocked at the fact that the latest Supreme Court nominee is not a judge? Apparently he slept through law school: Nonjudges on the high court are hardly new. He might want to look into the former Chief's background as a start.

Why is the reconstruction work in the Gulf Coast being awarded via no bid contracts to outsiders (Haliburton's doing some of this work? Really?) rather than giving the work to those in the area who currently really need the work? Why aren't we letting the people help themselves in such a basic way?

Why is it that video games get protestors saying that all of that violence will lead to desensitization toward violence in the real world, meanwhile the news keeps showing a tape of a suicide bomber again and again and again and again and... ?

Why don't we ever learn that we cannot, should not, rule the world?

Why is so much of tonight's NewsNight exactly what we saw on tonight's Anderson Cooper 360? Is it always this way? I admit to not usually watching NewsNight (been tuning in lately just for Anderson), but really, what's the point in all the same stories and interviews? If this is the norm, I won't be turning into a regular viewer of NewsNight.

Why did they get rid of the light brown m&ms? It may not be a new issue, but it'll also be there for some of us.

Quote of the day

Never believe that a few caring people can't change the world. For, indeed, that's all who ever have.

-Margaret Mead

Instincts vs. plans

According to IMDb, Anderson Cooper once said...

When I was younger, I talked to the adults around me that I respected most about how they got where they were, and none of them plotted a course they could have predicted, so it seemed a waste of time to plan too long-term. Since then I've always gone on my instincts.

And he's certainly doing well. I'm feeling much better about my lack of a five-year plan. This lack of a plan doesn't usually bother me, but being in law school, I spend my days around an awful lot of people with an awful lot of plans. Once in a while it gets to me. Granted, it doesn't get to me enough to actually draft a plan of my own, but it's still nice to find someone who's made it by going on instinct.

Reporter finally released

Remember Judith Miller? Just in case you don't remember, she's the NYT reporter who was jailed for refusing to reveal her source. Remember the story? Another Administration flub: the revelation of Valerie Plame as a CIA agent.

Miller's been in jail for almost three months. She was finally released today after her source released her from her promise of confidentiality.

So supposedly this whole leak business is still being investigated. I read somewhere the other day that this "investigation" has now gone on longer than the investigation of Nixon and his Watergate mess.

This Administration is just pathetic.

Michael Brown update

So I found the answer to my question about what Brown will do next. It seems that he is being paid by the federal government (in other words, by you and me) as a consultant to help FEMA figure out what went wrong.

I thought I had also read an article that said how much he's making, but I can't find that. I did find that he was making about 145K before he resigned. Don't know if that went up/down or stayed the same in his "consultant" role.

Can you imagine? He is a huge part of what is being investigated in this what went wrong investigation... and we're paying him to help with (lead??? on the FEMA side, I believe) the investigation? Really?

I knew this Administration was a joke... but come on!!!!!

If you don't believe me and need to read it for yourself, here are a couple of links:

CNN, 9/27
CNN, 9/28

Random news of interest

Mike Brown. Apparently Mike Brown (director of FEMA, taking lots of heat over the lousy response to Hurricane Katrina, recalled to Washington a few days ago in response to that heat, rumored to have "padded" his resume) has resigned. So here's my question: what on earth does he do now? A second presidential appointment would not be wise. But with this last few weeks on his resume, who's going to hire him? This is certainly not the first time that someone has resigned during the heat of the day, if you will. I'm just wondering what they do next.

John Roberts. What does John Roberts believe? Hard to say. He doesn't answer anything. Sometimes I understand, as many of these issues will be before the Supreme Court (and in some cases even before the lower court where Roberts is currently residing); sometimes I don’t understand, as he seems to be too careful as a way to get out of answering high-tension questions.

On the one hand, I get that the memos he wrote, the positions he took, while working for Reagan were the Administration's positions and not necessarily his personally. He was doing his job. That's what lawyers do. I get that. On the other hand, why did the Reagan Administration hire him? Good lawyering skills aside, why him over everyone else? Presumably, they would have been looking to hire someone whose ideology matched their own.

Mostly, I think I have problems with the nomination of someone who is so very new to the bench. He's been there for two years. We have no real way of knowing how he'll rule.

I've been reading some stuff today that compares some of Roberts's responses in the hearings to Clarence Thomas's answers back in his hearings. I must say that they were eerily similar.

Of course, as we all know, throughout the history of the court, it is certainly not unheard of that a justice ends up not being quite what people thought he/she would be. Who knows why this happens. A change of heart later in life (in theory, as the Supremes are generally a bit older)? A "letting down of the guard" once they reach the ultimate seat, from which they cannot be fired? Who knows. But it has happened. So there is a possibility that Mr. Conservative could turn out to be a liberal in wolf's clothing. Or he could turn out to be an O'Connor. In theory, fairly conservative. And yet… she is often the swing vote that the liberals need.

There is no way to know until the person is on the court. I can't imagine being on this committee. Appointing a Supreme Court justice is not an easy job.

Total Failure. Back to Katrina. The response, from all levels of government, has been just atrocious. Bush will be there tomorrow for the fourth time. He's also apparently said that the horrible response is the fault of the federal government. I'm sorry, but in my opinion, it's too late too late from him. It took him days to get down there. It took him even longer to get Brown out of there and someone else in.

I was actually very glad to see that Bush's approval ratings are at an all-time low. The last time I saw them, he was tied with Johnson's ratings during Vietnam. You know, when Johnson's approval rating was so low that he announced that he would not be running? Johnson's rating that was an overall all-time low? And finally (finally!), polls are showing that the people of this country think that Bush should be paying more attention to the home front! Finally! It's just so horrible that it took something so tragic to refocus people on our own nation's problems.

Not that I'm against helping others. But you cannot successfully help the world if your own home is falling apart. Also, you cannot (should not) be attempting to make over other countries in our own image. Citizens of other nations should have the opportunity to mold their own nations.

Ophelia. Yikes. The more odd weather we have, the more fascinated I become by the weather. Today I learned that as the eye gets smaller, the storm (usually) gets stronger. Think of a skater pulling her/his arms in during a spin. And as of early today, Ophelia's eye seemed to be getting a bit smaller. So yes, the potential is there for that storm to get worse. Granted, it's "only" a category 1. The problem, of course, is that it's moving slooooooowly. They're talking about 12+ hours of storm for that part of the coast. We're not talking 12 hours of a gentle spring rain here. We're talking about areas that have already received 10+ inches of rain. And the storm's not over yet!

You know, some people scoff at us Mid-Westerners… but there are definitely times when it's good to be in the middle!

Devastation

Here's an interesting story: USA Today. Be sure to note when it first appeared.

Harry Connick, Jr. has been to New Orleans this week. Where's the president? Where are the troops? Where is the help? It's been four days. Within four days of the Tsunami, we had more aid in place on the other side of the globe than we do now in our own country.

This catastrophe is not a surprise. This is the worst-case scenario that's been discussed for years, probably decades. Though apparently it's been mentioned as the worst-case scenario, no one has actually bothered to plan for it. We knew close to a week in advance that something was going to happen. We were sure as of late Friday or Saturday that it was going to hit the Gulf Coast and it was going to be very bad. Why didn't we get the aid and supplies in then? That used to be the way we operated. Back in the days of Clinton.

So far the most our president has managed to do is to ask his daddy and President Clinton to raise money. Oh and today he finally asked the Congress for money. Of course, that's going to cause more problems than it'll solve. Why do I say that? Because they're going to use this as a photo op. They're going to throw what sounds like a bunch of money (but in reality is a mere drop in the bucket considering the devastation) in the general direction of New Orleans (because apparently everyone has forgotten that New Orleans was not the only city/area wrecked by this storm) and then they'll forget about it. There will be no future planning. There will be no long-term fixing. And throwing random money at the problem now means there will be even less money to help in the long run. Also, the "creative accounting" that's going to fund their photo op is not going to be pleasant for any of us.

