Via CuteOverload
Note: This is not Moon and me at Chez Cowboy. The video is from this guy.
Friday Cat Blogging: Just Let Me Sleep Edition
Via CuteOverload
Note: This is not Moon and me at Chez Cowboy. The video is from this guy.
Party of Moral Values
Michael Rogers reports that two former officers of the College Republican National Committee, one of whom, Patrick T. McHenry, is now a Republican congressman from North Carolina, were shacked up from February 2001 to January 2002 in DC's Capital Hill neighborhood in a home they purchased together.
No story there, of course. Two young single guys often buy million-dollar homes together, right? Right.
What is a story, however, is that McHenry and husband co-owner Scott Stewart
received a $60,000 deduction off the property's assessed value for tax reduction purposes in the second half of 2001. In order to receive the tax reduction, homeowners are required to certify that the property is "occupied by the owner/applicant." The eligibility guidelines state that the "property must be the principal residence (domicile) of the owner/applicant."Oopsy! That sounds like voter fraud. The same kind for which good conservative Ann Coulter faced charges, as a matter of fact.
At the same time he owned the home and claimed the deduction in DC, North Carolina Board of Elections records show that McHenry voted in Gaston County, NC. McHenry first cast a ballot in Gaston in November 1993. Subsequently, he voted in twenty different elections up through the November 7, 2006 General Election. On November 6, 2001 McHenry voted in a North Carolina polling location. On that date he was also receiving the Homestead Deduction on his DC property.
And that definitely is a story.
SNN Breaking News: Congress Still Sucks
Have a gander at what slipped through the cracks:
The Senate agreed on Thursday to increase the federal debt limit by $850 billion -- from $8.965 trillion to $9.815 trillion -- and then proceeded to approve a stop-gap spending bill that gives the Bush White House at least $9 billion in new funding for its war in Iraq.Reach the debt ceiling? No problem! We'll just raise it so we can borrow more money! Wheeeeeee!
What's even more heinous than providing $9 billion more towards our favorite pastime, is how this measure passed. The Senate vote was 94-1 (1 = Russ Feingold), and the House passed it 404 to 14. That means everyone was in on this thing, tough talk notwithstanding.
Can someone please figure out a way for us to get a new government? PLEASE?!?
[H/T to ThinkProgress]
What a Croc
I was not a rebellious child. The truth is, due to a combination of parents who made pretty sensible rules and my disposition to follow pretty sensible rules, I didn't have much occasion for rebellion. That, however, doesn't mean I wasn't strong-willed; I was. I knew what I liked and what I didn't, and, if I didn't like a particular article of clothing, off it came. Anything too tight, too restrictive, uncomfortable, or in any way motion-limiting was off like a racehorse. This was especially true for shoes.
In fact, even to this day, I am barefoot as often as possible—despite my ardor for shoes. I consider socks a hateful bit of devilry, a necessary evil only to be engaged for hiking or traversing snow at least ankle-deep, otherwise given no truck or opportunity to deliver their vicious stranglehold on my freedom-desiring feet.
I recall several of my cousins—especially my most athletic cousin Julie—and not a few childhood friends being the same way; many of us ran around the neighborhood in our bare feet all summer. I also remember a seemingly endless number of little kids kicking off "fancy shoes" at church. And no wonder—those little black patent leather jobbies were no good for running around on the grass like a maniac burning off some energy between sitting in Sunday School and sitting in the church service.
All of this, by the way, is a very roundabout way of saying that I suspect if kids weren't able to do what they wanted to do in Crocs, they'd probably just kick them off.
But that's just me. The Chicago Tribune's John Kass (who Paul nominates as "most ridiculous columnist of the year," heh) evidently thinks that children just wear whatever they're given without complaint, even if it impedes what they want to be doing. And you know what that means—obesity crisis! And luckily he's got the co-founder of Unicus Fitness, which runs "boot camps for brides before weddings, and sports camps for young athletes," to give his totally unbiased opinion about kids' health, too. Ergo, Crocs must be banned.
There's a lot of blahdy-blah about muscle memory and legs that can't bend to support the call for this ban, but ultimately the argument rests on this: "And while some kids run all day in Crocs or wheelie shoes and are fit as fiddles, I suspect they're the exception rather than the rule."
