I wonder if Palin thought she would have it easy with Katie Couric. Couric's got a reputation (deserved or not since I don't really watch her) for being a soft and fuzzy type, and I wonder if Sarah thought she would get a female bonding type of interview rather than the tough one that Couric admirably delivered.
If Palin thought that, she don't know women. There was no way in hell Katie was going to let herself appear to be anything softer than a hard-edged news person out for the details. Couric's own reputation was at stake over this interview and if she'd lobbed softballs at Palin (like Hannity did), Couric would have been accused of going easy on Palin 'cause she's a woman. I don't think Katie was unfair at all to Palin, the questions she asked were for getting the details. It was Palin's fault she was unprepared for such a detailed interview and Palin's fault if she thought Couric would be at anything but the top of her game. This is female competition at its core, and Palin didn't suit up.
I had the appointment with the animal communicator yesterday. I'm not going to give a full recap here yet (gotta run errands), but certain things are just really weird.
She said that my cat Jackie liked to sleep/lay on smooth surfaces. Now this didn't strike me as accurate. While Jackie generally doesn't burrow into pillows or piles of clothes, she usually lays on the throw rug, or the chair, or couch cushion. To the communicator, I merely said, that's interesting.
From the time I hung up the phone with the communicator to now, Jackie has been sleeping on my laptop on its docking station on my desk underneath the desk lamp. It's like she's been waiting for my permission or something.
I don't say it means anything. Its just very weird.
Unfortunately, like most Democrats, we sent our super suits to the cleaners because we thought--given how supremely badly the Bush Administration has performed and how summarily they screwed over their own base--the culture war was over.
I’ve always been able to respect the fiscal differences between liberal and conservative ideology. The core of each argument has a solid base, the end state is nearly always the same. The main difference between the two ideologies is the means by which we reach that end state and within that debate a lot of good compromise and good policy can be made.Where I get nearly tyrannical in my opposition to conservatives is in the “culture war.”
The election of Bush, particularly in 2004, drove me near crazy. And the reason for my rabid hatred of him has in its foundation the people who elected him and why, at least those voting for him based on the “cultural” issues.
From Salon (apologies if you can’t see the entire article; I’m never sure what is and isn’t accessible on Salon for those not subscribed):
The culture war is driven by resentment, on the one hand, and crude identification, on the other. Resentment of "elites," "Washington insiders" and overeducated coastal snobs goes hand in hand with an unreflective, emotional identification with candidates who "are just like me." Large numbers of Americans voted for Bush because he seemed like a regular guy, someone you'd want to have a beer with. As Thomas Frank argued in "What's the Matter With Kansas," ideology also played a role. As hard-line "moral values" exponent and former GOP presidential candidate Gary Bauer told the New York Times, "Joe Six-Pack doesn't understand why the world and his culture are changing and why he doesn't have a say in it." The GOP appealed to Joe Six-Pack by harping on cultural issues like the "three Gs," gods, guns and gays.
It’s this “just like me” identification that so gets to me. Because it’s not just that they want their president to be just like them. Then want all of us to be just like them. And I don’t want to be just like them. I don’t want to take away their rights or abilities to be whatever it is they want to be. But I emphatically do not want that for myself. So when they vote in someone just like them, it’s for the underlying purpose, I suspect, to make us all the same. Joe Six-Pack has every say in the changing culture. It’s just that I don’t want to listen to him. I don’t want to live like him. I want to protect his right to live whatever way he chooses, but I’m not Joe Six-Pack. I’m more Susie Oenophile.
Turn on the television and there are plenty of wholesome programming for their kids and families. What they hate is that they want their HBO and keep it clean too. No. I want my raunchy shows on HBO and I’m willing to pay for it. I want edgier content, but I don’t expect to see it on the networks. That’s why I have cable. Go rail against the cable companies if you don’t like the way they package their programs (trust me, I could do without paying for Toon Disney and Blues Clues or whatever). But don’t rail against my culture as there’s plenty of room on cable for all of us.
Don’t like wine-drinking, latte-sipping, educated coastal types? Then stay in Kansas and stay out of my way. ‘Cause I like cuisine, fine wines, extensive and exotic travel, literary classics and writers that make me think, a film/television culture that pushes the envelope, gays, and the right to do whatever I want with my uterus. And my having that takes nothing away from the culture warriors’ lives unless they themselves let it. And if they do allow it, obviously they didn’t want it all that badly to begin with.
I want a president who is smarter, more experienced in how to use those smarts, and who has a broader vision of the world than just me, just Joe Six-Pack, or just anyone. I don’t want a president “just like me.” I’m not fit to run the country and neither are the majority of Americans.
