Lost part 10: Pushing the button

So there are two people. Person A wants to push a button. He has no proof that pushing the button will provide him any safety or sanctuary. He does have faith however, that pushing the button is the right thing to do. His faith gives him a sense of peace in an otherwise harsh unfair world.

Person B pushed the button for a long time. At some point his faith in the button slipped. He lost the sense of comfort that pushing the button provided.

What I find irrational is that Person B feels he has the right to stop Person A from pushing the button. He is hostile to Person A's believe. He would destroy the button if he possibly could.

I don't want to push the Button, but I think it is wrong to attack Person A's right to push the button. Now if Person A attacks me... then all bets are off.

Lost part 9: childhood

In the episode 23 Palms we are treated to a glimpse into the life and background of Eko. Eko is Nigerian and as a child warlords came to his village and put a gun in his younger brother's hand and force him on penalty of death to shoot an old man. Eko takes the gun from his brother and kills the old man himself and then the warlords take him with them out of the village. This is a common practice in war-torn parts of Africa. These warlords need fighters for their armies and by forcing children to commit atrocities and taking them form their homes they separate the children physically and psychologically from their families.

Fast-forward twenty years and we find Eko did save his brother. His brother is now a priest and Eko is a drug running murder. I frequently debate with myself how much of a role nurture plays in personality development. I talk to my friends with multiple children and hear them say that this child was outgoing at birth and this one was shy from the beginning. Or this baby was happy and that one was fussy right from the moment they are born. Yet when I look at the people I know, the happiest and most content adults had the happiest most content childhood.

Of course it is impossible to know how much of what I perceive as a happy childhood is honest and how much is for show. I personally was a miserable child but I spent most of my life trying to hide this fact. But I think there is definitely a correlation between childhood environment and adult personality.

It is interesting that I hear a number of my friends with children talking about parenting philosophies. I don't think organic food, cloth dippers, or no TV will make your child happy in the long run. It is the time you spend with him/her that will make him/her a strong, happy, balanced person. It is all about balance and love.

Lost part 8: luxury and convenience

In season two of Lost we are introduced to a whole new cast of characters. These folks were in the tail section of the plane and crashed on the opposite end of the island from our main settlers. In practical terms these "tailies" had it much worse then the majority of the cast in lost who were in the center of the plane. The tail section of the plane landed in the ocean near the water so the survivors from this section didn't have access to the material form the plane to build shelters, start fires, keep themselves clean and healthy. They didn't have a doctor to treat wounds or a hunter to get them fresh meat.

In practical term I think that the main cast had it pretty tough living on the island but when compared to the tailies they living a dream life. It makes me think about everything we have in life and take for granted. We talk about luxuries like they were necessities. I always say I couldn't live without a computer/internet access... but I think I could. In fact I could live without allot of things that I enjoy on a daily basis. Yet I don't think I live an excessive life. Some people would look at my life and call me frugal and wasteful. Others would call me excessive and outlandish. In an age of conspicuous consumption it is hard to draw a line.

I am grateful for all excesses I enjoy in my life.

Lost part 7: Science/Faith

One of the many themes that run through Lost is the concept of faith. In the first episode of the second season the writers of the Lost present us with contrast of faith verses science. In flashbacks we are shown how Jack meets his wife. She is in a major accident (which coincidentally was the cause of Sharon's father's death). Jack tries to "fix" her but he is unsuccessful and should be paralyzed. Yet her back miraculously heals and she is able to eventually walk, and dance with Jack at their wedding.

I have faith in a greater power. I have a strong belief in a creator or creative force. But I also have a fundamental core-forming confidence in science. I do not think that the two are mutually exclusive. Like just about everything in this world I think the faith/science debate has two sides and those two sides have a complex interplay that humans have not fully comprehended. I know there are people who reject modern medicine and science based on their sense of faith and likewise there are those who reject faith because there are concepts like good that can't be scientifically proven.

I think there is a greater spirit that made the world and the rules of he made it by are called our sciences. It is part of life that is a challenge is trying to understand those science at many micro and macro levels. Those people who discount faith or science are taking the easy way out.

Lost part six: Greater Good

In the Lost episode "The Greater Good" we are shown how and why Sayid ends up on flight 815. Sayid was working with the American CIA trying to stop a terrorist bombing in Australia. He arranges a "chance" meeting between himself and his college roommate to try to stop him taking part in a terrorist bombing. However the CIA officers Sayid is working with are not happy with stopping his roommate from taking part in the bombing; they want a complete disruption of the cell and the recovery of the explosives that Sayid's roommates plan to use in there planned bombing.

At one point the roommate tells Sayid that he is going to be a martyr. He is scared, not because he is afraid to die, but because he believes according to the Koran killing is immoral. Acting as an undercover agent Sayid argues to his friend that killing is acceptable because it is for the greater good. According to Sayid's argument the war in Iraq is illegal and immoral and killing thousands of innocent people and a terrorist act in Australia will disrupt that county's passive acceptance of the war.

I will not deny that I have always felt that there is some legitimacy to the concept of acting in the greater good. Of course the classic example is is it acceptable for a starving man to steal food to survive. I have always agreed that the starving man was justified. However, I don't think that one life is of more value than another. Furthermore, I don't know if basic math really applies when speaking about human lives; meaning it isn't right to kill one person to save three others. As humans we have the right to save our lives but taking another, even to save another is not the providence of and individual person, group or government.

Murder is not a justification for killing. Of course, this is sadly where my personal philosophy take a bend from the major religions of this word. Christianity, Islam, and Judaism all say killing is wrong but partitioners of each of these religions justify there actions based on faith. But that is another blog for another time.

Lost Part five: Special

In the first season of Lost we are introduced to Walt and told he is "special." Basically Walt has the ability to make things happen by seeing them in his mind. He makes a bird appear by think of the bird and throws a knife with the unnatural skill. The show also introduces us to characters who have other "special" ability, like the gift of prophecy or mind reading.

I myself do not have any of these abilities. I have never met anyone who I believe does have these abilities but I know that there are a major percentage of the world that believes in them. I find it amazing that human beings only use 10% of our brain capacity. I always believed special abilities are somehow tied to the mind and our inability to maximize our full potential.

That beings said I often think it is better that we do not use our full potential. The book "Flowers for Algeron" always scared the shit out of me.

Lost part four "the Moth"

In the episode the "The Moth" we are introduced to Charlie. Charlie was the bass player in a one hit wonder band with his brother. He is also addicted to heroin when the plan crashes on the island. John Locke takes Charlie's heroin away from him telling him he is stronger enough to quit. When Charlie asks for his drugs back Locke shows him a Moth struggling to escape from its cocoon in the jungle. Locke explains to Charlie that he could help the Moth escape but he won't because the Moth needs the struggle and the pain to become strong and survive.

This is a very common sentiment; struggle makes us stronger; pain builds character. I don't know if I agree with that. I think when we are in pain or in a difficult place we make worse decisions which ultimately lead us to worse places. This is certainly true with Charlie in this episode of Lost. After the he "learns" his character lesson from Locke we are exposed to another flash back where his brother says some very hurtful and things to him and abandons him. Charlie is hurt and this hurt drives him to try heroin.