And then there's FEMA. They used to be quite the org. From what I understand, it used to be that they couldn't be beat. So what on earth is going on here? Oh right, FEMA is no longer in control of disasters. FEMA has been folded into the Office of Homeland Security. And that office... well, they're new. They still don't even know their own structure.

Where's the president? Where's the call for volunteers? Where's the call for conservation (heaven forbid this oil-funded administration would actually use that word)?

This is disgusting. It's embarrassing. I can't bring myself to read any of the coverage from other countries. I can only imagine what they're saying about us.

Why is it that we're more capable of getting in the middle of things in other countries than we are of getting in the middle of things in our own country? Why do we think we can take care of the world when we clearly can't take care of ourselves?

I said yesterday that I didn't think other countries needed to send us aid. I've completely changed my mind because apparently our government can't handle it.

Where is the president? Why hasn't he been there? Why did he remain on vacation? What was he thinking going to CA to talk about social security? [Social security? A plan that the majority of Americans have clearly said no thanks to. A plan that he continues to push anyway because... well, frankly, I don't know why. But it's become his pet cause even though NO ONE wants his version of it.] Vacationing and social security in the aftermath of one of the worst (if not THE worst) natural disasters that's ever hit this country? And what was he thinking when he allowed his picture to be taken while he was sitting on his cushy couch looking out the window at 5,000 feet?

As someone on the radio said yesterday, he's having another My Pet Goat moment.

People who know me know that I don't hesitate to say that I don't think the guy is all that bright. I think he's selfish. I think he has no compassion, no empathy. I do not believe he cares about the people of this country. But this... even I didn't expect this apparent lack of interest in this tragedy.

Where are the buses? Where is the food, the water, the diapers?

I get that this is huge. I get that. But where is the planning? The aid? The help? We knew this was coming! We knew. We've known for years. Yes, we've all seen people being saved from rooftops. The people doing that rescuing are truly heroes. Yes, there are people helping, giving what they have, helping those who are ill, lost, wandering. Please don't misunderstand me. Those who are there, who are helping are truly wonderful people. They are heroes. They are to be admired, to be emulated. But they can't do all of this alone. They need more help. Where is the military? Oh, right, they're dying in Iraq.

And you know what's really sad? There's a not entirely small part of me that is afraid to post this, afraid to publicly post something so clearly critical of the administration. Over the last few years (say... 5) people have been questioned, detained, harassed really, for much less. I don't think the ABA will like it if I acquire a record.

I was watching a special on NBC as I typed this. They of course finished up with a photo montage. When I realized what song was running with the montage... well, let's just say I've had it for the day. I'm overloaded on this news. Watching and listening to all of this has actually been causing me more anxiety than I would have believed possible considering that I am many miles away, that I have no ties to that area, that I know no one there. My anxiety about this is actually at the point where it is showing itself physically. And I'm here safe and dry in Ohio. I have the luxury of turning off the tv, drinking a clean glass of water, and going to bed in my nice, clean bed in my air-conditioned apartment.

I truly cannot even begin to imagine what it's like down there. Cannot imagine how those people feel; whether you ended up trapped there or you managed to get out, your material life got washed away just the same... the only world many have ever known is simply gone.

So anyway, here's a little bit of the song from the special...

My city of ruins
My city of ruins...

The boarded up windows,
The empty streets
While my brother's down on his knees
My city of ruins
My city of ruins

Come on, rise up! Come on, rise up!...

Thanks to Bruce for that one. More appropriate than he could possibly have imagined when he first sang those words.

Random Hurricane Thoughts

As I watched the coverage (after I got home from classes… darn classes, I so wanted to be home watching the coverage today!) on CNN, I came up with the following random thoughts in response to things that aired. First there were the obvious thoughts of remorse at the destruction, at the loss. But then there were a few random thoughts rattling around in there, too. Here are some of those.

Looters. I just heard a report of looters. I'm not even sure what to say about that. Besides the stupidity of putting yourself in that kind of danger (why aren't the looters inside??), what on earth would possess someone to loot in these kinds of circumstances?

Did you think you were special? One of these guys was reporting that one of their colleagues in NY had family stuck in their house in Hurricane-Land. The family was on the second floor of their house, the first floor was flooded, and the waters were rising. They were awaiting rescue. And what were they doing in their house? There was a mandatory evacuation. So this family (and many others) stayed in their house why? I believe this particular family was in New Orleans because my first thought was, have you heard of the Superdome? I don't want to hear that you had nowhere to go. Clearly you do. You have relatives in NY! And you have access to the Superdome.

Do they really think they are so special that the flood waters would just skip their house? Do they really think it's acceptable to put the rescue workers in that kind of danger? I have news for them: they're not special, they're irresponsible.

And don't even get me started on the family rescued in a boat… the family that had an INFANT with them! This storm was not a surprise folks. You had plenty of warning. And you were ordered to get out. So you were there with your infant why exactly? Again with the irresponsibility.

A tropical storm in Ohio?! How bizarre would that be? Well, had Katrina hit as a Cat 5, they were saying that it would likely still be a tropical storm by the time it made its way to Ohio. At the moment, they're calling for 4 – 8 inches of rain up here. That seems incredible.

The beginning of the season. For those who don't already realize this, the tropical storm/hurricane season is really just getting started. The peak part of the season starts about now and ends in October. They were calling for a bad year. So far they've been right. If we don't have another such storm this year, the forecasts were right. However, it's not over yet. Per the expert they had not too long ago, we'll have several more storm to watch before the peak season ends.

Other countries sending us money? Heard some question whether other countries would send money and care packages our way as we did for the Tsunami (and as we do for disasters around the world). My guess? Nope. And should they? My response? Nope. We're one of the richest nations in the world. It would seem very odd to me for other countries (poorer countries) to send aid. I think cards/messages/"uplifting" care packages from foreign citizens would be a nice show of caring and solidarity.

The bright side of the storm. Two main topics here. First, and pretty much always when it comes to natural disasters, the people. Yes, there are looters and incredibly stupid people who stay in their homes, but there are also those who go out of their way to help. Disasters and bad times tend to bring out the good side of an awful lot of people. This time, there are all of those rescue workers (including those who delivered a baby in the get-out-of-Dodge traffic jams) and I'm sure there are tons of individual heroes out there, and some of those stories will come out in the days to come.

And have you heard about the dolphins? There were three dolphins housed in an aquarium by the water. The dolphin's keepers decided they were way too close to the storm and moved them to a hotel swimming pool treated with salt water. The good news is that there was indeed a lot of damage at that aquarium, but those hotel-visiting dolphins are doing just fine!

Guts

I've talked about guts before. Mostly in my Harry Potter post. Heroes have guts. However, they don't always know that about themselves beforehand. Others may not know it about them either.

I was watching a new show about 9/11 on National Geographic TV the other day. It was an excellent program. I was fairly impressed. Of course, I missed the first hour, but what I saw was good!

The format took us through the whole morning, step by step. The result of this (or rather, one of the results of this) was that I learned more about the people on the plane that went down in PA than I ever had before. The widows of two of the men were interviewed and talked about those final conversations. I knew that people from that plane had called their loved ones, that they had told their loved ones what was going on and that they were going to attack the hijackers.

I did not know how long the one man was on the phone with his wife. I did not know that he didn't hang up before the attack, instead he just laid the phone down so that those on the other end could hear some of what went on. I did not know that the one man told his wife to make sure that as his infant daughter grows up, she knows how much her daddy loved her.

Those men and women on that flight had guts. Whether they knew that when their flight took off that day, I do not know. But not just everyone has it in them to do what those people did that day. And do not ever forget that they did it for us. They didn't just save the Capital Building that day. They saved each and every one of us.