Sarah Palin brought one unusual accessory to the Alaska Governor’s mansion after moving in last year: A tanning bed…
Palin had the apparatus installed in the mansion in Juneau, and a spokesman for the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, Roger Wetherell, confirmed the account to Politico.
“She paid for it with her own money,” Wetherell said in an email.
We have to pay more than the usual attention to Palin as a potential VP not only given McCain's age, but also his health history. As in melanoma cancer. And this woman uses a tanning bed? That's just ironic.
We have lost our ability to envy in a healthy manner.
There is nothing wrong with being envious of the things we don’t or can’t have, if they are things we want. I believe that acknowledging that you are envious of things is a very positive thing. If you are envious of things you don’t have, that can only spur you to acquire it. If you are envious of things you can’t have, than it is healthy to acknowledge that so you can move on.
Focusing primarily on envying what you don’t have first. What is not healthy or positive is to hate the people who have what you do not. They have it, you don’t. While perfectly acceptable to hate perhaps the way someone acquired what you envy can be fine, if properly analyzed. For example, while envying the status of those in the upper echelons, I only hate the methods by which some of them acquired that status (if it be by corruption). But I don’t hate a celebrity who has acquired fame and fortune given that they have a talent that the modern world wants to pay to be displayed. I envy that they are given free designer clothes and jewelry, but don’t hate them or the designer for it. I don’t have that talent therefore I don’t have the cache for a designer to want to clothe me so that others desire that product. It’s that simple. I don’t hate Warren Buffet for being one of the richest people in the world. I’m envious of his status, his wealth, and the brains and ambition that got him there.
What has become easy and popular in America is to hate what is envied. Nowhere is this more evident than in the current tactics of the Republican party. Hate the elite, hate the Ivy League universities, hate the intellectuals. Hate the wine drinkers, the organic food eaters, the latte drinkers, the urban dwellers.
But just like it is easy to turn what is feared into what is hated, it is commonplace to denigrate that which is the higher achievement of the human condition. To study and learn; to explore culinary experiences; to have the leisure time to sit around a coffee shop and exchange ideas; to choose to live in a place that offers diversity of people, food, jobs, leisure activities; none of these are things to be hated, even if they are envied.
And at heart, I believe they are envied. Not in a way that says that these choices are better. They are better for some, and not as much for others. Many many people do not live the lifestyle constantly vilified by the GOP because they don’t want it. They prefer closer-knit communities to raise their children in. They choose lower payer careers to avoid the high-stress corporate environment. And in those choices, they give up other options that they may wish they could experience, but aren’t willing to give up what it takes to have that experience. And that’s perfectly understandable.
I oftentimes envy those with the slower-paced lifestyle and the smaller mortgage on more square footage. If I envied it to the point that it caused me grief, I could and would make the lifestyle changes necessary to make my life similar. But I understand that I made and continue to make certain choices that leads to my current lifestyle. And I’m happy with it.
I envy those who were born into great wealth and influence. But I don’t hate them for it. Luck is making the most of the opportunities presented to you. To be born with the wind instantly at your back is a great thing and something any parent would want for their children. So while I may envy those that have it, there is no point in insulting them for making the most of what they had at hand. There are far too many examples of those who made tough choices and find themselves in the same position as those to the manor born. So anyone who wants to be there, but isn’t, is where they are because of the choices they made. Maybe they didn’t want to go into debt to go to the better college (or to college at all). Maybe they didn’t want to give up some fun or relaxation in their younger years to focus on the activities that pave the way to scholarships or internships or entry-level jobs that lead to corporate/political power. But to hate those that did, because at heart you are envious, is one of the worst forms of dishonesty.
It’s what can’t be had that primarily drives me in my social/political beliefs. Every day we discover more and more about how the circumstances of our early upbringing set the foundation for our futures. A child born into lower means, fed insubstantial or sub-standard food, given no positives to model themselves after, and who is poorly educated, frankly doesn’t have much of a shot in this world. Fast food or food loaded with preservatives is not nutritious, but it is cheap. Community organization can provide many positive role models and should not be sneered at on the national stage. Schools funded by the property taxes of low income neighborhoods will not be good, but families cannot move to where the good schools are.
These people have every right to be envious of those who have. And therefore it is my firm belief that those who have have a duty to develop the socio-economic infrastructure to eradicate these differences. The current Democratic base of wealthier and more educated individuals is proving that as well. The current GOP-thinking is that a free market will provide all of that. Simply put, it hasn’t and won’t. The GOP has good ideas in some areas (school vouchers isn’t a bad idea, but does nothing to fix the base problem which is underfunding and under investment in our education system), but have been incredibly inept at implementing any of them.