If you look at the people who are successful generally they come from stable homes with stable families. The were given love and encouragement as children. The were taught good values in a loving respective environment. Those who have to struggle to survive more fail more often than not. Sure there are exceptions, and those exceptions are very strong and capable. However, I'm a person who likes to play the odds and I think that if more people are better off without pain and suffering and struggle than those things should be avoided.

Lost part three - English Language

I just watched "House of the Rising Sun" which is the first episode of Lost that focuses its flashbacks on Sun and Jin. About one third of the this episode was in Korean with English subtitles. This gives me hope.

This morning on facebook a slight acquaintance of mine posted a number of hateful signs with spelling errors. Things like "English is are only language" or "Obama is a Muslin." I will admit that the irony of these American fascist's poor grammar is entertaining. However, after that moment of humor is past I find myself left with such a feeling of dread that this is what passes for good citizenship.

Then I look at Lost as the number one show in tv and the multicultural cast that was accepted by millions and I feel a bit better about the world.

Lost blog two - leadership

I just finished watching S01E05, the White Rabbit. This is Jack's first flash back episode, also the episode when he decides that he must accept responsibility for leading the survivors of Oceanic flight 815. In this episode Jack has a conversation with Locke about what it takes to be a leader. Jack says "I am not a leader," to which Locke responds "They all treat you like one."

I have spent allot of time in my life contemplating leadership. In the simplest terms a leader is a person with followers. A leader can be competent, strong and intelligent or she can be scattered, weak and stupid but if people follow them they are a leader.

I have often debated whey some people are leaders and others are not. To me there seems to be two types of leaders. The first type of leader is the person who has the ambition to be a leader. The second type of leader is the one who has leadership hoisted onto him. Both are often competent and successful. However, as I see it the ambitious leader is easily corrupted. He is the leader who likes being in control and will compromise his values and his followers to remain in control. In comparison the leader who has leadership forced on her is more willing to share responsibility and reward but make the hard decisions for the best of the group.

I think people like Jack are the best leaders. If you don't want to be the boss but you have a plan and the answers and people follow you you will lead for the best of everyone and not just yourself.

lost part one

So I have decided to re-watch the series lost and do some blogs on some of the interesting themes of the show. I really did enjoy the show and loved the finally. Tonight I watched the pilot and couldn't believe how young/different some of the characters looked.

Hope you enjoy the future thoughts.

One thing that makes you go hum... how comes Sayid couldn't understand what the French woman was saying on her distress call when he lived in Paris. I guess it is just a continuity error... or is it?

in order to create a more perfect union

I find myself this fine morning in conflict. I love the Mets! I also strongly support organized labor. Today there is a conflict between the Mets and the MLB players union and I must choose a side.

Last week one of the Mets, Francisco Rodriguez, players viciously attacked the father of his girlfriend, a 53 year old man. He was arrested and suspended for two days (during his arraignment). He returned to the team, pitched one inning and after the game it was discovered he had a torn ligament in his thumb necessitating season ending surgery.

The Mets reacted to this season ending surgery by invalidating the clause in Rodriguez's contract which guarantees his payment. This means that the player will only be paid if the team chooses to let him play, if they choose to suspend him or release him he does not get paid. If he does pitch for the team next season he will earn the salary that he was previously guaranteed.

The Player's Association has filed a grievance against the Mets. This of course has lead to the comments of "Unions are Destroying America." I, like many, think the actions of the Player's Union are wrong. But I, unlike many, do not blame the union. I blame the people who put the Player's Union in the position it is in, the folks with the power and influence.

I have worked for unions all of my professional life. In this time I have seen first hand unions forced to defend people for indefensible behavior. Unions don't defend the indefensible because they want to; they defend the indefinable because the Republican lead Federal Government demanded that they must.

In the 1930's our country was close to revolution. The corporate greed of the previous decades led to the great stock market crash, massive joblessness, and a huge disquiet among the working class. People who wanted to work, support themselves and their families couldn't find jobs. President Roosevelt pushed the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) through Congress as part of the New Deal. For the first time in this country's history the NLRA set up a legal process for workers to form unions set up a machinery to stop employers from simply firing, imprisoning or even hurting their employees for organizing a union. This stopped the massive worker unrest and workers in this country started organizing themselves into unions.

Union density grew and grew. The economy grew strong with union workers. Standards of living grew and America entered a golden age. Average working people could afford homes and education for their children. Life became less brutish for more and more Americans. For the first and only time Americans felt they were living in a country they deserved and felt that they were building something for themselves and their children and they were right. Also during this time, the wealthy grew wealthier but not rich enough.

Joe McCarthy started scaring people that the communists wanted to stop working people from achieving the futures they wanted. He and his cronies convinced the American people that the families, home and futures they hoped for would be swatted out by the commies. Then McCarthy convinced these people that the commies were hidden in the unions and the Unions needed to be controlled to protect their futures.

The Congress amended the NLRA to provide that union could be sued by its membership for not defending its members in any claim the member may make. Unions were destroyed by unhappy members. Employers could rightly terminate these folks but unions couldn't refuse to defend them without being destroyed. How could unions defend themselves, they had no choice but to defend their membership even when their actions are indefensible.

Knowing this, do you still blame the Player's Association for filing a grievance? Do you still blame Unions for destroying this county?

when i write

I notice i tend to write more on this blog when i am feeling lonely and depressed...

I wonder why that is. I think this blog has in some ways turned into a vent for my negative feelings. The two blogs I read on a normal basis are not like this. I guess I am a trend setter.

peace out... hope I don't write for a while!

conventional wisdom

I always hear optimistic people say that we have to go through hard times because they make us appreciate the good times even more.

But if this is true I would like to take a moment to reflect on the opposite. Does knowing there are good things in the world make it harder when going through hard times. Does knowing that you have friends out there make loneliness even more palpable? I had a nice day yesterday with one of my closest friends. I was so happy to spend some time with her and her lovely son. Now today I feel desperately lonely and sad. Nothing particularly earthshaking happened today that would depress me, but yet I am so down in the dumps. I wonder if I would be so sad if I wasn't so happy yesterday.

Maybe I'm just a pessimist.

disappointments

so today i found out that i wasn't getting something that i really really wanted. i'm hurt but not as disappointed as i thought i would be. rejection is hard but at least i feel like i did everything in my power to get what i wanted.

i often try to hide my disappointments. i don't want people to think i'm week or hurt because i believe that people will try to exploit my weaknesses. of course this isolates me and then prevents me from forming and sustaining bonds. so i'm not going to do that anymore. or at least i'm going to try not to do that anymore.

The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas

This afternoon I finished re-reading one of my favorite books of all time, The Count of Monte Cristo, by Alexandre Dumas. The hero of this novel is Edmond Dantes a young, intelligent, brave sailor who is on the verge of becoming a ship captain and marrying his soul mate at the start of the book. Two men jealous of Dantes's professional and personal happiness conspire with the aid of an ambitious and morally bankrupt prosecuting attorney to send Dantes to prison where he spends the next 19 years. While falsely imprisoned Dantes meets and becomes confidants with an old priest who shares with him the secret of an enormous hidden treasure. After the priest's death Dantes makes a daring prison break and claims the treasure that is buried on the Isle of Monte Cristo. Dantes then styles himself as the Count of Monte Cristo and uses all his skills and treasure to affect revenge upon those who destroyed his simple joyous life.

