Don't You Have an Economic Crisis or a War or Two to Worry About?

Normally I try to treat the subject of abortion either very dispassionately and logically, or very sensitively (yes, that’s my version of sensitivity). I appreciate it’s a touchy subject. But the latest regulation Lame-Duck Curious George wants to push through is going too far and is getting me rather cross.

The proposal defines abortion as follows: “any of the various procedures — including the prescription, dispensing and administration of any drug or the performance of any procedure or any other action — that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation.”

Normally I wouldn’t get all hot about this given who is coming in next, and what his record is on women’s reproductive rights. I have no doubt this will be reverted and probably even repealed entirely. It’s the insult that gets me. That this guy (Bush) and his backers (antiquated nits) think so little of my rights and freedoms; that they are so arrogant as to try and regulate this in a lame duck session; that they are so obvious in their overall contempt for women; that’s what earns me the red hair temperament.

I can see no other motive behind this except that Bush and his antiquated nit supporters in this want us to stop having sex. They have this weird idea, I guess, that if they throw up more and more barriers to safe birth control methods, that we’ll stop having sex.

How’d that work out for Bristol Palin?

But more importantly, how well will that work out for the woman who can’t take the Pill and wants an IUD? How well will that work out for the woman with an ectopic pregnancy if she happens to run into a hospital worker opposed to abortion of any kind?

Enough! I am sick of having these arguments about sex, birth control and abortion. The sexual revolution was like 40 years ago. We won it. We’re having sex. We have methods to prevent pregnancy. The abortion battle was 35 years ago. We won that too and keep winning it over and over again. With Obama likely to appoint as many as 3 justices to SCOTUS, we’ll win it for decades to come.

The very simple fact is: Humans like to have sex. Humans like to have sex without consequences. Humans will continue to develop methods and technologies to have sex without consequences. Cleopatra stuck rocks in her naughty bits so she could have sex without consequences.* Every time someone tries to stop humans from having sex, we find a way around it. Medicine, the 60’s, the Internet. You get the idea.

So please stop banging your heads against this biological wall. You cannot legislate adult sex. Not well, not effectively, and not without creating some seriously bad edge cases. Or maybe not so edgy? One in fifty pregnancies can end up being a life-threatening ectopic pregnancy and this regulation would allow people to not treat that. When I’m rushing to the emergency room because I think my innards are about to rip apart and kill me, I’m not stopping to check whether the nearest hospital receives federal funds and whether there might be a virulent pro-lifer waiting to treat me (or not).

I can be sympathetic and agree that no one—excepting for the life and health of the mother—should be forced to perform an elective abortion. But birth control? Stay out of my fallopian tubes!

Birth control has become so accepted that no one dares speak openly against it anymore unless it’s the Catholic Church (and boy howdy do they have the moral superiority when it comes to sex). So the antiquated nits are going after it from the other end; calling birth control methods that work after conception abortion. More and more women are opting out of the Pill towards less hormonal methods, primarily the IUD (my data is anecdotal, not statistical; I’m too lazy to do the real research right now). But even if I don’t have the numbers, that any form of birth control is included in restrictions against abortion is nothing more to me than further invasion of my reproductive tract against my will.

Usually that’s called rape.

* I prefer modern methods, of course, but applaud that ancient lady for her inventiveness.

Money for Nothing and the Jets for Free

Seriously folks, begging for my money via private jet? You’re so doing it wrong. And yet, these wealthy people that supposedly generate the jobs so god forbid their taxes should not be raised want to use my money to cut jobs so they can still fly in private jets.

I realize I’m being simplistic here, but don’t these people have PR people? To say, hey, this might look bad given the mood lawmakers and the public are in? The definition of socialism as bandied about during the campaign was completely off base. But the situation the financial industries and the auto companies are putting us in practically demands socialism (government ownership of industry for those who thought the progressive income tax enshrined in our constitution was socialism; NB it’s not).

Symbolism and illustration are important to the American people. Flying in a private jet to the hearings where you beg for money is illustrative of these CEO’s grasp of reality, or hubris. So they’re either stupid or dangerously arrogant. Either way, they have no business running these companies any more. But we will have to bail them out somehow should necessitate some government ownership/oversight which is in fact socialism. And all this is predicated by the actions of the uber-Republican type. The CEOs and Wall Street financiers who embody the symbol of success in the Republican Party.

Good job GOPers! You’ve created socialism in America!

So apparently there is some agreement cooked up in the Senate (of course appropriately bipartisan) that the mere announcement that it exists (no details) boosted GM and Ford’s stock prices. But, it might not get voted on because Congress might not stay in session all this week because they’re going home early in advance of their very long Thanksgiving break. I think it likely that my former coworkers are going to have to work over the Thanksgiving holiday. And with unemployment at its highest in sixteen years, there will be families who will be eating the cheapest turkey they can find (which is gross) but Congress can’t stay in session to deal with this.