Oh. Well. As long as you suspect it, that's all right then.
Never mind that this suspicion necessitates believing that the majority of children who want to run all day, but can't because of their stupid, stupid shoes, are too meek to take them off (and/or that there are tons o' kids who exist with a $30 pair of Crocs as their only shoes, I guess).
How on earth does this shit get published?
Meanwhile, over at Junkfood Science, Sandy Szwarc takes a look at the very interesting relationship between athletic shoe companies and the alleged obesity crisis: "Athletic shoe companies have been among the most active corporations working to convince the public that today's kids aren't physically active." Huh—what a shocker.
New Species Finally Identified In Senate
(Hypocriticae asshatus)
I know this is normally Quixote's area of expertise, but I just couldn't wait to share the news that has taxonomists worldwide rejoicing like never before.
For years, there have been unconfirmed sightings of these fungi, even as recent as a few months ago. The best that scientists could determine was that these organisms would sprout in darkly lit spots to secrete enough fluids to stick to a bill and hold it from passing. The biggest challenge was trying to find these suckers. With the grounds and ability to place these unidentifiable holds, even the least controversial bills would fall prey to these parasites.
But now, there's been a breakthrough.
Thanks to the signing of bill S.1, the grounds have changed, and now the Hypocriticae Asshatus can be easily spotted within six days from time of sprout:
And so, we've confirmed sighting of the most recent trouble maker, Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY). He is on record with objecting to HR1255, but of course we don't know why. This presidential records amendment, which has overwhelming support in the House (333 to 93), is meant to overturn Bush's ridiculous ass-covering executive order to limit access to records of ex-presidents. You can bet your bippy that once his worthless ass is out of town, he doesn't want anybody knowing what went on. That leads us to question what kind of deal is being worked out with Bunning to keep applying the brakes.SEC. 512. NOTICE OF OBJECTING TO PROCEEDING.
(a) In General- The Majority and Minority Leaders of the Senate or their designees shall recognize a notice of intent of a Senator who is a member of their caucus to object to proceeding to a measure or matter only if the Senator--(1) following the objection to a unanimous consent to proceeding to, and, or passage of, a measure or matter on their behalf, submits the notice of intent in writing to the appropriate leader or their designee; and
`I, Senator XXXX, intend to object to proceedings to XXXX, dated XXXX for the following reasonsXXXX.'.
(2) not later than 6 session days after the submission under paragraph (1), submits for inclusion in the Congressional Record and in the applicable calendar section described in subsection (b) the following notice:
Either way, I'm particularly glad that secret holds are over and done, so that these despicable shitheads can't hide anymore while trying to pull a fast one. However, as Ellen Miller at Sunlight notes, we've quite a way to go before the crew in DC starts to feel shame at what they go through to keep secrets from everyone.
Kids are being indoctrinated*
Back in February, World Ahead Publishing was looking for manuscript submissions for a children's book about global warming. If you recall, this is what Eric Jackson (president of World Ahead) had to say:
“Since Scholastic and the UN are publishing kid’s books that represent the liberal view on global warming, we’d like to give concerned parents an alternative.Our company is calling on writers of children’s books to pick up their pens to support intellectual diversity. We’re inviting scientists, professionals and the public at large to submit thoughtful, well-documented manuscripts that present a balanced perspective on climate change.”He also said that: "[N]uanced, logical thinking is seldom present in books written by liberal authors". Jackson and World Ahead Publishing are responsible for such nuanced and logical books, such as Help Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed. Well, anyway, they found their author and have published a book that "deal[s] honestly with the subject, utilizing provable facts about the nature of our changing world while debunking the fabrications, hysteria and anti-growth agenda propagated by the far left" (from actual their submission specs). Yep. It is called: The Sky's NOT Falling: Why It's OK To Chill About Global Warming.