Dantes is a master of revenge; he attacks his tormentors in a way that most effectually destroys them. The man who values money is bankrupted, the man who values his pride is driven insane, and the man who coveted Dantes's fiance is abandoned by his family. Dantes constantly justifies his actions as God's will. He claims that God would not have allowed him to escape from prison and gain a fortune if He did not wish Dantes to actively take revenge on his enemies. However, at the end of the book seeing how his revenge schemes hurt the innocent as well as the devious he changes his mind. He realizes that it is not man's providence to extract revenge from the wicked but only the right of God to punish the evil doers of the world. When the Count comes to this realization, he becomes content self actualized man who can enjoy the gifts and joys of life.

I'd like to briefly comment on what I think are two of the most important themes of this novel. First, and probably most obviously, the Count of Monte Cristo is referred to as the quintessential novel of revenge because this theme is most prevalent throughout its plot. Dantes undoubtably suffers as a result of the lies, jealousy, greed and ambition of others. From what I see of modern society most people would agree he has the right to revenge himself on his enemies. I have also been hurt by liars who were greedy and ambitious and people who have been jealous of what I have achieved or coveted what I have owned; and I have often wished for revenge against them. However, I think in the long run, the best course for me, is to forgive those who have hurt me. Would revenge heal my hurts? I may get a temporary joy seeing my former tormenters brought down, but in the end I think the answer to that question is a resounding no. I personally only feel real sustainable happiness and joy in this world comes from sharing in the happiness of the people around us in general and those who we care for specifically.

While revenge is often the most commented theme of the "Count of Monte Cristo" for me the most important and thought provoking theme is that of providence or the justification of one's actions by claiming that you act according to God's will. I would like to make a few points here about my personal religious philosophies and how intersect with the world around us. In my life I have heard countless people from those as high as Presidents (of both parties) to those as low as drug addicted thieves, justify their actions by referring to them as "God's Will." I struggle nearly every day with thought of my own religious philosophy. I was raised as a Catholic and learned through religious teaching that God was Love and that He is happiest when we act with love and respect to our fellow man. However, while this was the message I was hearing in Church it became very evident to me at a young age that this was not how the Catholic Church and many Christian religious leaders lived their lives. They survived and flourish by creating false enemies and directing their parishioner's hatred upon the enemies. Church are often administered by selfish and patriarchal leaders. I find very little "love" in the actions of most organized Christian religions.

Yet today many people say and do vicious and hateful things and use the justification that they are following "God's Will." It is "God's Will" that fags and junkies are killed by AIDS. It is "God's Will" that the poor are meant to suffer and starve all over this planet. It is "God's Will" that our country drops bombs on innocent people in the war on terror. These hypocrisies have led me to reject organized religion. I cannot in good conscious call myself a Christian and I have no faith in the Catholic church in which I was raised.

Yet I do consider myself a spiritual person. I spend a good portion of my day in mediation and prayer. I try my best to live my life by a set of principles which honor my fellow man, my planet, peace and love. Finally, I believe that human beings were created have been guided on our path but a spirt greater than ourselves, and it is that spirt who I worship through my morality. Yes I believe in God and I believe in living according to a set of principles that I think this spirit or God would endorse because it is a God that endorses the positive, rather than the negative and destructive forces of life.

When we chose to act in a negative or destructive manor and use "God's Will" as our justification I do not believe we are honoring God's principles. As long as organized religions foster hatred for other as their basis and justify this hatred as "God's Will" I can never accept them in my heart. I often look at friends and acquaintances of mine who have strong religious beliefs and envy them the piece and tranquility they obtain through their religion. However, I believe that God's greatest gifts to us is our or intellects and the ability to use our intellect through our free will. Blindly accepting dicta and dogma of organized religions and spewing hate is in direct contradiction to this gift. To quote the great philosopher and Catholic "I think, therefore I am."

Therefore, like Edmound Dantes at the end of the novel, I reject the idea that God wants me to be and instrument of punishment. I will attempt to live a life that is free of negative emotions and actions that do not lead to happiness.

The Count of Monte Cristo may be over 1200 pages but it is a worthy read, and re-read, that I highly recommend.

sports expectations

Today is the first day of the major league baseball all-star break. Oh how I was convinced this was going to be another really really bad year for the mets. In April if anyone told me that my Mets would be 8 games over 500 in second place in the NL I would have been deliriously happy. I honestly do not think the Mets have the talent to play championship baseball. Yet today as the Mets are 8 games over 500 and in second place I find myself dreaming of more. In fact, I am disappointed that the Mets aren't closer to first.

So what is it about sports that make me escape reality where much better than expected is not good enough? I guess it is the same inertia and passion that keeps me rooting for a team no matter where they are in the standings. Being a fan is not logical it is emotional.

I generally prefer to live a logical life. Sports are the exception to that rule. Lets go Mets!

why i blog or if a tree falls in the woods it still gets to make a noise

I think I write this blog for a reason which is much different than others who write a blog. I write for me and only for me. I am happy when I see someone comment or mention that they read the blog but I have no real interest in trying to get others to read my blog or follow it.

One of my socially unacceptable habits is my joy and acceptance in being alone. A shrink would probably have a professional diagnosis and try to change me. An outsider would probably call me strange. I don't doubt that this is true. But in spite of this fact being alone contents me. I love my friends but most of them do not live very close to me. Furthermore, I wish I had those strong family connections that I hear about but I don't.

So I meet my need for acceptance by accepting my self. I like writing my thoughts, not because I think others will read them, but because I like writing them. I am selfish and this writing is a selfish thing.

I'm trying to be a better person...

but sometimes it is really really hard.

I find it so galling when people who have been given every advantage and opportunity in life have the audacity to bitch about the less fortunate. Good for you that you have a nice house and a beautiful family. Great for you that you have a good job. But would you have all those things if you weren't raised in a stable home. Would you have your great job if you weren't given the chance to go to college. Would you have your home if not for the opportunities and advantages others have given you. Yet think you have the right to bitch about others.

I have to fight every urge in my soul not to tell these folks off. It is really really hard.

ps... most of these hypocrites I have seen would call themselves Christians... that is why I can't stand the Church. Jesus would be proud

wants

There is something I really really want that I think I have a chance to get. I don't want to talk about it because I don't want to jinx it. I also don't want to admit how much I want it because if I don't get it I don't want to admit my failure. Keeping my fingers crossed.

Questions about Heaven

I wonder if Katherine of Aragon and Anne Bolyen can both be in Heaven together? Here are two women who were basically moral enemies. Katherine was a devote Catholic; Anne was the face of the Protestant reformation in England. Katherine's greatest sin was loving her husband too much; Anne's greatest sin is loving her husband less than he loved her.

Yet fundamentally they were not bad women. So if they are in Heaven together have they made up? Do they share tea? Are Henry's other wives invited? Is Henry invited? I mean it has been nearly 500 years have they gotten over it yet?

I hope one day to find out.

These are the the things I think about when I can't sleep?