Out of touch and oblivious to reality. I can often be accused of this given I’ve never not worked when I wanted to nor did I ever not have what I wanted (within reason) when I wanted it. But even I get that the people running the show are clueless. We did our job in shaking up Congress. Now they need to do their jobs and shake up the executives. Or at least stay in session.

Have a Smoke and a Smile

Some may say it’s perverse to quit you career when it appears that you’re on the cusp of hitting the next big step. The problem is, I don’t know how to make that step. I mean, I guess I do, but I don’t want to. So after stepping up the ladder, stepping sideways on the ladder, getting stepped upon, I didn’t just step off the plank, I swan dived. And I don’t care. But somehow I have to get from here to the end goal,

You know you need a manicure when typing the above paragraph took way too long due to typos. That and I’m really tired, so it’s all inanities today.

I could spend the next four years looking at Rahm Emanuel. He’s so good looking. Oh yeah, I get to!

I’m watching an entertainment tonight-type special about the election. Anyone remember Fred Thompson? Without the da dumb?! But seriously, this is on CNN, and it is totally playing like a Entertainment Tonight! episode. Wait, there went Kucinich and the UFO. This brings back memories.

There’s something quite contemplative about just sitting and relaxing in a hotel room. I took a red-eye from Seattle to Philadelphia last night. I will endeavor never to do a red-eye that isn’t a non-stop flight again. I normally do red-eyes to the East Coast ‘cause I can sleep through it (gotta love xanax) and bypass the whole time change. But when you have to layover, it disrupts the whole process. So rather than wandering around Philly today, I stayed in the room waiting for my gal friend to arrive. Nice room, and I can smoke and drink wine and write. That’s something you don’t get to do in many places anymore, all at the same time. I need to do this periodically, with knowledge aforethought, just to write and think. Not that this post is a good example of that, but like I said, knowledge aforethought.

Now they’re talking, on CNN, about stabilizing consumption. I have really dropped the ball on this one. I used to be highly consumptive (that does not mean I have TB) and obviously since I’m not working, I can’t buy as much as I used to. Which I’m very fine with, surprisingly. Own one Von Furstenburg coat and you own them all? Nah, not really, but one has turned out to be plenty.

Ooh ooh, up comes Palin’s return attack on the McCain campaign. Wait, I’m already done talking about her. I hope. There’s a reason my political blog is called Pandora’s Politics.

Krugman! On CNN now. With Tivo there is little to stumble across. So I would have missed this at home. I love Krugman.

BTW, for anyone who sends me the little people things rather than plants on Facebook’s Lil Green Patch, I turn around and sell them. So thanks for the greenbucks! What a useless but addictive app.

Ew, Arnold is talking about getting expelled from the bedroom with Maria. TMI!

So how do I get from my mini-retirement to a driveway moment on NPR? Updates to come.

Look Ma! No Politics!

Do you live to work or do you work to live? There’s nothing inherently wrong with either concept, just as long as you know what you’re doing and why. Living to work should only be for those who are in a field that they are passionate about. The geeks I know and work with (and live with) love technology and love working with it. My friend the radio talk show host loves what she does. My teacher friend is passionate about education.

It’s certainly fine to work to live as well. People who do that, and do that well, have other higher priorities and their work is merely a means to that end. But what if you’re a live to work person in a work to live job? That’s where the priorities get screwed up. You end up working working working with the only real reward being a big paycheck so you constantly look to find new and creative ways to spend it. In the end, if you are living to work but work isn’t what you want to live for, you (actually I) end up with a lot of shoes, and not a lot of fun.

Don’t get me wrong, I love pretty shoes and I don’t regret a single thing I’ve been able to buy. But once you hit a certain pay scale and accumulate a certain amount of stuff, it gets boring. So you look around and realize, I don’t particularly care about what I do but it’s such a demanding job that I don’t have time left over to pursue what I really enjoy doing. And when you’re someone like me who doesn’t have or want children (which I am given to understand is highly motivating to work to live rather than the other way around), you realize you’re throwing away valuable time for high-priced goodies that you don’t even have the time to properly use!

I realize that in the current economic clime it’s pretty perverse—even stupid on the surface–to risk a solid respectable pay check. But I can’t care. That’s the type of thinking that kept me from doing what I wanted, whatever in the world that is. Obama winning isn’t the magic bullet that makes this less risky (though I don’t know that I’d be feeling so risky under a McCain/Palin administration). But change is good, productive, and now a slogan and way of life. I don’t want to miss this ideological band wagon. You talk about a guy that lives to work!

I almost made it through a whole post without politics. Sue me, I’m going to have to wean off that slowly.

Madeline Kahn, You're On

I can often come across as disparaging of the average American, and their decision making process. And I am frustrated by it. But I do realize that it’s not wholly their fault. Americans are busy, they’re tired, and they simply don’t have the time to pay attention the way it’s needed.