Would you be able to do what they did? I don't know if I would. I don't know if I have guts, if I'm a hero. But then, until tested, does anyone really know? I suspect not.

And do not forget these women, these widows of heroes, these mothers of fatherless children. I was impressed with their composure. Granted it didn't happen yesterday. But I'm sure it's something that will stick with them forever as highly emotional. They were very well spoken about that horrible day, very calm and collected as they related the events of that morning. These women, too, have guts. They've carried on.

Here, there, and everywhere

Did you know we have homeless people here in America? Yes, that's right, in a country known for its excesses, a country with some of the richest people in the world, we also have people living on the streets with nothing.

Some of our elected officials respond so well: One city's mayor didn't like having his ride to work marred each day by a view of the homeless who were living under a bridge. So he did what any normal person would do, he ordered the police to roust them out of there. Couldn't have that sort of thing at the front door to the city!

And this is not particularly uncommon. Politicians don't like to have the homeless mucking up their city's streets. What does that say about the city? Indeed. Of course, such mayor's could perhaps actually do something that would help these people rather than just telling them to move along.

The thing is, people don't seem to be particularly concerned. The plight of people in Africa? Let's raise money and awareness and sign petitions and save those people! What, a baby in Ethiopia is an AIDS orphan? Don't worry, Angelina Jolie will adopt her! Baby girls in China being abandoned? Never fear, we Americans will adopt them!

Not that I have a problem with helping children, regardless of their nationality. We're all one big family on this Earth and we all need to help each other. I'm all for helping those in foreign countries when they need and want our help. I'm just not for ignoring the problems in our own country. Just a couple of weeks ago, I was reading an article about foreign couples coming to America to adopt babies/children.

I know a lot of people are surprised to hear that. I certainly was. Until I got to the punch line: they're not white babies/children, they're black babies/children. Not enough people here want them (they're too busy adopting overseas, apparently... or perhaps agencies are not making the outreach efforts they need to be making), and apparently it's "easy" to deal with the paperwork and such, so people are coming here for our babies. But that's a topic for another day. Back to the current point…

Taking care of others is fantastic. It's big-hearted and kind and right. However, let's not forget us. We need to also be caring for ourselves, our own neighbors. The more we help our own neighborhoods, the stronger our overall society will be. And the stronger our overall society is, the more we can help others. See, it all works out, even if our efforts begin at home.

What we cannot do is to continue ignoring the problem. Pretending you don't pass those homeless people on your way to work doesn't help anything. Pretending that the homeless people who do register on your radar are just lazy bums who don't feel like getting a job and ignoring that fact that a large percentage of them are ill and unable to care for themselves. They were pushed out of state hospitals a couple of decades ago when it was decided that those institutions should be shut down. The people had nowhere to go. They're too ill to hold jobs, to care for themselves. So they live on the streets.

I won't argue that there are those who abuse welfare, that there are those who truly don't want to work and prefer receiving that check from the state each month. People do not, however, choose a life on the streets. They do not choose to live under bridges, on benches, in doorways. They do not choose to beg for money and to walk around town well all of their worldly possessions in a plastic bag or two.

Whether seeing a homeless person causes your lip to curl or your heart to hurt, ignoring the entire situation seems to be the favored overall response. And this is wrong.

I don't want to hear about individuals not being able to make a difference. That's not true. No, I'm not suggesting that you hand out money left and right each day. I am suggesting that you write letters, to papers, to politicians, to friends. I am suggesting that you stop ignoring that our brothers and sisters and mothers and fathers and children are living on the streets. I am suggesting that you think about this when you vote. Vote for the candidate that you think is the most likely to do something to help those who cannot help themselves. And if you do want to give money, then give it to an organization that helps the homeless: an organization that provides shelter, a foodbank, a store that offers clothes and such for next to nothing or even for free. If we all do this little bit, then we will all be stronger for it. And the stronger we are, the better able we will be to help those around the world.

Aren't we proud.

Have you ever visited a prison? It's quite an experience. A few months ago I went on a prison tour with some of my classmates. The prison houses inmates of different security levels: some max, some min, some in betweens. Some of the people (men… it's a men's prison) whose death sentences were commuted several years back are there. All of the sex offenders in the state pass through there (there's a program they're required to go through: assessment type stuff, anger management, that sort of thing, before they get sent on to wherever they'll be going). Also there: the vast majority of the juveniles in the state who have been tried as adults.

Why is it the vast majority of those juveniles and not all of them? Well, you know, they can't all play well together. There are gang problems, who told on who problems, way too devious together problems. So some are shipped off to other prisons. I don’t know how they're housed in the other prisons though. I don't know how they'd keep them segregated. Because there aren't enough anywhere else to fill up a whole dorm of their own.

If you ever have a chance to go on such a tour, I highly recommend it. Not because it's a barrel of laughs. No. But because I think we should all know. But if your average everyday citizens don't want to go, that's fine. However, it should really be a requirement for law students. I felt it strongly beforehand and feel it even more strongly now.

It was a fairly surreal experience. One image that I think is forever burned into my store of mental images is the juvie who was in solitary and "enjoying" his outside time. See, he was in solitary so outside time for him was in a cage. Literally. Picture the zoo. You know the houses (cat houses oftentimes) where the animals have an inside and an outside to their particular "habitat"? The outside is just a big cage? Yup. That was it. I saw these cages in the yard, projecting from the side of one of the dorms (I'd lost track of where we were on this huge "campus" and wasn't sure which dorm it even was), and couldn't figure out what they were. So I asked. That's where the juveniles in solitary get their yard time.

Kids in cages.

Well aren't we proud.

Since there are so many juveniles there, they have a school. Which we did of course visit. And really, it's just like a school. A mixture of tough-looking aged beyond their years types… and those sweet faced, haven't lost the baby boy roundness to their faces types. Those are the faces I noticed. Those sweet ones. Those are the faces that have stuck with me. Will stick with me. Because remember where I was: a state prison. These sweet faced boys had committed crimes that were serious enough to get them tried as adults and then sentenced to time in prison. The youngest? He'd just turned 14. We're talking murderers. We're talking bad boys. These boys will become men and prison will be what they know. Granted they are not allowed to have any interaction at all with the adult inmates in the prison. If the juveniles are in the yard, then the adult inmates are not. They do not eat together, they do not even walk across the yard at the same time. They are kept isolated from one another.

But still. These boys are in prison. This is what they know now. They will turn into men (hell, given what they've seen and done, it's really not right to call them "boys" anymore anyway) and most will spend the majority of their lives behind bars. Some of those who escape that fate will escape it through death. Not many of them are going to go on to be senators or judges or engineers. Oh certainly some will turn things around. They will go on to live the "normal" lives the rest of us lead. Maybe help save some other kid some other time in some other place. And though some will struggle mightily, they'll remain on the right side of the law. But most of them? Well. Their futures are bleak.

Aren't we proud.

Because we did this. More precisely, we allowed it to happen. Because Hillary had it right: it takes a village. And when the parents aren't around or are incredibly bad influences and the village looks the other way rather than get involved, the village must share in the blame. These kids, in one way or another, have been abandoned by everyone. We failed. We failed in a big, bad, ugly way. We claim to be all about the children and yet we failed these children.

Certainly the same is true of most of the adults in prison, too. Many started out as these boys. Whether they were caught or not, whether their crimes at that age were slightly less severe or just more well hidden, many of the men there started out as these boys. And when they were boys, we failed them, too. We didn't watch out for them, we didn't mentor them, we didn't help them with their homework, we didn't make sure they were going to school and getting dinner and living someplace safe. We didn't love them enough. Shoot, we didn't love them at all. No, much easier to pretend they weren't there.

Aren't we proud.