In their press release, World Ahead says:
Los Angeles, CA (Sept. 28, 2007) -- School has started. Unfortunately, right along with it comes the usual indoctrination about the "threat" of global warming. Perhaps your kids are already saying…Oooh, the liberal education system! Look at what it's doing to the children! The children, they are scared! Mean, evil liberal public school and its sinister agenda. We hates it! But, it actually gets better. And by better, I mean crazy:
* "I'm scared that every time I ride in the car, I'm hurting polar bears and other animals."
* "I'm afraid that people just like me are causing global warming."
* "I'm afraid that my favorite outdoor places are going to disappear."
Holly Fretwell, adjunct professor at Montana State University, mom of 2, natural resources allocation expert and author Sky's NOT Falling: Why It's OK To Chill About Global Warming knows that kids are getting an earful in school about global warming. Unfortunately, all too much of that information is misleading or just plain wrong.Let's look at Ms. Fretwell's credential of "natural resources allocation expert". Ms. Fretwell is a senior fellow at the Property and Environment Research Center (PERC). PERC used to be the "Political Economy Research Center". PERC, according to its site, is:
The Sky's NOT Falling is the product of her concern not just for the environment, but for the millions of kids being handed an environmental bill of goods in class. As an educator, a mom and an optimist, Ms. Fretwell envisions a world that is wealthier, and so healthier for all. To get there, however, our kids need to become critical thinkers. And too much of what is passing for "truth" when it comes to the issue of global warming is anything but.
[...]
Bringing honesty and balance to the issue of global warming is why Holly Fretwell wrote The Sky's NOT Falling: Why It's OK To Chill About Global Warming. "I wanted to show kids the connection between our freedoms and environmental quality. It's those freedoms that let us choose the best methods when it comes to improving the environment, and it's those same freedoms that allow human ingenuity and creativity to be unleashed." It's also those same freedoms that we are may lose if we fall into the policy recommendations many advocate as a response to global warming.
...[T]o say that 'the science is decided' when it comes to the issue of global warming is just plain wrong. Author Holly Fretwell wants kids both to hear the truth and learn how to find it for themselves.
PERC (the Property and Environment Research Center) is a nationally recognized think tank focusing on market solutions to environmental problems. Founded in 1980, PERC is one of the pioneers of free market environmentalism.Is it any wonder why World Ahead chose Ms. Fretwell? Anyway, here are their tenets:
We believe environmental quality can be achieved by managing our resources based on property rights, private initiative and voluntary activity. Free market environmentalism offers a genuine alternative to excessive government control and regulation.
Private property rights encourage stewardship of resources.Here are some of their research studies:
Government subsidies often degrade the environment.
Market incentives spur individuals to conserve resources and protect environmental quality.
Polluters should be liable for the harm they cause others.
FisheriesAccording to this watchdog site:
Ocean fisheries: Moving toward full property rights
Donald Leal
Public lands
Public lands: The surrealism of resource subsidies
Holly Fretwell
Other
Pollution easements
J. Bishop Grewe
PERC promotes "free-market environmentalism." Major issues include property rights and "reforming" the Endangered Species Act.Interesting, eh?
PERC is a member of the Cooler Heads Coalition and has been listed as a "networking participant" in the Alliance for America, the "wise use" umbrella group. Executive Director Terry Anderson was a member of George W. Bush's presidential campaign environmental advisory staff, as was current Secretary of the Interior and former PERC fellow Gale Norton. Kathryn Ratte of PERC addressed the Petroleum Association of America on "a more grassroots approach to telling the industry's story in the nation's public schools." She stated that the problem is that "politically correct environmentalism invaded U.S. public classrooms years ago, and is helping to hold the door shut on your message." Another problem is that "children resonate with environmental topics." Ratte recommended tailoring industry materials to all subjects, including language arts to get at students from all possible angles. Ratte also recommended that industry hold teacher workshops "in resorts or campuses in pleasant surroundings" to get educators to use their materials. At one point, the meeting turned into a fund raising event. The presenters recommended industry also form partnerships with organizations such as the Foundation for Teaching Economics and PERC because "If it has a corporate logo on it, it is propaganda... You need a foot in the door where somebody else is pushing he door open for you...The people best able to push open the door are non-profit education organizations that teachers already think of as being credible," reasoned Ratte (American Oil and Gas Reporter December, 1998).