Productivity increases occur year after year. Every new technology creates a new efficiency. My primary job over the last decade and more was in process improvement. My job was to increase efficiencies, both through human and technological processes, with reasonable but not barricading checkpoints to ensure a greater output. In short, my job was to increase productivity in the workplace.

What about increasing productivity in our lives? Where does that come from?

Over the weekend Sarah Palin tried to explain the wardrobe malfunction. The problem is, for those of us long opposed to her and to independent undecideds, it’s just not good enough. It’s not the clothes, stupid. It’s the disingenuousness that is Sarah Palin. She no more said thanks but no thanks to a $150,000 wardrobe than she said thanks but no thanks to the bridge to nowhere. She said bring it on until it became unpopular and then kept the money anyway. She isn’t against earmarks, she requested more per capita than Obama ever did. The problem isn’t her clothes, it’s her shallowness. She’s like the kid caught with the cookie crumbs all over her, but still refuses to admit she raided the cookie jar.

Everything about this woman seems perfect until you scratch the surface. That’s the problem with the clothes. Not that she has them, but that she wasn’t honest about them. If her consignment shop clothes are good enough for her now, why did she ever jettison them in the first place? I’m sympathetic, as I wrote here, about her need for the clothes. What I have a problem with is how it’s approached. She allowed herself to be packaged and when it didn’t work, she blames the gift wrapping. If she’s such a maverick and willing to take on her own party, why would she cave so completely on something as simple as a wardrobe?

Nordstrom, Saks, Neiman’s, etc. all put these big tags on the more expensive clothes so that people can’t wear them once then return them. Now the campaign is claiming some or most of them have been returned. Remove the tag and you can’t return the item. Returning them after they’ve been worn is tantamount to shoplifting.

The Republican Party has underestimated the power of Internet communications. They are campaigning as if blogs, YouTube, Google News, and The Daily Show didn’t exist. And it’s biting them. Just like the bridge lie, this is the clothing lie (not to mention the science lie, provided to me by a former classmate who I won’t name because I don’t have his permission). And all of them could have been easily avoided.

Wouldn’t this have been better? “I listened to the people and once they made clear we didn’t want that bridge to nowhere I instead put the money towards more worthwhile projects. I hate earmarks but had to work with the system as it stood because that was the only way to get what was needed to get done. Knowing how broken the system is, I’m in a strong position to change it. See here, here, and there where I made change where I could. Now put me in a better position to make change where it matters.”

Or this: “The clothes? You’re seriously talking about my clothes? Of course I needed new clothes. Didn’t you see what happened to Hillary in the primaries where Glamour and People and all kinds of fashion magazines picked her apart? Didn’t she herself say, near tears, that she needed a lot of help (referring to hair dressers, stylists, and makeup artists) to get through each day? It’s tough to be a woman in politics. Hillary knows what I’m talking about. Yeah, they bought me clothes and yeah, I’m going to pay the taxes on them. Nothing’s free and no one knows that better than women trying to crack that glass ceiling.”

And with the science lie, she once again proves her shallowness in thinking the American people will laugh at the concept of studying the fruit fly without really understanding what that science gains, for all of us.

The list just goes on. But it takes too much time to explain why her lack of intellectual appreciation of science or her skim-the-surface understanding of the earmark and budget system (and why it’s developed) so the wardrobe malfunction becomes what I—and the blogosphere—use to highlight her inherent problem. Which is her complete cynicism about what is really troubling America. She thinks a few folksy winks and stories about her earrings will fool people into thinking she “gets” the issues. But Americans have interesting instincts.

I’m a fashion-aholic and I have no problem with her wearing Valentino and Jimmy Choo. But as a political junkie, I have a problem with her trying to claim one status while portraying another. I have a problem with her attempts to snow the voters. Because Americans are busy, tired, weary, and over-inundated with sound bites. Here I am, with no kids and on a sabbatical from work and I can barely find the time to do all that’s needed to run a simple two-person household and keep up with election, war, and economic news. McCain and Palin are abusing that, and it’s going badly and I find it, as Bill Maher does, cynical; cynical to constantly think that the American people are so stupid as to fall for these tropes.

I can’t trust the American independent voter. I don’t believe they are applying any more judgment in this election than they did in 2004. But Obama is keying into what they want now and need in a way that Bush did in 2004 and in which McCain and Palin so spectacularly are not doing now. And at least Obama is trying to find a way to increase productivity in people’s lives. Worries about healthcare are a constant drain. Worrying about the wars is a constant headache. Worrying about the price of gas and how we can wean ourselves off of it are is nonstop acid reflux.

At some point Americans are going to have to start demanding increased productivity in their lives so as to better understand how they live them. And the only way to do that is to decrease the demands on our lives. I do believe this is a first step in this process, by shrugging off the politics as usual (Obama, no matter what you think of him, is anything but usual). The 30-second sound bite as the basis for a decision must die.