Lies

It has recently come to my attention that I have been victim of lies. I remember when I was a child I lied allot. Who did that "not me." Who took that "I didn't."

Now I don't feel the need to lie. I mean I will tell the occasional white lie because the truth would hurt the feelings of others and I guess it is a lie when I bluff at a poker pot. However, about the big things I find I am very honest now. The more I see of the world the less regular I find that. I don't know why. I find it easier to tell the truth but I guess not everyone has learned that yet. Maybe we all need to grow up.

Little things make me smile

For the last 36 hours or so I have had a number of little failures and frustrations. Nothing massive or life shattering, just the kind of things that when they happen one after another are frustrating.

For dinner I made baked chicken with risotto and steamed broccoli. It was good. It was an accomplishment because I never made successful risotto before. Now I am happy.

It is amazing how just a little thing can make me happy!

proud to be an American

I just read an article about Montreal hockey fans that rioted after the Canadian's win last night. After reading this I had a surge of patriotic pride. It is good to know people in other countries do incredibly stupid things too. I mean its not just us for once.

Or maybe I just don't understand hockey.

an observation on racism and sports fans

Ok, unless you are living in a box or more off the grid then me you know that Arizona passed a law allowing police to demand that any person prove citizenship if there is a suspicion they are in this country illegally. One day soon I'm going write my response to this law, but not today. Today I want to contrast two articles about the response to this law that I have read.

Both of these article were posted on espn.com. The first one had to do with Ozzie Guillen's statements that unless the Arizona law was changed he would boycott the all star game next year which is to be held in Phoenix. Guillen is a retired major league player and current manager of the Chicago White Soxs. He also urged MLB to move the game out of Arizona in respect to the latino major league players. The second article featured the Phoenix Suns decision to wear uniforms that say "los sun" instead of "the suns" as a tribute to their latino fans on Cinco de Mayo. Steve Nash, perennial all star for the Suns, said that he supports the idea of wearing "los suns" jerseys and he personally believes that the Arizona law is a travesty.

There were a substantial number of comments about the immigration law written buy sports fans after these articles. Predictably, some writers supported the law while others argued that it was unconstitutional. This was true about both articles. However, there were also a substantial number of comments personally attacking Ozzie Guillen of his statements. Many of these writers basically told Guillen that he should keep his opinions to himself, and, if he doesn't like the state law he should leave this country. Nobody commented that Nash didn't have the right to talk about the Arizona law or that he should leave this country if he doesn't like the laws passed here. These commenters the still defended law but did not attack the speaker. The writers chose to insult Guillen personally but not Nash for having the same political opinions.

Ozzie Guillen is latino. Steve Nash is caucasian. I believe that this color difference is the reason for the difference in tenor for the commenters.

Oh yea, also, just so you know Ozzie Guillen has become a legal American citizen. Steve Nash is a Canadian (not American) citizen. Who do you think the Arizona police are more likely to target for identification?

Sarcasm

Last night I had a nightmare that has been haunting me. For some reason I was living at home with my parents. I was working as a cop in Jim Thorpe. And the worst part was I didn't have the ability to be sarcastic.

Needless to say being a cop in Jim Thorpe living with my parents is pretty much my worst nightmare. But not being able to be sarcastic made me defenseless. I guess most shrinks would say sarcasm is bad. We should confront the things we don't like honestly and try to change them. Sarcasm is a passive aggressive way to mask our true hurts; therefore not really healing them.

Still, I like being sarcastic. In my dream, when I couldn't be sarcastic I felt so weak. I felt almost suicidal, not because of my situation, but because I couldn't see a way out of it; even if that was just a quip. I think sarcasm is an expression of hope. No matter how bad things get I know I will alway be able to have a comeback. That gives me hope.

still the greatest?

As a child I was taught that the United States was the best place to live. Looking at the world and this country, even at my most cynical I have always believed that. However, now more than ever that belief is starting to fade.

Democracy and freedom are supposed to be the founding process of this county. It seems in the past 30 years, my lifetime, democracy and freedom are on the decline. It doesn't matter if the President is republican or democrat. The slipping has been substantial.

This week both freedom and democracy were harmed by the actions of our elected leadership. First, the state of Arizona passed a law that provides law enforcement the right to require anyone suspected of being an illegal immigrant must be required to present proof of citizenship when required. This law is clearly a violation of the Constitution. We as citizens have the right to move around this country without being harassed by the police. However our freedoms are being stripped from all of us because of a few misguided, raciest individuals.

Secondly, this week Senate Republican used the power of the filibuster to block DEBATE on a bill to regulate Wall Street. I believe in the filibuster to block a vote but it is unheard of to block debate. Why can't we discuss regulations anymore. Haven't heard allot about this... well because the Senate Democrats really don't want to regulate Wall Street either. After all they are taking corporate kickbacks as well. But I regress, when debate is stopped, when a few powerful people prevent our government from even discussing change democracy is dead.

I still would rather live in the United States than many other countries. Its true I just made some pretty unpatriotic statements that in other countries would justify my imprisonment. But if we keep letting government curtain our freedoms and democracy how much longer will this be true?

trust me, you'll enjoy this

Just read an excellent article : http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126141922&sc=fb&cc=fp

It is about oxytocin a hormone that makes you trust. It talks about a child with Williams syndrome, a disease that apparently makes it impossible to distrust anyone, even strangers. This child constantly tells stranger she loves them. People are not strangers to here just "friends she hasn't made yet."

I am a distrustful person. I almost always look at things people do with cynical eyes, not trusting people. It is something I really hate about myself.

I don't want Williams syndorme because there are legitimate reasons for distrust. The poor child in this article will always need supervision. Yet I am fascinated with the idea what it would be like to live in her shoes just for one day. Trusting everyone must mean being fantastically happy at all times.

I can forgive but not forget

You know the thing I hate the most about being hurt. Not necessarily the hurt itself. It isn't the point when you realize that someone you thought was a friend betrays you or the time when you realize that you are a fool. The worst part is how it changes you.

Every time someone hurts me I become a little more cynical. I am more and more likely to keep to myself. I stop letting people in, and put up more emotional walls. And for me, most unhappily, I stop believing in the good in all people a little bit more.

I don't want to be a person that hates others. I want to trust people. I wish I could get over it. I forgive the people who hurt me. I know it is a weakness in humanity brought on by insecurity. I wish I could forget. Forgetting would be nice.

Glad you are here!

Welcome to the major leagues Ike Davis. Don't worry about the expectations, you have already met them! I like Ike. I think I am going to be saying that allot over the next few years!!!

Red Shirt Protests

Attention people of the world...

Civil disobedience lives. The people still have a right to protest. Military strength cannot compare to the power of the people.

It just makes me happy!

I like tea too, but i don't think they want me at the party

Oh those tea party people. I find them fascinating. Just read and interesting article in NYT about the demographics of the tea party.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us/politics/15poll.html

I find myself agreeing with many of the general premisses of the tea party. I would love a smaller government. I think the best days of the country are behind us. I think that the federal government should stay out of my bedroom (aka social issues). However, where I think these people have a fundamental misunderstanding is about the roll of the government today as compared to what they define as the good old days. The following is a basic analysis of the economic history of the country's past 90 years.