It's reunion time

I always thought old people had 15 year high school reunions. Turns out I was wrong because mine is this fall and I'm far from old. Live and learn!

Reunions do make you think. I haven't stayed in touch with anyone, so I don't actually have any desire to go. [Now if I was ridiculously famous and strikingly gorgeous, then of course I'd go!!! But as I'm pretty much the exact opposite of both of those things, I think I'll just stay home and study.] To be a fly on the wall, perhaps. After all, who doesn't want to know what's become of all of their classmates? I certainly do. I want to know who's done what and who's doing what and who's where and all that stuff. Lucky for me, they're going to be sending out a class directory so I can find all of that out without having to go anywhere near the reunion! Now I just have to hope that most people sent in their information for the directory. After all, they had one for our 10 year, too, and I didn't even respond to that one (or receive it).

Of course, the only directory information they asked for was family and professional. Nothing about schooling. And since pretty much the only thing I've done is go to school (I'm getting pretty good at getting those degrees!), I didn't have much of anything to fill out on the information form. Oh well. I guess that's what happens when you graduate from a rural school. I'm sure the form would look quite different for some perky little city prep school.

Reunions do get you thinking. Both about life then and life now. Distance hasn't really made the "then" part any different for me. I existed on the fringes in high school. I got along with everyone (well, for the most part, there was an exception or two), but didn't really have friends. Sure there were a couple. But they didn't stick. That's always made me a little sad. I'm so jealous of the people I know who have close friendships from their childhoods. I don't even know anyone from my childhood anymore. I don't care about the lack of dating in high school. It's the lack of lasting, life-long friendships that I miss.

Overall though, high school was okay for me. Middle school was Hell. But I survived that (didn't think I would at the time and occasionally look back with some surprise that I made it through) and made it to high school and things there were… well, they were fine. No high drama. Again, I just kind of existed. No one was mean to me. I've never been able to decide if that's because I just didn't encourage meanness in people (that would be the best explanation!), if they didn't notice me enough to be mean, or if people just didn't want to be mean to my brother's sister. Who knows. And really, who cares. Does it really matter? It was 15 years ago and has no bearing on my present life. But sometimes I just wonder about it.

And life now. Having a reunion makes you take stock, see if you're where you thought you'd be, and if not, whether that's okay. Am I where I thought I'd be? Well, to be honest, I never really knew where'd I be. I still detest the "where will you be, what will you being doing in 5/10/x years from now" questions. I don't know. I'll be where life takes me. Granted that sounds rather aimless and unambitious. And I don't feel I'm either of those things. It's just that we can't see the future. We don't know what's going to happen in a year or two or five or even tomorrow. I don't want to have such a rigid life plan that I miss out on the opportunities outside that plan that arise for me. I also don't want to set myself up for the inevitable disappointment. After all, what ever goes entirely by plan?! So I'm in law school at the moment and the plan is still to work in the government (somehow, somewhere, some way). I don't know what opportunities will actually come along by the time I graduate. I want to remain open enough in my plans that I don't miss out on a once in a lifetime type chance to do… whatever! I'm easy. As long as whatever I'm doing makes a difference in some way then I'll be happy.

After all, my overall life plan is really rather simple: I want to save the world. That's not so tough. It's all about the butterfly effect. When you look at it that way, we all (every single last one of us) have the absolute power to change the world. We just have to be careful to use that amazing power for good. If I can look back at my future reunions and be comfortable in the knowledge that I have made some positive difference, then it'll all be good.

What is it about Harry Potter?

The reason for the big break in posts is Harry Potter. With the new book out, I wanted to reread (or in some cases, listen to) the previous five books. It had been years since I'd read them and I just couldn't remember what was going on. Not a good state in which to begin a new Potter book. Though each book has it's main plot, the series is one big plot. In a way, you could view each book as a chapter in one big story. So the fresher the storylines and characters from the previous books are in your mind, the smoother the reading of the latest book. Granted you could do without the review as Rowling does a pretty good job of retelling the major pieces that you really need to know. However, you'll miss out on a lot that way. I can't believe the things I picked up on (in four and five in particular) that I had just completely missed the first time around.

I'm now working on finishing up book six, which is always a good and bad thing. Good because the ends just never disappoint (and get better each time); bad because I'm never ready for a really good book to end (and because I know this one will end darkly as we are approaching the climax of the entire series). I don't have another book in the series to move on to (yet), so how will I get my Harry fix?

And now onto my actual point in posting...

What is it about Harry Potter? What can I possibly say to those who think that these are just silly kids' books to attempt to explain the attraction?

I've tried to keep those questions in mind as I've been going back through these books and reading the new one. And for those of you who remember my long "essays" on Buffy, the two have a lot in common. Yes, the boy wizard and the vampire slayer both get to me for some of the same reasons.

Remember Buffy's gift? Love was her gift, remember? Her ability to love others was her gift. It's what made her different from (and better than) your average slayer and from all those she fought. Well, Harry's greatest strength and protection is love. Even though he is supposed to be a particularly talented wizard, his greatest strength is that despite everything he's had to endure, he is still able to love. That turns out to be what gives him his greatest strength and his greatest protection. And given all they have in common, it is what truly distinguishes him from his greatest enemy.

Friends. Though different demons over the years made fun of Buffy's little Scooby gang, it is her friends that kept her alive, kept her going. Her determination to save the world was in large part because that was how she could save her friends. Well, that's Harry, too. He has these friends that he would do anything to protect. He teaches them (remember those training sessions with Buffy and Dawn? Well, Harry taught a whole class of his fellow students) in order to help them help themselves. He loves them and wants them to survive, and so he does what he can to give them the tools to both protect themselves and help him with the war.

Also, those friends love him, too. They help him and support him. They plan with him, they study with him, they research new evils with him. They're very much his Scooby Gang. They would not betray him and they have his back no matter what.

Good vs. Evil. We all know there is good and evil in the world. What makes one win over the other? How does one side triumph? Will good always win in the end? Or does it just depend on who's fighting on which side? Do wins last forever or is it a constantly re-emerging fight? Is everything predetermined or do we have true choices, can we affect the outcome? Buffy and Harry both deal with every one of these questions, and what's more, they both answer them pretty much the same way.

Isms. I think Buffy did deal with different stereotypes over the years. Racism, sexism, etc. Harry does, too. There is a lot on racism in Harry. Between muggle-borns and half bloods and mixed species (there's a half giant and a werewolf fighting on the good side), the message is pretty loud and clear: it's not your ancestry that matters, it's what you do in life that makes you who you are. You can absolutely rise above the stereotypes.

Family. Buffy and Harry both show us that you don't have to have blood ties in order to have a family, and that often it's our families of creation that are more "family-like" and special to us than our families of birth. Being born to a lousy family or having a lousy childhood is no excuse for anything. You can create a strong, loving, supporting family from the special friends you make in life. [And there's your Rent tie in, too!]

Guts and brains. Buffy and Harry both show us that a huge part of the equation is our willingness and ability to stand up. Having the guts to act. Knowing enough to trust our instincts (and learning to hone those instincts). It's not all book smarts. Willow and Hermione are the academic stars, but neither is the star of the show. Why? Because it's not all about the brainwork. What's the saying? No guts, no glory. Rules are a good thing. They keep order, they guide us, they make things predictable. But sometimes, you have to be willing to break the rules. Sometimes because the end justifies the means and sometimes because the rules are just wrong. Buffy and Harry are the rule breakers. Oftentimes they do what they have to do to get the job done. You need the brains in your Scooby gang, but the one with the guts is going to be the leader of that group every time.

On top of all of this (and much more, but I don't want this post to turn into a book all its own), Rowling is a good writer. There aren't time gaps between books. One book will leave Harry at the end of summer term in June and the next book will pick up with Harry over summer break. The kids were 10/11 when the books started and are now (in book 6) 16/17. As you read through the books, you really see them growing up. And what I've found fairly impressive is that the writing itself seems to grow with the characters.