Yes, World Ahead chose an author who could present such an unbiased, honest, nuanced and logical point of view for their children's book, didn't they?
The goal of the book, World Ahead and Ms. Fretwell say, is to "educate not indoctrinate". If irony was gold, oh how wealthy they'd be.
*title of the press release email, I shit you not
Polish Women's Party Plays to Win
'The party of women. Poland is a woman.'
The Women's Party of Poland, a new political party founded by writer Manuela Gretkowska in response to the Polish government's threat to tighten already strict controls on abortion, has just released the above campaign poster ahead of national elections, featuring seven of its candidates, baring not just their skin but their seriousness of purpose.
The attention-grabbing move is making waves in staunchly Catholic Poland, where the ruling Kaczynski twins have pushed a fiercely conservative agenda.It's extremely cool that there's even a Women's Party in Poland in the first place, no less that they're directly challenging the insane Kaczynski twins and the idea that Catholic priests are best suited to make reproductive decisions for women. But the remarkable audacity of these women to break through the male-only barrier in conservative Polish politics and call attention to their cause by publicly baring all is astounding. And Gretkowska will go to the mat with anyone who calls it exploitative.
"[The government's position on abortion] is the straw that broke the camel's back," [Gretkowska] said, adding that Poland's political scene was usually run by men for men.
…Ms Gretkowska hopes that the backing of some of Poland's most famous women could help push [the party] over the line and into parliament. If that happened, the Women's Party could become a key coalition partner after elections that none of the major parties looks like winning outright.
Its backing for equal pay for men and women as well as public funding for contraception would mark a major shift in Poland, where priests, not sexual-health practitioners usually set the political agenda.
"This poster is intended to shatter stereotypes in the anachronistic world of politics, which is more often dominated by uncommunicative men with their black tie outfits," she said.Cheeky. (But damn insightful.)
"We are beautiful, nude, proud. We are true and sincere, body and soul. This is not pornography, there is nothing to see in terms of sex, our faces are intelligent, concerned, proud."
"We do not have our mouths open nor our eyes closed," she said.
I'm rooting for the Women's Party—and I hope they manage to storm into parliament, where their mouths will no longer have to remain shut and they can make their voices heard loud and clear.
[H/T Petulant.]
They Hate to Do It
The Senate passed the Matthew Shepard Act, which adds gays and lesbians to the list of those protected by hate crimes. That will make it interesting for President Bush to continue to threaten to veto it because he would also be vetoing the Defense Appropriations Act, which funds the Pentagon and the war in Iraq.
As Steve Reynolds at the All Spin Zone notes,
A few Republicans supported the Matthew Shepard Act, which protects gay and lesbian citizens from hate crimes, but Republicans like Lindsey Graham (suspected of being gay) say Bush will veto the bill. Larry Craig, of course, who is not gay, voted against the bill.The standard right-wing objection to hate crime legislation is two-fold; all crimes are hate crimes and therefore the punishment should be the same for any assault and not more so because the victim is gay, black, Jewish, or whatever. The second complaint is that laws against hate crimes are really laws that punish people for holding odious opinions about the protected people. (There's also the simple fact that the Republican party is pretty much anti-gay, and anything that gives the gay community any support is going to be voted down by them as a matter of course.)
[...]
It may not be homophobia that drives the Republicans, anymore, but fear of the religious right. You gotta believe there’s going to be divine retribution from the Radical Religious Right against those Republicans who voted for the Matthew Shepard Act. In Larry Craig’s case, his motive appears to be a fear of losing power, or access to free travel and thus opportunities to visit restrooms all over the country.