President Roosevelt's' New Deal created limitations on the power of banks and corporations to defraud the American people. The Great Depression was caused by predatory lending practices and corporate fraud on Wall Street just as today's depression. The New Deal stopped these practices, provided a safety net for the poorest and oldest Americans with Social Security and Medicaid. The New Deal also provided assistance to the institutions that made the United States the strongest and most economically secure country in the history of the World. Money was funneled into the school system, kids were given a decent public education; the brightest students were give a chance to go to college, housing loans were provided at fair interest rates to working people, university were endowed to do scientific research that created medical miracles we live with today. For the next 40 years there was an unheard of economic boom in this country.

At the end of the 1970s we experienced an energy crisis. This caused the economy to hiccup. Up rose the "hero" Ronald Reagan. He cut regulations and gave money to the wealthiest Americans. He cut taxes dramatically for the very wealthiest of Americans and ran a deficit. His plan was give the money to the wealthy and then the wealth will trickle down. Well that didn't happen. In the last thirty years the gap between the wealthy and the working classes has grown and the good jobs, educational opportunities, and home owning chances flew the coop. Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, and Obama have not changed these policies. It is these policies that have created the conditions for our current economic depression, huge deficit, and lack of job prospects.

Whatever your political ideology, we all want a better more secure America. Roosevelt showed us how to accomplish this goal. Lean our history. Maybe we can discus this more over tea.

Motherhood, a nice place to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there

Taking some time off from work has given me allot of opportunities to do some really pleasurable activities. Last week I spent some time with one of my closest friends. This friend has a really lovely young daughter. Her daughter is beautiful, smart, funny and charming. She is the kind of kid that parents hope they have (and I'm not just saying that because my friend reads this blog). I had such a great time spending a few days with my friend and her precious daughter.

I like children. I like playing with them. You cannot help but be hopeful when you look at the world through a child's eyes. After all, a happy child has only seen the good and none of the bad that this world has to offer.

I am of the age where a majority of my fiends have had or are having children. I have seen my friends grow, become more balanced and generally more content as they have become parents.

That being said, I am completely positive that I would never want to be a mother. I have experienced allot of angst about this position. There was a time I thought something was wrong with me because I didn't want children. God knows there is a ton of societal pressure for a women to have a child or children. However, I have reached the point in my life that I am secure in my decision that I don't want a child. Its just not for me. I guess someone just unplugged my biological clock.

good bye and thank you

Last night when I read that the Eagles had traded Donovan McNabb to the Washington Redskins I wrote a blog that was unfocused and angry. I decided not to publish it because it was so poorly written. However, I still would like to state that this trade makes little sense except as a salary dump. For this I am disappointed.

The Eagles management has been excellent at parting ways with long term players as they reach the end of the professional careers. There have been times when I have been disappointed to read that a player wasn't getting resigned after a number of good years with the team. However, that disappointment was an emotional reaction and management has done a good job putting the emotional reaction or their fans aside and putting together the best team possible. However, with this trade I do not think the Eagles accomplished this goal. With this trade I think the Eagles management has allowed the illogical prejudice of my fellow fans to influence a stupid trade.

I honestly don't understand why Donovan McNabb has been so hated by proclaimed Eagles fans for so long. I admit I was surprised and disappointed that the Eagles drafted McNabb ahead of Ricky Williams. However, I have gotten over that big time. McNabb has been a perennial pro-bowler and Ricky Williams has been a perennial distraction. Yet it seems that so many Eagles fans never gave Donovan McNabb the credit for what he has done for and with what he has been given by Eagles management.

McNabb's distractors have complained that Donovan has never won the big one for the team. While there have been steady division victories and deep play-off runs there has never been a Superbowl win for the team. I think it is incredibly infair and short-sited to put this all on McNabb.

Undoubtably, a good quarterback is necessary to win a Superbowl. But a good quarterback is not the only factor. Tom Brady and Payton Manning have been the most successful quarterbacks during the years that McNabb was an Eagle. Without a doubt they are excellent quarterbacks. However, when one looks at the rest of the the offense of the Colts and the Patirots there is no competition between the two teams. The Eagles have consistently had a below average receiving core and a subpar offensive line. I think if Brady or Manning were playing with the Egales over the past 11 seasons their stats would have looked allot different. McNabb played well for the Eagles.

So for all these reasons and many more I say good bye to Donnovan. You have been a stand up player and man for the team I love. I have been proud to wear your number 5. Thank you for the memories.

are you seeing what I'm seeing?

Dear Mike Pelfrey:

I just read an article on ESPN.com where you, in refer to your expectations of the the Mets this season by stating: "We pretty much have the same team and the same rotation that a lot of people picked to win the World Series last year. Now everybody is so down on us." I retort umm maybe Oliver Perez isn't the only crazy guy in the Mets starting rotation.

Where should I start with how wrong that statement is. Well since you are a starting picture lets start with the rotation. Ace: while Johan is coming off surgery indications are he will be ok. He has been phenomenal since becoming a Met and his pitching last season was the only bright spot for an otherwise dismal team. While I certainly don't believe a word that comes out of the Mets bullshit PR machine I believe in Johan. Why you ask because he has proven himself a winner and a gamer year after year time after time. That brings us to you, Maine and Perez. None of the rest of the men in the starting rotation have proven time and time again that they can be winners. Flashes of brilliance do not inspire long term confidence. Last year you were coming off the end a season where you appeared to break out and turn the professional cornor. This year you are coming off of a horrible season, injuries, poor pitching, the yipps -- you did not pitch well. So yes you are the number two again, excuse me for not thinking you are going to live up to the hype. Maine..." this year he is healthy and will revert to his past excellence" is the story we are expected to believe. This is starting to feel a bit like the boy who cried wolf to me. I guess I'll believe it when I see it. Perez... there are not enough hours in the day for me to explain why he is a mistake and why I have no hope for him or his abilities. And as for the fifth starter, last year there were some solid veterans and unproven rookies that the organization hyped us to believe could be impact players. This year we have a few young guys who have shown in limited experience in the bigs that they do not have what it takes to be a starter in the major leagues. Enough said.

How about the bullpen. Starting with K-Rod. Two year ago he had 62 saves with a 2.24 ERA. Last year he had 35 saves with a 3.71 ERA. And did I mention he switched from the AL to the NL so no more desigated hitter? While K-Rod certainly wasn't a bust and he wasn't the reason the team sucked hard last year, forgive me for not thinking he is God. JJ Putz is gone and who is replacing him Pedro Feliciano a guy who is coming off a season where he pitched 6.2 innings. Questionable at best. After that the bullpen is made up of two rookies and a group of guys who averaged ERAS over 5 last year.