There is a lot of detail in these books. And through it all Rowling has kept her stuff straight. Her characters and settings don't sloppily alter as we go, they stay true to themselves throughout. It's really quite impressive.

There are more specifics, more details, from the six books that could further explain my enjoyment of these books, but between spoilers and space, I'll skip that for now. As much as I want the seventh book now in order to see what happens next with Harry et al., in a way I'm okay with a delay because I've really enjoyed this series and will be sad to see it end with the next book.. I can't remember the last time I read a series that got better, stronger, more intriguing with each new book. That is a rare thing in the book world today and another reason that I am so drawn to this series.

For those who have seen the movies and have enjoyed them, trust me when I say that they've got nothing on the books. As good as I think the movies are (and how often do you say that about a beloved book turned movie??), the books are head and shoulders above them. The books are just so much more.

Le Tour de France

Who would have thought that I'd be so fascinated by the Tour? And no, this does not fall into the "I'll watch anything" category.

Because see, I am just fascinated by these guys. They're amazing. Also, as I watched and listened (there was a live radio broadcast online each day), I learned so much. The commentators talked about all kinds of things: the history of the Tour, the professional histories of the different riders and teams, the bikes, the roles of the different members of a team, the feeding stations, and the French countryside, to name just a few topics.

"But it dawned on me that the Tour’s great lesson is to push forward, always forward. There’s always a way. You just have to keep looking for it." (From Martin Dugard's 7/13/05 active.com Tour blog entry Bike Spike -- almost.) You have to want it and you have to be willing to work for it. And then, anything is possible.

And yes, of course, I'm also interested in Lance's story. That wasn't why I started watching. I saw that the Tour was on OLN, watched one day, and was completely hooked for the rest of the three weeks. I'll watch again next year. Next year when Lance will not be there. So it is not a Lance obsession that drew me in.

However, since we're talking about Lance, what is it about him? I read an editorial in the Times the other day that had a big hint of an answer. He plays offense. He doesn't sit around and wait to see what's going to happen. He doesn't just react, respond. The man has a plan. Always. He starts a year in advance and he spends the year training and his team spends the year training and as a result, they're well known as one of the best (many say The Best) team in the world. And to prove it, Lance now as 80-some yellow jerseys and 7 straight Tour victories to his name.

And let us remember that he did this after being diagnosed with testicular cancer, which had spread to his lungs and brain. Yes, his brain. How many people survive brain cancer? Though I don't have the stats in hand, I know the answer is "not many." And yet, there he is with his 7 Tour wins. That, to me, is amazing.

Was it a miracle? Was it determination? Mind over matter? Or just pure luck? Well, those questions can never be answered. We just know that this is what has happened. And it's amazing to me.

Since my current obsession is Rent the movie, let's tie them together. Here's a line from one of the songs "people living with… not dying from disease." That's Lance. Not living with, of course, as he is now disease free. But when he found out, when he was diagnosed (Oct. 2, 1996, just in case anyone has forgotten), he didn't sit down to die. He didn't decide that it was a life sentence for him. He was determined to do everything he could to overcome that cancer. And—whether it was luck or attitude or straight out miracle—he did just that.

Furthermore, he hasn't forgotten. His Foundation educates and supports those with cancer and works to change related health care legislation. He has a plan and he's following it. He's on the offense, not the defense.

If more of the teams in the Tour would take a page out of Lance and the Discovery Channel Team's book, the Tour could be even more fascinating next year. Imagine all those teams on the offense. We could be completely blown away by the winners and even more records could be broken. Oh what a Tour it would be.

These guys on their bikes

Do you see yourself having a nine-to-five job?

Lance Armstrong: "[Laughing] No, never, I don't see that. But, you know, life is funny and sometimes you have to do things you don't want to do. But, nine to five sounds really painful." (from Dan Osipow's 7/17 entry in the Tour Notebook on the Discovery Team's website)

See, I'm not the only one who feels that way about the nine-to-five world. Of course, Lance Armstrong managed to find a non-nine-to-five gig that he excels at and that has really paid off for him. Wish I could do that.

For those who don't already know it, I am loving the Tour de France! I've become completely obsessed with it. I haven't had anything to say here (yet) mostly because there are plenty of experts out there with recap blogs. No need to hear it from me! But never fear, I will have something to say about it soon enough.

Justice O'Connor update/correction

No, I'm not going to rant on about anything. I recently picked up on a detail of Justice O'Connor's resignation that I had somehow missed before. I made a comment in my previous post about the possibility of the Court returning with an empty seat this fall. However, that isn't likely to happen. O'Connor's resignation is "effective upon the nomination and confirmation" of her successor. So I just wanted to correct that.

Bush announced his nomination last night. I'm sure those who know me expect a rant about that. But no, not today. Frankly, I don't know enough about him. All I know about him is that the Dems held up his nomination to the federal bench. That doesn't make me want to join his fan club, but it also isn't enough for me to automatically condemn him.

One comment I will make is that you cannot necessary judge the person based on the cases he/she has tried. Though I do know that he has appeared before the SC as an attorney arguing for the overturn of Roe v. Wade, I also know that as an attorney that's what you do. You argue the case before you for the side that employs you. Though I'm sure there are many prochoicers who wouldn't take the job that would land them in that position, I'm sure there are also some who would take the job anyway because of what the job is. So I personally need to know a little more about him as a person and as a justice before I can know for certain how I feel about him as a possible SC justice.

Live8 update

From http://www.live8live.com/:

The greatest act of mass advocacy in political history.

We invited you on a long walk and you went all the way. You are a great peaceful army of 3 billion who walked for those who could barely crawl. And you won.

From http://www.one.org/g8countdown.html:

On July 8, 2005, the leaders of the Group of Eight (G8) committed to a comprehensive package of aid to Africa. British Prime Minister Tony Blair announced the G8 would

• increase aid to Africa by $25 billion, more than a doubling of 2004 levels;
  
• increase global assistance by around $50 billion per year by 2010;
  
• provide near-universal access to HIV/AIDS treatment drugs;
  
• cancel the debt of some of the world's poorest nations; and
  
• address trade reforms in the near future.
  

And now from me:

I never expected these concerts to inform or educate the entire world. However, "more than 1 million fans united for 10 free concerts across the globe" (see CNN). Then there were all those couch potatoes at home (and who knows how many of us there were). Also, AOL will continue to have the concerts available through the end of the summer (you can watch videos of the concerts or listen to them via AOL Radio).

That's an awful lot of education and awareness. That's an awful lot of people who learned something they didn't know before. And though not everyone watching signed the petitions that were sent to the G8, a healthy number of them did.

I do agree that the media failed on this one. I do not agree that the concerts themselves did. The goal was to raise awareness and to educate people around the world. Reports say that there were over 1 million people in attendance. For those who didn't attend or watch, what you may not realize is that you could not be there and you could not have MTV or VH1 on without learning something. There were speakers explaining what was going on, there were giant TVs airing bits from MTV and one.org that explain the point, the goals. There were screens up that showed the members of the G8 as the performers were on stage. There were ticker tape type screens that were constantly running with messages about the day. Again, though the media didn't manage to educate those who didn't attend or watch, the organizers and performers (and MTV and VH1) did an excellent job of educating those who did.

Then there are the actual results from the G8, which I listed above.

As always, this is not a one-time event. We can't expect one day of concerts to be the end. MTV and VH1 both aired uninterrupted footage of some of the highlights this weekend. MTV has a next steps show airing. The white one bracelets are popping up all over the place. Though some say the plastic-bracelet craze has become too hip to actually be helpful, I disagree with that, too. Yes, some collect and wear them just because they're hip. However, they still start conversations. People still ask what this color or that supports or represents. As long as the bracelets continue to provoke the questions, then I say they're still helping.