As Melissa noted, hate crimes are not crimes against an individual but rather against an entire group of people. Gay-bashers or skinheads who beat up blacks or the homeless rarely know their victim personally; they pick them out because of the community they belong to, and it is an attempt to cower an entire group of people, regardless of their individuality. In other words, it's terrorism. And given the Republicans' embrace of the global war on terrorism, you would think that fighting terrorism, including protecting people from attacks for innate qualities such as sexual orientation would be on the top of their to-do list. After all, they have been screaming at us for the last six years that the highest priority in the country is fighting terrorism, and that should include terrorism of all stripes, including that which comes from the more outspoken and active members of the Religious Reich or just plain ignorant bigots. If President Bush vetoes this bill, as he has threatened to do, it will be because those frat boys who get drunk and stand outside gay bars and threaten patrons with pieces of one-by lumber, or the religious fanatics like Eric Rudolph who blow up abortion clinics, or David Koresh who impregnate eleven year old girls and murder ATF agents, or the all-American kids like Timothy McVeigh who blow up buildings aren't included in his definition of terrorism, nor is it by the people in the base of his party.
The idea that hate crimes are some sort of Orwellian attempt at thought control is bogus. No one is attempting to stop people from thinking bad thoughts about people, whether it's against a minority or queers or bimbos who talk on cell phones in their SUV's and don't use their turn signals. We are still free to think all the evil thoughts we want. The difference is when you turn a thought into an action and actually do something motivated by that thought. That removes it from the realm of idle musing and makes it a crime, and the law has recognized motive as a factor in both prosecution and sentencing for a very long time.
One final point: people who speak out against hate crime legislation have, strangely enough, rarely been the victim of a hate crime.
Crossposted from Bark Bark Woof Woof.
Question of the Day
What's the one household item that you simply will not scrimp on under even the most severe circumstances? Round here, it's toilet paper. Luxury poo-roll is the last item to get crossed of the list.
In Memoriam
Hi Shakers, Cernig from The Newshoggers here. I've been graciously offered some space here by The Mgmt. to tell you about a bipartisan blog fundraiser in honor of the tragically-killed NYT op-ed writers Sgt. Omar Mora & Sgt. Yance T. Gray.
You probably recall that Sgt. Mora and Sgt. Gray were two of the writers of an op-ed in the New York Times which was highly critical of the Bush administration's conduct of the Iraqi occupation but which ended, even so, by saying "As committed soldiers, we will see this mission through." A week later, both were killed in a vehicle accident in West Baghdad.
Well, my good friend Kyle Moore at Comments From Left Field ended up in a conversation with Sgt. Gray's father after writing a blog post on the subject and...well...this in memoriam fund is what resulted. This is truly a bipartisan effort and it goes to a good cause. All funds raised will go to the Fisher House charity, an organization which builds houses near military medical facilities where loved ones of those who have been injured in the line of duty can stay free of charge while their service member undergoes necessary treatment.
Comments From Left Field and the Conservative Thinking blog are the co-creators of the fund and so far a whole slew of blogs, both Left and Right, have supported it with links and endorsements. I mean, how often would you expect to see Skippy and Newshoggers, Stop the ACLU and the Jawa Report on the same bloglist??!
With some great support, the fund blasted through its original target of $2,000 in just 24 hours and so they've decided to move the goalposts up to $10,000. I'm here today to ask you to help. If you own a blog, consider joining the list above. If you only read blogs, consider dropping a heavy hint in the comments of all your favorites today.
Thank you in advance, all who support and contribute to this memorial for two courageous servicemen.
Regards, C
Rotundity Revealed!
So, yesterday, I asked you all to guess this woman's height and weight:
So did she. There were a LOT of responses.
And quantities like "a LOT" should tell you exactly how scientific our analysis of the data was. Nevertheless, we made a fancy graph!
To be honest, I'm not even sure how you're supposed to read this graph, and I'm the one who made it. Here's what I do know: the white dot represents The Rotund's real height and weight. 5 feet, 3 and a half inches; 314 pounds. Everything that's not on the white dot? Is wrong.
We're both gonna analyze/laugh at the responses in-depth tomorrow, but right now, I need to give a shout out to DBK here and Nadai at The Rotund, who both proved wrong all the whiners claiming there was no way to tell how tall she was. 7 x a standard bathroom tile = 5'3" (Nadai), and 3 x a standard toilet = 5'4" (DBK). Since both of those are within half an inch of the correct answer, y'all who said there was just NO WAY TO KNOW can suck it. :)
Also, Rachel from The F Word and cp both guessed the same and damn near nailed it. I don't think anybody got closer.