How about the starters. First base, Carlos Delgado coming off a season where he hit .271 with a slugging percentage of .518 verses Daniel Murphy coming off of a disappointing .266, .427 year. Luis Castio is a year older and a year slower, he is at the end of an excellent career but it is insanity to think he is going to ever be the offensive or defensive player he was in the past. At short stop we have glass legs Jose Reyes. No he probably won't be ready to start the season. He has shown flashes of brilliance but he can't stay health and he has failed as a lead-off hitter because he has no batters eye. The bloom is off the rose. David Wright, here I'm still hopeful. Yes his power numbers are way down but I'm not willing to give up on him to he is consistently down. See I'm a Mets fan. Arguably the Mets are better in the corner outfield positions. Bay should certainly be an significant upgrade on Murphy, offensively and defensively. I am hoping Frankie will have a real bounce back year and be a great asset to the team. Carlos Beltran is starting the year on the DL and frankly I don't know when he will be back. This is the same injury that ended his season last year and no amount of surge and rehab during the winter has made much of a reported change. Even when he does comeback it is crazy to assume that he will be the Beltran of two years ago, he will have to lose a step defensively and who knows what he will do with the bat. Finally catcher. Admittedly Schnider wasn't a star for the Mets, but his replacements this year leave a ton to be desired. For me upper management's failure to find a catcher of ay caliber to play this year is a clear indication that they have given up on this season as well.

All that being said, are you sure you want to stand by your words in that ESPN article? Hey, I'm a Mets fan. I hope for the best. And in spite of what I have just written I believe that you guys could be a sleeper team. After all "Ya Gotta Believe," and I will not congratulate any team before the final out is on the score card. See you at the ball park.

Sincerely,

Amy

PS... have you noticed how much the Phillies and Braves, and even the Marlins, have improved their teams? I guess that is another letter.

Doc strikes out yet again

I'm very sorry to read this morning that Doc Gooden was arrested yet again on drug related charges. I remember a you Dr. K blazing onto the field at Shea Stadium. He was so skinny but he had such power and movement in his fastball. I was only a kid but watching him pitch in 84 & 85 & 86 are some of the happiest memories of my childhood.

I've never been a drug user and Doc is one of the main reasons for this. His fall from grace has always been one of my main inspirations to stay off of drugs. Most people today don't understand the numbers a young Doc put up and where he could be in history if he would have kept straight. For three years, his rookie, sophomore, and third year in the biggs he was unquestionably the most dominating picture in the big leagues. No pitcher ever burst onto the professional baseball scene to steal the show like Doc. It is hard to fathom how, if he would have avoided drug addiction, he would not have been a first ballot hall of famer.

Thank you for the memories but not for the inspiration. I hope you get well and stay well.

dread

So there is something I have been dreading doing and I did it and it wasn't bad at all. Actually it made me feel good. Why I dreaded it I'm not sure except the usual fears of rejection and failure and general insecurity. I wish I could get over that.

I used to have a fried that was incompetent. Even when he tried to do something well, really tried he did it poorly. I always thought if I only had his bravery I could take over the world. I am competent and smart, but scared. I wish I could get over that.

who the hell made this shit up

I went out to dinner with a friend of mine for a great Thai dinner (roasted pork... if you are interested) and then we went back to her place to watch a movie. After the movie was over she put on Bravo and we talked for a bit. The show "House" was on syndication. This is a show that I have heard people say they enjoy and have told me I would like. Now I only saw two episodes and we were chatting through them so I wasn't completely enthralled but I must say who the hell made this shit up. The plot, the characters, the story lines, the problem solved in the alloted time. What the hell! Sure the main doctor's dry wit and consideration is somewhat funny. I would like to tell stupid people where to stick it too, but there is a time and a place where that shit is believable and treating a critically ill child is not that time. And the fact that everything is one formulaic story repeating over and over again. Bad TV... I said it before and I'll say it again... so glad I don't have cable.

Up in the Air

I just rented "Up in the Air" on netflix and I haven't seen a movie I liked so much since Saved! It is great when a that a movie can unintentionally reaffirm your life choices.

In this movie George Clooney lives a nomadic independent life. He enjoys that life and creates a philosophy of independence. When he meets Vera Farmiga in a time when his job is in limbo he decides it is kismet and time to settle down. Not to give too much away but he ends up broken hearted reinforcing the correctness of his philosophy.

Im not looking for love. People I do let into my life tend to hurt me. Does being uber-independent make me an asshole? Is the occasional loneliness worth it? My backpack is pretty empty and I love it. Maybe others don't and I understand that, but for me I am pretty happy.

I highly recommend this movie.

A few words about Oscar

Just a few personal notices and observations:

• For the first time in allot of years I haven't seen very many of the Oscar nominated movies. I need to get watching. Can't say whether or not this movie was better than that one because I simply hadn't seen them. Shame on me!
• My favorite part of the Oscars is generally the death montoge. I was disapointed in it this year. In a year when there were so many "celebrety deaths" it seemed shorter and I felt like there were allot of people missing. I mean where was Farrah Fawcett? Why the focus on James Taylor instead of those movie people who passed on? Poor taste.
• I did love the tribute to John Hughes. I loved his movies, his voice, and his character. I often feel like an outsider in this world but a John Hughes film always makes me feel good about myself because he celebrated the diversity. On a related note Judd Nelson is really aging badly.
• Sarah Jessica Parker's dress cause quite the debate with the friends I was watching the show with. I liked it. I agree she has worn more flattering clothing and her body wasn't displayed to the optimum but I thought the dress was very nice and she seemed very comfotable in it.
• Shout out to the plus size women at the Oscars. Oftan bigger women at the Oscars don't dress well. This year it looked like the designers agreed that it was time to make these talented ladies look beautiful! I for one really liked it!
• Nice to see a woman win best director. Havent' seen "The Hurt Locker," but it is going on my must rent list.
• I thought the hosts did an excellent job!
• The show was long. Yet they really seemed to cut the acceptance speeches short. I felt really bad when there were multiple winners and the first speaker took all the time and a second winner couldn't even thank "his beautiful wife." I'm not sure what the solution is except moving some awards off of the Oscar night.
• Was it just me or there seem to be segregated seating at the Oscars this year. It seemed all the people of color were sitting together near the back.
• George Clooney is sooooooo hot!
• Kathy Ireland was so annoying on the "pre-game." I'm not sure if her dress was too tight or she was nervous but it seemed like she couldn't breath. And her gestures were very robotic. Two thumbs down.
• Was Jeff Bridges paying the "Dude" accepting his award?
• I liked the horror montage... but did anyone else find it a bit strange the Beetlejuice was a horror movie?

All in all good show... I look forward to next year!

Netflix - you don't know me!!!

I like to think of myself as a person who knows who she is and what she likes. Yet it never fails to astonish me how well Netfix knows my tastes. It seems whenever I chose to rent a movie from Netflix against their recommendation I don't like it and when I chose to rent one they suggest I love it. So what's the problem you ask. Just do what Netflix tells you. The problems is the part of me that hates being told what to do by anybody, especially a corporate body like Netflix, completely rebels against that logical suggestion. Artificial intelligence cannot ever overcome the illogic of the human psyche. So what is a corporation to do? What should I do? I guess the human psyche is just two complex for Netflix or me to figure out tonight... I think I'll just read a book.

A good cry

Why is it a good cry often makes me feel so good. I have a love/hate relationship with the movie "The Joy Luck Club." Everytime I watch it I guarantee myself two hour cry-fest. I mean I start crying during the opening credits and snot is running out of my nose through most of the show. When the movie is over I always ask myself why I do this to myself... why drudge up these horrible feelings and emotions.