If you still don't really know what this is all about, check out the MTV and VH1 news pages. Go to one.org and the LIVE 8 website to learn more about it all. Because I agree with the comment from D, "Your point about making a gesture, no matter how small, is valid. Perhaps mine can be paying attention to what's going on in the world around me."

What is it they say on NBC? "The more you know..."

That Dumbledore...

It is our choices... that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.

And if you don't know who Dumbledore is, not only are you not reading the right books, but I'm also going to make you ask!

Is there anything they won't do?

MTV's the '70s House. These kids didn't know where they were going or what they were going to be doing when they signed up for this show. Seriously. They showed up at the address they were given to discover the '70s House. They had to hand over everything modern--cell phones, CDs, laptops, even hair and makeup products ("what will I do without my makeup" one of the girls whined). They even had to change their clothes. Oh, the horror! They have Pong and 8 tracks. And the reward for tonight's winning team is a fondue party. The one kid's response: what's fondue? Come on! What city doesn't have a Melting Pot?!

Who does this? Who signs up for... who knows what, who knows where, for who knows how long? Presumably they've given up work and/or school, not to mention family and friends, for an indeterminate amount of time and they don't even know why.

Did I mention that they arrived not even knowing what they're playing for? And I admit I completely missed it when Dawn, the House Mom/cohost, filled them in on that little detail.

Spontaneity is one thing, but this just strikes me as ever so much more than that.

I suppose a future post should answer this question: is there anything I won't watch? (Though I'm guessing you can answer that one all on your own!)

It's going to be an ugly summer

What a time for Sandra Day O'Connor to retire. Right before the 4th of July weekend. A time when we should all be remembering what our country stands for, a time when Congress is on a break for the holiday. Or are supposedly on a break for the holiday, that is. Seems many managed to break into their holiday celebrations in order to do the Sunday-morning talk show circuit.

Democrats are saying that the nominee must answer all of their questions.

Republicans are saying that certain questions may not be asked.

The Republicans are back to talking about the nuclear option. I guess the compromise reached a couple of months ago (a compromise that was not a victory for this country, regardless of what the Dems were saying) means nothing.

And of course, let's not forget that this is the 4th of July weekend. A weekend of war movies and fireworks. A weekend to remember how we all came to be in this country, why this country was founded in the first place.

Freedom for all, right? Well, not really. Our founders didn't want to follow the rules of England anymore, but they didn't really want all people to be free. Just the rich white folks. And even then, "freedom" was only as defined by those same rich white folks. We tend to forget that little factoid.

African Americans were slaves (and don't fool yourself into thinking that African Americans in the North were living the good life). Women had zero rights. And actually, women were given rights as citizens after the slaves were freed, owning property, and voting.

So back to the Supreme Court. Conservative that she is, Sandra Day is actually often the swing vote that ends up giving us many of the rights we have today. Her vote, for example, has kept Roe v. Wade from being overturned. Though the current administration would certainly deserve another conservative appointee who ends up voting with the liberals on many big votes, there's certainly no guarantee that that will happen this time. It's just as likely—actually even more so—that we'll end up with someone who will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade.

I know that's a great thing to some. But honestly, I don't get that. I do get not believing in abortion. I totally get that. I do not, however, get letting some over-privileged folks in Washington decide whether or not a 16-year old girl who's pregnant with her own brother (with, not by… though by works here, too) has to have that baby. Or whether a woman who's been raped has to have the resulting baby. Or whether a middle-school girl who's looking for a little unconditional love should have to have her baby. Or whether a woman who already has more kids than she and her husband can emotionally, physically, or financially handle has to have her baby.

And see, the thing is, it doesn't work to say that some women are allowed to have an abortion and others are not. It doesn't work to say that the 16-year old who's been raped by her father can abort, but the tipsy college girl can't. It doesn't work to say that the responsible family-woman who took precautions but got in trouble anyway and just cannot afford another mouth to feed can, but the 20-something who didn't bother with protection can't.

It's legal or it's not. It doesn't work to say "sometimes" and then attach a bunch of strings. It doesn't work to say it depends. Because to say it depends, well, who decides? More over-privileged, mostly white, mostly male judges? That would never work. Not to mention the logistics. These are decisions that have to be made much more quickly than the court system can handle.

No one has to agree with me. I never expect that the whole world will see things my way (oh what a different world it would be if they did!). All I want is for people to think about things. I see so many who make knee-jerk decisions on really huge, complicated issues. And given the whole never leaving school thing (in other words, given that I'm generally surrounded by a wealth of really, really young people), I see so many who have never actually decided for themselves. Instead, they believe whatever it is that their parents believe. That frustrates me to no end. They're in school, the whole point is to think and to learn. And yet, there they all are, spouting off things they've heard their parents say without thinking about them at all.

So anyway, none of that was my point. My point is, the woman just announced her retirement a few days ago, and Congress is already doing it's thing. They're already puffing up their chests and arguing via talk shows. There's no nominee yet. There's no hint of a nominee yet. But they're already putting on the holier than thou act and saying how it's going to be.

The Republicans want to rush it. I have enough issues with life-time appointments. If we're going to have them, they certainly should not be filled via a rushed process. Take your time and get the right person in there. No rushing. The Court will be just fine if it comes back one woman less come fall.

How do they do that?!

Fireworks displays are amazing to me. How on earth do they do that? Smilie faces, flowers, waterfalls of light flowing through the night sky, and all of those colors. Not only how do they do that, but who does that?

Engineers? Mathematicians? Who? They have to be incredibly skilled. Besides the fact that it's all incredibly beautiful, it's also timed to perfection. The explosions are in perfect time to the music.

There are stories every year about idiots in their backyards who get hurt with their fireworks. Those backyard displays aren't complicated and they last for 5 or 10 minutes. The professional displays last for 30 minutes or more and are at least as complicated as your average ballet. When was the last time you heard about one of the pros getting hurt?

Another question, how long does it take to plan something like that? It's fascinating to me. How it signifies all that the 4th is supposed to signify is beyond me, but I'll take it!

Happy 4th!

Keep on rockin' in a free world

Sometimes enough voices can change the world. Voices in the form of signatures on a petition or letters to politicians or ballots on election day or songs on stages around the world. I heard someone on TV the other day making fun of the Live8 concerts. This guy seemed to think it ridiculous that the point was not to raise money but was instead "just to raise awareness." He seemed to be completely missing the point. What would be the purpose of sending suitcases full of money to the Big 8 on the golf course in Scotland next week? What would that accomplish? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

There was a CNN poll up today asking if people think the Live8 concerts will help to eradicate poverty. Last time I checked, the answer was overwhelmingly no. I disagree with that.

People seem to be missing the awareness and education angle. Raising the awareness of people around the world to the situation in Africa today so that they can add their names to the petitions that will be sent is not a pointless waste of time. Imagine the piles and piles of paper with name after name after name. The names of people who are asking these 8 men to forgive the debt of a nation in trouble. The names of the constitutes of these 8 powerful men. How will those piles of names affect these 8 men? I don't know. We'll have to just wait and see on that one.

Although, the papers today did include a hint. Tony Blair is the chairman for this year's meeting. And more than one English official was quoted saying that this kind of attention, this kind of pressure, can and does make a difference. They went on to say that the pressure must continue. It cannot be a one-time thing. People must stay involved and continue to lobby their representatives to help do away with poverty.

I find it quite impossible to believe that a voice as big and united as that of the Live8 concerts will have no effect. Even if "all" it ever does is spread connectedness and goodwill through the citizens of the world, how is that nothing? How is that unimportant? Even if "all" it ever does is to educate thousands of people around the world, how is that nothing? Education is never a waste of time. Education is never pointless.