What’s very strange to me is that the current conservative base is not poor nor developmentally challenged the way people who live in urban poverty are. And yet, they hate what they don’t have, but could have if they wanted. And if they don’t want it, why hate those that do? If these people would simply apply rationality to their own thought processes, they might realize how idiotic they make themselves to be when they disparage education, intelligence, and eclectic and experimental tastes. Those things are better. Period. Anyone of these small-town-values loving people can still be educated, intelligent, and cosmopolitan in their tastes while still loving whatever it is about small-town-values they … well value.
Understanding the inner green-eyed monster could go a long way to clearing up the current state of public discourse that deals only in extremes and vitriol hurled back and forth across the political, economic, and social divide.
Want to do something fun? Go get a political and/or societal commentary type book published before the year 2000. I recommend Bill Bryson (I’m a Stranger Here Myself is a good one) or P.J. O’Rourke (a very funny conservative commentator, one you can actually like).
Before wide-spread use of the Internet.
Before 9/11
Before Bush
Before housing bubble/burst.
Before bloggers.
Wow, they say the ‘50s were simpler times. We’ll be saying that about the ‘90s when our biggest issue was what Bill actually did with that cigar and where.
For my birthday my mother and sister got me a gift certificate for a consultation with an animal psychic.
Yes, you read that right. An animal psychic.
I believe or don’t believe, or don’t even care enough to express an opinion about any number of the inexplicable, preternatural, or un-prove-able things in this world. I don’t know if I do or do not believe in psychics. I particularly don’t know if I believe in psychics over the telephone.
What I do expect is that it will be interesting and fun. At worst funny, at best insightful. My appointment is on September 24. I’ll definitely write up the experience. If I find it amusing, I’ll write about it but not post the name as I’m not looking to embarrass anyone. If I find it a useful/fun experience, I’ll provide the details. Let me know if you want the contact details before I have the appointment and do the write up.
For the interested, we have two cats, Jackie and Gambit, and strong memory of our old girl Gypsy. I’m trying to think if I have any specific questions I want answered.
Jackie, the 5-year-old jellicle cat, is a typical jellicle (if you don’t know what a jellicle is, it’s a black and white or tuxedo cat; I like the British-originating term jellicle better, like from Cats). Aloof but loving. Not too talkative except when demanding something. Very independent but loves to sprawl on laps. She has definitely picked up some Gypsy-like habits, particularly in her demanding ways.
Gambit is a 3-year-old Chartreuse. We’ve never met another of his breed, but by all reports he’s growing into a typical cat of it. He’s very dog like. Loves to play, loves to sit on your lap or just be around you. Doesn’t meow loudly, but is quite polite in his chirps and sqeaks. We swear we can decipher his pleases and thank yous from each other.
Gypsy was my epic cat. I had for 16 ½ years before she had a heart attack. Which, due to 2 ½ years of dealing with her diabetes (and managing it!) was kind of a blessing as I wouldn’t have wanted to see a long slow decline. The fiancé and her even bonded after a few dominance battles in the beginning and she became his epic cat as well. I haven’t told the psychic anything about Gypsy, so I wonder if she’ll come up.
New rumors for The Dark Knight sequel. If they’re true, they’re brilliant. Johnny Depp as The Riddler and Philip Seymour Hoffman as the Penguin. I don’t worry too much about Nolan getting these two right. The Penguin as played by Danny DeVito was creepy and for the character that DeVito was given to play, he did a fabulous job. Only problem was, that wasn’t the Penguin. Same with Jim Carrey’s The Riddler. The Riddler is an obsessive and brilliant character, not the flapping effeminate that Carrey played himas. Depp would be perfect.
McCain got a big boost in the polls, you can see at Electoral-Vote.com. Still has Obama in the lead, but barely. The boost came predominantly from from white women, but I honestly doubt it will last. As the majority of women really get to know Palin’s policies (or if we do, since she’s not being at all forthcoming with the media), they’ll peel off. Particularly items like this, courtesy of SLOG:
Some will stay, but they’re the ones who were only voting for Hillary because she was a woman and otherwise would have voted for McCain anyway. Polls still show solid majorities in Congress for the Democrats.
But even that doesn’t warrant a real political post on Pandora’s Politics.
Other than that, I just can’t get too worked up on McCain/Palin today. And I’m sick of hearing about her church. Of course, I’m always sick of hearing about any church as it relates to politics.
God, there isn’t any even good entertainment gossip to make fun of. When did all the prosti-tots start behaving? C’mon Lindsey! Train wreck or something. Even Paris doesn’t warrant a rubber-necking glance anymore.