I guess it is to release them. An hour after I watch "The Joy Luck Club," after the tissues are put away, I always feel good. The movie and the cry clean me out. I know one of my biggest weaknesses is to repress my feelings. I don't tell people when they hurt me and I let very few people into my private thoughts. I feel guilty if I give more than I take. Maybe crying is a way to compensate. I don't know.

I've always considered myself somewhat of a hedonist. I don't take it so far that I hurt others, but I like having a good time. I like to indulge. I love a good meal, time with friends, the emotional satisfaction of doing things where I am a winner. Maybe there is a sense of joy inherent in feeling bad too. It makes you see everything else so clearly. I don't know. One to think on I guess.

The women of "Mad Men"

I just finished watching the first three seasons of the show Mad Men. While I don't think it was the best show I have ever seen I did keep me mostly entertained. It was thought provoking to say the least. A few years ago I read a book called "No Logo" that was about the advertisement industry's manipulation of the American consumer. Most people do not realize how much we are manipulated but advertisement watching a dramatization of this industry was what originally attracted me to watching the show. I could do an entire post on the industry, and maybe one day I will but "Mad Men" doesn't really examine the ad industry. It doesn't make any judgements on the industry's manipulation. The manipulation is there and acknowledged but none of the writers or characters experience any real angst about it. In spite of this disappointment, what kept me watching was the general portrayal of the early 1960's and more specifically the portrayal of women in that time period.

There are three major women characters of note in the show. First, Peggy Olsen is a young woman from Brooklyn who starts at the ad firm as a secretary and eventually works her way up as the first woman copywriter in the firm. Initially, she is portrayed as a mouse-ish school girl virgin. She has no concept of her sexuality and femininity. While she is clearly competent she has no idea how to act in a male dominated office. It is very interesting watching her grow and develop, watching her insecurities melt away, watching he learn that she has just as much value as any man.

Joan Hollaway is the very smart, very savvy, very sexy office manager who leaves the firm to marry a doctor. She has the abilities to take down or build up any person she chooses. But unlike most of the men in the show she uses her brains for good and not evil. She is smarter than her husband the doctor, better spoken that the slickest ad men, and classier then the wealthiest debutant. I find myself wanting to know more and more what makes her tick.

Finally, Bitsy Draper is the suburban stepford housewife of the main character. In season one we are shown a character who is hopelessly devoted to her husband even though she knows he cheats on her and lies to her. Eventually, it becomes too much and she leaves him. However, in typical mainline fashion not until she has another rich man lined up to take his place. For me her story is the saddest and the most typical.

Each of these women have an character arc which is sometimes depressing but always interesting. The show pulls no punches when dealing with women and their roles in the early 1960's. It shows the harassment, assault, and lack of choice that women of that time were forced to deal with openly. Of course all of these things are around today of course but they are much more suppressed and behind closed doors.

I have often heard people who call themselves conservatives recall this time period fondly. All I can say is this was a hard time to be a woman. Any woman who takes for granted the freedom she has today should watch this show and see how things have changed.

Oh and PS the costuming of these women is great!

Logic sucks

I am the kind of person who is attracted to things that are bad for me. Sometimes I manage to cut bad things out of my life and I am a better person for that. But I still miss the bad things. I miss them allot. I like to consider myself a person who loves logic but I still can't overcome longing for the things I should logically want out of my life.

A few words on Vampires, Morality, and Power

I have always found the idea of Vampires very interesting. Yesterday NPR did an interesting article on Vampires specifically looking at Vampire popularity throughout history. The article addressed the fact that right now, Vampire works are going through a resurgence in popularity. It further ties this popular resurgence and other resurgences of the Vampire cannon to times of change and uncertainty in the general population. The article argued that Vampires are popular now because of economic and environmental uncertainly, in the 1980's because of the Cold War terror, in the 1930's because of the depression, and when Bram Stoker's Dracula was produced because the first big wave of immigration occurring in Great Britain. The strength and immortality of the Vampire is attractive to a society that feels vulnerable.

The article went further though to discuss how the current generation of Vampires are different from those in the past because they are looking for morality. Specifically, we can look at the Vampires in True Blood who want to main stream, join society, and drink exclusively artificial blood. Similarly, we can look to the Cullen family in the Twilight series who survive without taking human lives but rather by drinking animal blood. The article argues that these modern Vampires are searching for morality today because society is searching form morality in a corrupt world in a way that hasn't happened before.

I think the first premis is intersting and true, however, the second premis of this article is a fallacy. Specifically, I believe this anology is false because if we accept the first premis that people are looking for stenght then the second premis that individuals in power are searching for morality. It can't be denied that the Vampire in society is an individual of power. Therefore, I think if the Vampire was a in fact a mirror of modern society then it would be more blood thirsty and unfeeling than ever. We simply are not living in a time enlightenment and compassion. This is especially true for the people in power. Is Vampire CEO being generous to his employees. No. Is Vampire politician putting deminsihing corporate welfare in favor of creating real health care coverage for the people in this country. No. Is war-machine looking for peaceful solutions to the world's problems. I don't think I need to answer that. In today's society to be called liberal is an insult. Furthermore I think that the majority of the people in this world know that our leadership is amoral, greedy and corrupt and expect nothing better from them. It is an old say but true today more than ever, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutly.

I guess Vampires are fictional and so a the moral Vampires are fictional as well. Here is the link to the article if you are interested: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123115545&sc=fb&cc=fp

Unacceptable

Its been a year and half since the voters of this country elected President Obama. Organized labor was a huge reason for Obama's election and he has unequivocally failed us. He promised to support the Employee Free Choice Act and hasn't. He promised to stop giving corporate subsidies to to business who violate employees rights, he hasn't. Maybe some of this is understandable, if not acceptable because of the economic crisis and his attempt to get consensus for health care reform. However, what is completely unacceptable is his failure to appoint new members to the National Labor Relations Board. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is the federal agency that regulates labor law. Right now the Board only has 2 sitting members and 3 are needed to hear cases. That means no cases are being heard and employers have been able to violate the law with even more abandon than normally. Unacceptable.

PR is not news

So there a few websites that I look at nearly every day. I like to keep up to date with the news so I read NYT online. I love my friends so I keep up with them on facebook. I check my email a few times per day etc. I'm obsessed with becoming a better poker player so there are a number of poker sites I read on a daily basis. None of these sites anger me as much as the final site I look at on a daily basis... nymets.com!

That site just kills me because it is claims to report news to the teams fans. But these reports make "Faux News" actually look "fair and balanced." I'm sick of reading stories about how great this player or that player is going to be this year or how Mets management has put together a competitive team. Now I hope in September to eat my words, but, I do not believe that the 2010 Mets are going to be a competitive team. There are a number of reasons and as inept as Mets management is I don't know if there is anything that can be done about the team for this season.

Of course the most ironic thing about this rant is I can't even direct it at the Mets, because MLB controls all income and content related to official team websites. I'm sure every team site is similar. I wonder what the Pittsburgh Pirate site says.

American Wife by Curtis Sittenfeld

"All I did was was marry him. You are the ones who gave him power."