Lowest weight guessed was 140 lbs. Highest was 345. Lowest height guessed was 4'8"; highest was 5'11". But the very best part is the range of answers that started with, "You look like exactly me, so I'll guess..." Those started at 5'7"/180 and ended at about 5'10"/310. I'll be talking about those tomorrow.
For the record, I've known for a long time that The Rotund weighs over 300 lbs., but until recently, I thought she was about 5'8". And I probably would have guessed she weighed about 280 if I hadn't known to go higher.
Mind not blown enough yet? Check out the Photographic Height/Weight Chart.
The Glorious Fourth Amendment
A federal judge has ruled that parts of the USA PATRIOT Act are unconstitutional.
In a case brought by a Portland man who was wrongly detained as a terrorism suspect in 2004, U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken ruled that the Patriot Act violates the Constitution because it "permits the executive branch of government to conduct surveillance and searches of American citizens without satisfying the probable cause requirements of the Fourth Amendment."I'm curious as to what the Justice Department thinks those "options" might be. I'm not a lawyer, but I have read the Constitution and I'm pretty sure I'd remember if there was a part that said the Bill of Rights could be suspended without due process, and I'm also wondering how the government will now define "probable cause."
"For over 200 years, this Nation has adhered to the rule of law -- with unparalleled success," Aiken wrote in a strongly worded 44-page opinion. "A shift to a Nation based on extra-constitutional authority is prohibited, as well as ill-advised."
The ruling in Oregon follows a separate finding on Sept. 6 by a federal judge in New York, who struck down provisions allowing the FBI to obtain e-mail and telephone data from private companies without a court-issued warrant. The decision also comes amid renewed congressional debate over the government's broad powers to conduct searches and surveillance in counterterrorism cases. Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said last night that the administration "will consider all our options" in responding to yesterday's ruling.
In this particular case, the government has basically conceded that they screwed up and have settled with the plaintiff.
Aiken's ruling came in the case of Brandon Mayfield, a lawyer who was arrested and jailed for two weeks in 2004 after the FBI bungled a fingerprint match and mistakenly linked him to a terrorist attack in Spain. The FBI used its expanded powers under the Patriot Act to secretly search Mayfield's house and law office, copy computer files and photos, tape his telephone conversations, and place surveillance bugs in his office using warrants issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.So while it's not a huge surprise that the court ruled against the PATRIOT Act, it is gratifying to know that there are still courts that recognize the power of the Constitution over the unitary executive.
In a settlement announced in November 2006, the U.S. government agreed to pay $2 million to Mayfield and his family and it apologized for the "suffering" that the case caused him. But the pact allowed Mayfield to proceed with a legal challenge to the constitutionality of the Patriot Act, resulting in yesterday's ruling by Aiken, who was nominated to the bench by President Bill Clinton in 1997.
I'm sure there will be the usual rants and carrying on from the righties about "activist judges" taking the law into their own hands. At the risk of reminding them of the blantantly obvious, the purpose of the judiciary system -- which is still a co-equal branch of the government -- is to interpret and enforce the laws. So unless you think that putting the Fourth Amendment to use in its intended purpose is somehow judicial "activism," in which case you really need to go back to high school and re-take that government class you slept through, the federal court and Judge Aiken did exactly what they were supposed to do.
And more chinks are going to be found in the armor of that odious law.
Crossposted from Bark Bark Woof Woof.
Edwards Accepts Public Financing
Just recently, we had a discussion about shortened election cycles which also led to considerations about public financing. Today, John Edwards became the first of the Democratic frontrunners to accept public financing.
Former Sen. John Edwards Thursday said he will accept public financing for his presidential campaign, and challenged his chief rivals for the Democratic nomination, Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, to follow his lead.Right on.
"This is not about a money calculation," Edwards told CNN senior political correspondent Candy Crowley on his way to an event in Durham, North Carolina. "This is about taking a stand, a principled stand, and I believe in public financing."
Well, Look What's Crawling Out...
By Elle
"There is a major white supremacist backlash building," said Mark Potok, a hate-group expert at the Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights group in Montgomery, Ala. "I also think it's more widespread than may be obvious to most people. It's not only neo-nazis and Klansmen—you expect this kind of reaction from them."The mayor of Jena, who says his town is being portrayed unfairly, allowed himself to be interviewed by the leader of a white supremacist organization. What the hell? I mean, my God! Talk about irony.