Also, let's be realistic. Just because they didn't sell tickets, just because they didn't air an 800 number for all of the viewers around the world to call and pledge some cash, that does not mean that this event is not raising any money. I'm sure they sold all kinds of gear at each of the concert sites. So far they have 2 songs from the London concert available for download at iTunes, with the proceeds going to Live8. That alone will raise a nice chunk of change. And I'm guessing there will be more; I’m guessing there will be more downloads or CDs in stores; I'm guessing there will at least be a DVD of clips. Come on, Pink Floyd was reunited on stage for the first time since 1981, Madonna rocked the house, Stevie Wonder was amazing (as was Adam Levine, of course, when he joined Stevie on stage... as he was when he took the stage with his own band), and let's not forget Greenday's version of We Are the Champions. Whether you support the cause or not, who doesn't want copies of all of the above?!

Some ask why they should send their money to Africa, why the G8 should make any efforts on behalf of Africa. Not our country, not our problem, they say. The problem with that argument is that we're all together in this. This is the 21st Century, we are a global community. As such, we are all interconnected and interdependent. To quote Will Smith (yes, really), this whole effort is a Declaration of Interdependence.

So many people are so convinced that what they do or say doesn't matter. How can a society as selfish and self-centered as ours be so convinced that what they do and say doesn't matter? I say if you're going to be selfish, then stick with it: of course you matter! Of course you can make a difference!

As I said before, this is not a dress rehearsal. There are no do-overs. If you want to make a difference—in any way, for any cause—then today is the day. It doesn't have to be a big gesture. It can be small and very cheap, free even. Talk to someone you wouldn't normally talk to; smile at someone you wouldn't normally notice; discuss something important from the news over the water cooler, and I'm not talking about the latest episode of Desperate Housewives; write a check to an organization that supports your favorite cause; write a letter to an editor; find a petition online and sign it. It's not hard. It doesn't have to be global or even national. It just has to happen. You just have to do it.

As fantastic as the big gestures are, the little gestures can be just as huge. Making someone feel as though they matter, taking a stand for what you believe, sharing what you know with others, and learning what they know that you don't. All of these things are important. All of these things matter. All of these things together (all of us together) can and will make a difference. You just have to take that step and do it. You're not too busy. You're not too stupid. You're not too jaded. We can all smile. We can all talk. We can all listen. And that's really all it takes.

How much is enough

Everyone who knows me knows I'm big-time prochoice. I totally believe in a woman's right to choose. My gym is owned by someone who gives lots of money to anti-choice organizations. Not the owner of the franchise where I am a member, but the guy who owns the who shebang. I like this gym, I'm comfortable there, and when I actually go on a regular basis, it does work for me. I can't even get myself to walk through the door of another gym. I'm too self-conscious, too aware of myself to do that. So what do I do? Give up my gym for my beliefs? Or keep my gym and support my beliefs in other ways?

It seems the whole world is owned by about 10 white men. And those 10 white men are against everything I believe in. So what do I do? Stop buying newspapers and magazines? Stop buying crackers and cereal? Or do I buy what I want to buy, and then support my beliefs in other ways?

Money is power. We all know that. And when enough people withhold their money, the world can change. So if enough of us withhold our money from the 10 men who rule the world, maybe they will make some changes in who and what they support.

On the flip side, giving money can also change the world. So maybe if we go to the gym we want to go to and buy the crackers we want eat, and then make sure to give our money to the causes about which we care the most, well, then maybe we can still change the world. Besides, as I mentioned before, pretty much everything is owned by the 10 white men. What on earth would I eat and wear and where would I work out and what would I read if I stopped buying any of their products or services?

I know some think I'm a hypocrit for continuing to go to the gym that I go to. I guess that's their issue to deal with. Not mine. I've made my peace with it. I give my money to those I believe in and I join the phonebanks when I can and I sign the petitions and I never miss an opportunity to vote and I write to my representatives and I do what I can to support the things I believe in.

For me, that is enough.

This is not a dress rehearsal

Life should NOT be a journey to the grave
with the intention of arriving safely
in an attractive and well preserved body,
but rather to skid in sideways,
cigar in one hand,
favorite beverage in the other,
body thoroughly used up,
totally worn out,
and screaming,
"WOO HOO, what a ride!!"

Remember: This is not a dress rehearsal!

The incredibly kind and interesting nurse practitioner who gives me my allergy shots shared this with me today. Of course, she doesn't entirely agree with the drinking and smoking part! But the sentiment is spot on.

Flashback: Tsunami

Just because it happened half a year ago is not a reason to forget. We need to remember. So when I came across something I wrote about it last January, I decided to go ahead and post it, with only slight modifications.

That MTV...

Intellectually, we all know what happened with the Tsunami: everything was destroyed, whole villages, towns, cities, families, everything. The coastline has been forever changed, the terrain is different. It's a different world there now. We all know that. But here's the part we don't think about:

Everything is gone.

I saw a special on MTV about the whole mess. (Yes, really. For those of you who are a bit, shall we say, "beyond the MTV generation," MTV has some excellent news specials. Yes, the VJs tend to be, well, odd. But a few of the news people are excellent.) A few international MTV folks went to the area in mid-January. They each went to a different country. The point was to see, post-Tsunami, what it's really like and how the people are doing. And whether all the money we've given is getting to them. There was a lot of tragedy. Devastation. Destruction. Death. Etc. And again, the reminder:

Everything is gone.

At one point, one of the MTV guys (I think it was Gideon Yago, one of the good ones) was in this huge... well, I guess it was a temporary orphanage. Or perhaps school? I'm not entirely sure. There were a ton of kids there (100? 200?) for an art class. Art therapy, really. Kids of all ages painting and coloring and drawing. It's one of the ways they were helping the kids to deal with the tragedy and begin to move on. But again:

Everything is gone.

Think about what that means. All the paperwork. Marriage licenses, birth certificates, everything. For the orphaned children who are too young to speak, they have no names. The names their parents gave them are lost. They'll never know what their parents named them. They'll never even know their parents' names. We take it so for granted. It's the little things that we forget. But at the same time...

Given the pictures of flowers the children were drawing and the bright colors they were using and their smiling faces and infectious laughter, the show was surprisingly uplifting. Everywhere these MTV people went, there were kids. And though we certainly saw clips of sad, blank children, it only took someone going over to them with a hug or a game or a smile to have them smiling and laughing, genuinely having fun. The adults they spoke to were just as amazing. So nice. So willing to share a part of themselves. As one of the MTV people put it, since it happened to so many, there's really no sense of "woe is me" with people. They're all in the same boat. It's amazing the way the human being bounces back. So in the end, I guess the lesson is this:

Everything is not gone. The human spirit remains. And that is more important than any piece of paper.

Because so many have forgotten

democracy

SYLLABICATION: de·moc·ra·cy
NOUN: 1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives. 2. A political or social unit that has such a government. 3. The common people, considered as the primary source of political power. 4. Majority rule. 5. The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. Fourth Edition. 2000.

and now back to me

By the people, of the people, for the people. You cannot force democracy onto a country. The people of that country must choose it for themselves. When one forces a government on a people, that's not democracy. What's more, it's against much of what we're supposed to believe in and stand for in this country.

Currently our administration wants to force democracy on the world. They defend themselves by claiming that we're bringing freedom to the world. The problem is that imposing our beliefs on others is not freedom. Forcing people to do what we want them to do because we think we know best, because we think we're smarter than they are, because we're so self-centered that we believe that our way is always the best way is not freedom.

Monkeys on trial... again

So they've put evolution back on trial.