I just finished reading "American Wife" by Curtis Sittenfeld. I have read all of Ms. Sittenfeld's novels and found her first two "Prep" and "Man of My Dreams" to be pulpy, neurotic, fun. The characters were flawed in a way that I could relate to. Alice Blackwell is a much different character and "American Wife" is a much different book that Sittenfeld's previous efforts.

"American Wife" is a fictional portrayal of the life of former first lady Laura Bush. There are a number of similarities between the life of Alice Blackwell and Ms. Bush. Each of the four parts of the book are broken up to the address where Blackwell lived, her childhood home, her single person apartment, her first home with her husband, and the White House. Parts one through three in, my so humble opinion, are well written and page turning. They lay out a life of a person a think I would like to spend time with. Alice Blackwell is a smart, compassionate, proud woman who because a happy wife and mother. Part 4 however deviates from this formula.

In the fourth part of this novel Alice Blackwell changes her fundamental philosophy of marriage and her life. It is quite unbelievable. During Bush's reelection campaign I remember having a sharp debate with my fellow progressives about Ms. Bush's complicity for her husband's actions. My debating opponents seemed to take a stance very similar to Ms. Sittenfeld's, that Ms. Bush loves her husband but strongly disagrees with him politically and probably suffers an amazing amount of guilt for her complicity with his actions. My friends and Ms. Sittenfeld's proof for theses statements are Ms. Bush's clear intelligence. I disagreed then and I disagree now. Ms. Bush is intelligent, knew what she was doing at every point in her adult life. She didn't stand with her husband because of some antiquated "stand by your man" notion. It is too easy an out for her. We all agree that she made her bed, but I believe that she has no problem at all sleeping in it. This was not a change in her fundamental philosophy, it is her fundamental philosophy her whole life. It is a bad philosophy but one so many people, especially women adopt.

Overall, I would say "American Wife" is a thoughtful read. If you are in love with W. you may not like part 4. But if you aren't, read this section with a critical eye none-the-less.

Dirty Dancing

I'm sitting watching Dirty Dancing for about the 100th time in my life. I loved this movie when I first saw it in like second grade for the music, dancing, and romance. I think I always, on some level wanted a man like Johnny Castle to sweep me off my feet.

Now though, that I watch the movie as an adult I am drawn and facinated by the socioeconomic plot of the movie. The things I never saw as a kid, or if I saw them never fully understood them.

1. Robbie Gould giving Baby a copy of "The Fountainhead" so she would understand that some people matter and some people don't. Hillarious!!! I don't think that this is exactly Ayn Rand's thinking but it is close enough.

2. The first impression of Baby that the poorer servent class are all fornicating animals. She is initally scared of the people dancing that she encounters dirty dancing. It isn't until she is sexually aroused by Johnny that she accepts that behavior in others.

3. "Its not for anything illegal is it?" When I first saw Dirty Dancing I didn't really know or understand that abortion was so recently illegal and what the woman's movement was really about. Thank you Jane Roe.

4. I have read that Dirty Dancing is based on a true story but I alway had problems believing that anyone as sheltered as Baby actually existed. We are to believe that she is progressive, well-read, activist type whose dream it was to join the Peace Corps and yet, she didn't know when she was 18 that there are people in this world that didn't live her lifestyle or that there are abitous climbers and money grubbing swindlers. This never made allot of sense to me. But as I get older I realize that people like Baby are all around us. They choose not to see the problems of this world because they are comfortable in their own lives. And even if they see the problems they never believed they could be so close. Not everyone is Robbie Gould but most people have their heads in the sand and are happy to keep them there. These people may even see the problems of the world but never can comprehend how their failure to act prevents real change.

PS... I still love the dancing, music, and romance... NOBODY PUTS BABY IN A CORNER!!!

Toto and I may be heading to Kansas...

If Robert Zoellick ever comes to Kansas I may have a free shot at him. After all I honestly and sincerely believe that the policies of the World Bank, which he directs, are directly responsible for for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people every year. And that should be enough to justify my killing of him.

Well at least that is the argument that Scott Roeder is making to justify his cold blooded murder of George Tiller. George Tiller was a Kansas doctor who performed legal abortions. Scott Roeder is a man who admitted buying a gun, practicing shooting, stalking the doctor and shooting him while he was in Church. But he honestly believed that murder was the right thing to do.

Now I am pro-choice but however you feel about abortion... murder is murder. I'm waiting to see how this turns. Mr. Zoellick have you ever been to Kansas?

Phony

If there is one fictional character that I feel in tune with it is Holden Caulfeild. I love how he openly and brashly rejects the concept that financial success is equivalent with happiness. I will never understand why he is called a cynic he is so optimistic about the human condition. He can't always articulate why but he knows deep in his heart that people can be better then their materialistic dreams. I guess the people that call Holden a cynic are the nonfiction phonies. RIP J.D. Salinger.

RIP Howard Zinn

Today, in my humble opinion, we lost one of the finest American minds of our time, Howard Zinn. Mr. Zinn was most well known for his book "People's History of the United States" but he also lived a life of activism and honesty. What made Zinn's book and academic work so special was his perspective. He wrote and spoke about history, politics, and economics from the prospective of the disenfranchised. He looked at the discovery of America through the eyes of the Native Americans, manifest destiny through the eyes of the Mexican indigenous people of the Southwest, the Southern agrarian economies through the eyes of the slaves and the Vietnam war through the eyes of the people fighting for their own independence. In a world where this point of view is often ignored or written off as unimportant Howard Zinn was a voice of all of us. He was a true progressive, not compromising his values to support popular characters. He will be missed.

Would a Republican by any other name still smell so bad?

I just read the funniest article in the NY Times about Arlen Specter. As a native PA'er I have always disliked Specter. He has always been bad on labor and disrespectful to women and women's issues. Last year when he pulled a Leiberman and became a Dem my feelings didn't change.

Now anyone who reads this and knows me knows I am not a Republican or remotely conservitive. However, I do honestly believe having cowardly democrat majority is really no better than having conservative leaders. The problem with all politicians, Republicans, Democrats, or so called independents is the system. I don't think you can be an honorable person in politics any more.

For your enjoyment... http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/27/us/27penn.html?hp

Corporations are not People

Today our "non-partisan" Supreme Court decided that the McCain-Feigold law that prevents corporations from directly donating money to political candidates. The Court through away 100 years of judicial precedents as well as ignoring its own procedural rules that go back to the times of the founders to put more power into the hands of the big corporations that control our government.

1. Corporations are not people. The are legal entities that have grown out of control and will continue to grow out of control until we demand that they are controlled. People, not legal entities have freedom of speech.

2. Scalia: practice what you preach... our founding fathers (except for maybe Hamilton) were firmly against a government controlled by business interests. You are so quick to point to founding father's intent when looking at individual liberties... why do you ignore founders intent when looking at the role that corporate America plays in politics.

3. Honestly... I'm not even sure why I'm so upset about this. All that this law really changes is procedural rules that corporations do not have to funnel money through PACs now. Still it is a slap in the face.

4. Dirty politics are about to get even dirtier.

5. This is the official end of any hope that a truly progressive branch of the democratic party could emerge. Not that I had much hope before today.