I'm late posting about this—see Kevin's post (by the way, is anyone appreciating the truth of Elliott's law like I am?):
As an online discussion concerning race grows longer, the probability of a person referencing Martin Luther King, Jr. as a means to justify their racist and/or ignorant attitudes approaches one.If I read one more "What would Dr. King think..." from someone questioning support of the Jena Six (and who doesn't know anything more about Dr. King than what s/he hears in soundbites) I might insert my fist through this damned monitor.
-----------------
[I'm a newly-minted PhD, a still-aspiring historian of the United States in the 20th century. More specifically, I study black women's and labor history in the post-World War II South. I'm currently in the middle of adjusting to my first year as a visiting assistant professor of history. Still, my most challenging job by far is mothering a bright, opinionated nine-year-old boy. I blog at elleabd.blogspot.com. Yes, it seemed like the ABD status was permanent!]
Slug v Snake
I saw this over at Chris' place yesterday and just loved it. Today, I was thinking, sometimes it pays to just be a fat, happy slug and let the venomous attackers try to do their worst until they tire themselves and move on. Ahem.
[Click for explanation.]
And my acne cleared up, too
The recent and relative quiet from this corner of Blogsville is due to a handful of factors. Firstly, I've been fairly busy at, ah, you know, the place where most of the blogging gets done. Additionally, I've been doing more non-blog-type writing; I've found that this tends to bleed off a lot of the energy that would otherwise go into the web stuff.
There's a third factor, though, which is actually intentional rather than incidental: I've been on a bit of a political fast, and I have to say that I'm really enjoying it.
Just about all of the feeds in my RSS aggregator are politiblogs of some stripe or other, and I've studiously ignored nearly all of them over the past week. As for political news in the regular ol' mainstream media, I've avoided it. Sunday morning bobblehead shows? Ha! Blew 'em off!
The result? I've lost nearly three pounds!
Okay, it's more like two pounds, but it's the non-physical consequences that have been more interesting.
For me, political stuff has always been the most common blogging topic because it's so easy, what with the war(s) and the malfeasance and the crimes against liberty and stuff. All you need is indignation bordering on gamma-fueled rage, and you're good to go. Lord knows, though, that there's no dearth of politibloggers, most of them much better at it than I am. One more source of such editorials - or one less - shouldn't really matter all that much. As Yama, God of Death, once said in the ultra-cool Roger Zelazny novel, Lord of Light:
There are leaves and feathers enough in the world for me to have labored so long only to increase their number.
What Yama said.
I once worked at a somewhat dysfunctional business where every day was a new adventure in stress. One of my coworkers ruefully reflected on the effects of this environment on her own personality. "Honestly," she insisted as much to herself as to me, "I'm not like this." This, of course, being the tense, oft-irritated person that she was from nine to five. She was right. And she left. So did I, much later, but then I'm a slow learner.
There's something to be said for not being angry all the time. Hmp. Fucking anger.
Also, it's a lot quieter these days inside the cranium, astonishingly so. It's rather like those car commercials where the driver (or invisible narrator) demonstrates how much NVH (Noise, Vibration, and Harshness) is blocked by the vehicle's QuietSteel construction. Very pleasant, I must say. There's been mental space to think about other things, which is timely, since I really need to to be thinking about those other things, many of which are important in the personal sphere.
Of course, it's not desirable nor even possible to permanently divorce oneself from things political, since that aspect of life is woven into everything else. The LaVena Johnson situation, for example, will be with me for some time to come. Perhaps this is less about avoidance of politics than about formulating an alternate approach to the political. Or to, uh, life. Well, we'll see about that. For now, I just think I'll be doing less political opining in future.
For all the beneficial aspects of this path, I do wonder: When so much of your online persona has been devoted to one thing and then you substantially reduce that one thing, then who are you?
The eight-ball says, "Ask again later."
Hmp. Fucking eight-ball.
(Not a good-bye, cruel world cross-post. Honest.)