Besides the fact that this whole thing is just dumb, there's something I've never, ever understood about this argument (this argument being evolution versus "intelligent design" or whatever they're calling it this week). Evolution is a scientific theory that is taught in science classes. What's wrong with that? "Intelligent design," on the other hand, is a religious theory; how exactly does that fit into a science class?

And let's look at this quote:

"Detractors also argue that evolution is invalid science because it cannot be tested or verified and say it is inappropriately being indoctrinated into education and discouraging consideration of alternatives."

And how exactly can "intelligent design" be tested? What, some guy wrote it down in a book a long time ago, ergo it's true? Hey, guess what, same thing happened with evolution. That's it, question answered, trial over!

I don't even have the patience for these kinds of arguments. People are homeless, starving, being killed by suicide bombers, 13 year olds are pregnant, mothers are trading their children for cars and/or money, we don't have a cure for cancer, there's a whole universe to explore and discover but we don't seem too interested in funding NASA, the US has a disgusting infant mortality rate, and I'm too depressed to even go on... and these people are spending how many hours and how many dollars arguing over evolution? Why? What's it going to help? How many homeless people will it shelter? How many lives will it enrich? How many children will it save?

Now granted, I'm no saint. I certainly don't spend my days and nights rescuing abandoned puppies (though a few friends and I did spend a couple hours one night trying to "rescue" a kitten from a drain; but that's another story...) and feeding homeless mothers, and yet, I'm not quite the drain on the system that this foolishness is.

And one final note, it really makes me sick that people are so damned impressed with themselves that they think it's just unfathomable that they're the result of evolution (a "process" I think the article called it). You know, if they'd go work in a soup kitchen for a while, they just might find the meaning that their lives are apparently lacking.

Do you believe in the goodness of people?

Do you believe in the goodness of people?

When you step off the subway and walk past the homeless lining the tunnel, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When you turn on the news and see the latest person sent to death row, this one for blowing up an office building with a daycare, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When you read a history book that details the atrocities of the death camps in Germany in WWII, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When you listen to the radio and hear of the latest suicide bombers on the other side of the world, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When you walk down the street to work and watch as person after person walks by a young mother struggling to get her baby’s stroller through a cafe entrance, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When you drive down the highway and swerve to avoid the trash thrown out the window of the car in front of you, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When you go to the grocery store and see a man grab his young son by the arm and scream at him for tasting a grape, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When the kids (not your own) ask why they didn’t have more gifts from you under the tree this Christmas, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When the New Year arrives and the poor are still poor, the hungry are still hungry, the unloved are still unloved, and the forgotten are still forgotten, do you believe in the goodness of people?

Do you believe in the goodness of people?

When you see a new mother smile at her baby, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When you hear the wonder and joy in a child’s voice upon seeing their first rainbow, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When the parking garage attendant lets you out with a wink and a wave on Christmas Eve, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When a stranger catches your favorite hat as it blows away from you down the street, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When a man drives through a blizzard to take insulin to a stranger, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When you discover that your neighbor is the one who’s been clearing the snow from your walk every morning, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When you sit glued to the news in the days after 9/11 and see the spontaneous memorials and tributes from around the world, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When a stranger lets you have their place in line because you look tired, do you believe in the goodness of people?

When the New Year arrives and the flag still waves, do you believe in the goodness of people?

Crash (into me)

All I can think of when I hear the title of this movie is the song by the Dave Mathews Band. I hear Dave singing "crash into me" over and over and over. Which is not at all a bad thing. It goes very well with Don Cheadle's line about us all living such isolated lives that we crash into each other just for the contact.

Anyway, I did not love this movie as a few of my friends did. Nor did I feel an overwhelming sense of hope at the end (just the opposite, actually). To understand why I felt this way, let's start with some comments from the critics.

The director dares us to assume we know these people, and then neatly offers conflicting evidence (Ty Burr, Boston Globe). The missing word that would make me agree with this is tries. The director tries to neatly offer conflicting evidence. The problem was that it didn't work. Everything these people did made them live up to the stereotype that had been assigned to them.

Haggis is telling parables, in which the characters learn the lessons they have earned by their behavior (Roger Ebert). That was his goal, I will agree with that. However, the characters in this movie didn't manage to learn much of anything. One particularly clueless character was Brendan Frasier's DA. The most surprising thing about his character is that there wasn't even a chance for him to learn anything. It's as though that part of the film was left out.

If there is hope in the story, it comes because as the characters crash into one another, they learn things, mostly about themselves. Almost all of them are still alive at the end, and are better people because of what has happened to them (Roger Ebert). Roger Ebert's review seems to be a summary of what the film set out to do. However, quite simply, it failed. These characters don't learn things about themselves. There's little to no growth involved in this film, for any of the varied cast of characters.

I believe anyone seeing it is likely to be moved to have a little more sympathy for people not like themselves (Roger Ebert). Though I do believe that this is one of the very lofty and admirable goals of the movie, I also believe that the film failed on this score. I suspect that what many will get from this movie is that the stereotypes they hold are absolutely true and that the sympathy would therefore be lost on those people who are different from them. And that leaves me much more scared than hopeful.

Don Cheadle as another harried cop forced into corruption… (Michael Wilmington, Tribune Movie Critic). Don Cheadle's character was forced into nothing. He had choices available to him. That he took the corrupt path was the easy way out, which, quite frankly, works only to make the character live up to the stereotypes associated with both his race and his profession.

I must admit that the acting was fantastic. I will confess to being a Sandra Bullock fan in order to say that I really disliked her (well, her character) in this movie. She did the yuppy, snobby, white, rich bitch perfectly. The soundtrack added to the movie without being distracting. The characters and the story lines do still manage to be moving. There were tears. Overall, though, I'm just not a big fan of this movie. That so many others are had me confused for a bit, but then I found a theory for that, too (I have lots of theories, as you'll see if I continue writing this blog and you continue reading it): the Oprah Phenomenon.

The Oprah Phenomenon defined: If Oprah loves something, then I do, too! Remember that little thing called Oprah's Book Club (the original one, before she started with the classics)? An Oprah pick was an automatic bestseller. The thing is, a lot of those books are really mediocre books and others are outright bad. But there are many, many people out there who can't see that much less admit it. Because if Oprah likes it, it must be good! Heaven forbid we think for ourselves; heaven forbid we actually act and think and feel and react as individuals. It's like those lit freaks (and no, I'm not saying that everyone who reads literature is a freak; I'm speaking of a certain subsection of the readers of the world) who absolutely refuse to dislike anything labeled a classic. I read pretty much everything. And I read a lot. I'm (over)educated; others claim that I'm intelligent. And I do like some of the classics. But I really, really dislike some of them, too. For instance, I'm not at all ashamed or hesitant to admit that I hate Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. That is an awful book. Horrible. "Once upon a time and a very good time it was there was a moocow coming down along the road and…" I promptly fell asleep.

Yes, I know that's just my opinion. And by rolling your eyes and screaming that at your computer screen, you've just realized my point, so give yourself a pat on the back! This movie has fallen victim to the Oprah Phenomenon. Smart people who know these things (aka movie critics) say it's really good and I should like it and I'll learn to be a better person just by watching it. And therefore, the masses fall in line, do what they're told, and go on to say that the movie's really good, they like it, and they learned to be a better person by watching it.

I say, think it over. Really think about it. Do you really believe Sandra is all warm and fuzzy at the end? Do you really believe she's going to start hanging at the mall with her new buddy? Or do you believe, as I do, that not too long after that ankle heals, she'll be back to griping about the lazy maid not emptying the dishwasher of the clean dishes before dawn every morning?

I'll give you a break and not walk you through every character. If you've already seen this movie, do yourself a favor and think about it again. If you haven't seen it, go ahead and go. Just keep a really open mind. Try not to be influenced by what you've been told (by the critics who liked it or by me) and just see what your gut reaction to the movie really is. And remember, a movie's just not the same without popcorn.