CC reccommends

"Gah," said the beautiful woman said to her friend at the party. "I try to date, but all the men are jerks."

"Have you tried dating an engineer?" I asked, because she's my friend too. "They are sweet, smart, and lots of them are funny. You know that your kids will study hard and get scholarships to college..."

"Yeah," she said in a voice totally devoid of enthusiasm. "I should really try that..."

"OK, so they're not big partiers... but they can fix things..."

Now admittedly, I am biased. TheCSO and I celebrated our first wedding anniversary two weeks ago, and the sixth anniversary of the first time we umm... became involved on December 6. The CSO is a systems engineer.*

I, of course, love the CSO. I think he's great.

But it fascinates me that I know several really beautiful girls looking for guys, but all my cloest male friends are nerds so they won't date them.

CC

*People have commented that theCSO resembles Patricia Arquette's husband on Medium both physically and in the way he and his wife interact. He's playing an engineer.

Trying to be a socially responsible sexy person

A really interesting comment on the Target post got me thinking.

Where CAN one buy socially responsible underwear?

Pepsi, Pixar, FedEx and Weight Watchers all make the lists of socially responsible companies but no place to buy underwear makes this list or any of the similar ones I found.

So perhaps we'll try process of elimination.

• I'll concede that Walmart isn't the place to go for this.
  
• Target is indeed just as bad or almost as bad as Walmart by most social responsibility indexes. Which is too bad because their Gilligan O'Malley line manages to be lacy without being prissy.
  
• Victoria's Secret (which has a new flagship store right near me, something that really deserves a post of its own) is owned by Limited Brands. They are currently being boycotted because they Send too many catalogues I have to wonder if any of the people behind this are on libereal-beloved L.L. Bean's mailing list, because I am and damn, I think I get something from them every two days. If you consider giving to Republicans a sign of social irresponsibility (which I don't really, but some people who post here seem to) Limited Brands gives 73 percent of its PAC money to Republicans, a higher percentage than WalMart.
  
• Frederick's of Hollywood gets a lot of its undies from a company called Gelmart that is notorious for nasty labor practices.
  
• Leggs, Hanes, Gossard, Loveable, Bali and Wonderbra are owned by Sara Lee. Sara Lee seems to be a better choice on the whole, especially if you're pro-Isreal and.or for gun control. That said, gay rights folks are justifiably peeved about this billboard. But a fair amount of their stuff is still produced in East Asia.

It's a rough ol' life, trying to make a better world.

CC
who swears she only spent half an hour or so on this.

Kickass new UUism blog

by a UU in Alaska.

Check it out.

CC

Art has a blog

and I thought the world should know.

CC

How sad.

The Air Marshalls at Miami Int'l Airport just shot a guy.

Judging by what I've heard and read, it was a clean shooting as the guy claimed to have a bomb and was running toward the cops while reaching into a bag, but Fox News is reporting that the guy was traveling with a woman who says he was manic-depressive and off his medication.

CSI did this plot roughly a two years ago.

CC

Avoiding the Target

So why is it that some big box stores are OK?

There’s a store out there that give some 70 percent of its political contributions to Republicans.

They buy lots of goods that are cheaply made overseas.

In rural stores, they start their employees out at a little over minimum wage and they frequently show up on lists of large employers with the largest numbers of people on state assistance programs.*

They allow their pharmacists to refuse to dispense emergency contraception. Planned Parenthood is campaigning against them.

They aren’t unionized, of course, but their pissed-off employees still have a website

Yet the only people wanting to boycott them are upset with them kicking out the Salvation Army or are doing it for other wacky reasons

And most of my liberal friends shop there. I know I do. I haven’t been in a Walmart in at least a year. But every time we need furnace filters, dish soap or a cheap birthday present for my brothers, TheCSO and I head right out there.

To Target.

Not that I don’t like Target. I really do. I far prefer it to Walmart. It’s owned by a Minneasota Senator’s family rather that the ever-creepy Waltons. They sell nice-looking lamps and do a nice job advertising how socially responsible they are. They do a great job appealing to the upper-middle class and they are smaller so the numbers of people they are screwing over appear far less impressive.

But they actually give a slightly greater percentage of their PAC money to Republicans than WalMart does.

CC

*Along with other places that hire lots of people for unskilled labor. Fast food chains, large staffing agencies, grocery chains, etc, all have a lot of people uninsured. All of them hire lots of poor people. In general, poor people are more likely to be uninsured.

Oddest Classified Ad Ever

I've been looking for some volunteer work so I can spend part of my free time doing something for other people. When life isn't going well, I find that doing something for people who have bigger problems than I do is a big help in keeping perspective.

The "Volunteer" section of the paper today had this ad:

DANGEROUS THREATENING RISK assessment volunteer wanted to investigate liberal agenda catering to lowest common denominator, cowardice, and government reward system for irresponsible mutants- liberals@mentaldisorder.com.

The website that the email address originates from is even odder.

Ah well.

Not that it wasn't tempting and all, but I emailed a soup kitchen and a women's shelter instead.

CC

Conflicted Feelings on the Big Monkey

Ever since I saw the mini-documentary in the preview for Harry Potter, I've been really into seeing the new King Kong remake. Apparently, it is the movie Peter Jackson has wanted to make since he was a kid and it looks like it will be a kickass fountain of spectacle.

However, Angry Black Bitch makes a convincing case that the story well, sort of sucks from a political perspective.

CC

Clarifications on Wal-mart

Yep, Walmart gives primarily to Republicans. So do lots and lots of businesses. Target, for example. And Home Depot, and Macy's for a few others.

Yes, I've heard of the Walmart movie. I read in the New York Times a couple of weeks ago, for example, that the hardware store owner in it who claimed he was being driven out of business by Walmart actually lost his business three months before Walmart even opened.

There's now a new small hardware store right where the old one used to be. According to the owner of the new store, they guy on the documentary's business had been floundering for years. The new store is doing well, Walmart or no.

Naturally, the filmmakers didn't mention that.

I don't understand why Michael Moore, Morgan Spurlock and now the people behind this documentary think they need to lie or obscure the facts.

In most instances, I think the liberals are correct and shouldn't have to hide the truth.

I, for one, would love for poor people to be able to buy fresh vegetables from small farmers markets. In my area, however, the farmers markets are more expensive, mostly open wacky times like Wednesday mornings and none of them take foodstamps. Walmart sells fresh vegetables and sells them really cheaply.

CC

Added after theCSO's post:

I really don't get the filmmaker thing.

I mean, when Michael Moore splices parts of two different Charlton Heston speeches together to imply that he gave a really offensive speech in Colorado right after Columbine, that's straight up lying with film. (For anyone who has seen the movie, Heston said the bit about his cold, dead fingers at a speech in Charlotte a year before Columbine. Moore mixed that footage in with the Colorado footage. You can tell if you watch the tape carefully because Heston is wearing a slightly different suit and a very different tie. Moore did tape Heston's Colorado speech, but there Heston prayed for the victims and didn't say anything offensive, so Moore had to imply that he did for Heston to look as bad as Moore wanted him to.)

When Morgan Spurlock claims in his book in McDonald's that:

"Leftover bits and pieces [of dead cows] are scooped up, ground together and fed back to the cows. And then those cows are ground up and fed to you"

He provides no source for the accusation.

If he hates McDonalds so much, he should prove it. That's called "ruminant feeding" and it is way illegal and has been so for years. If he can prove it, McDonalds will face huge, huge fines. My guess? Spurlock doesn't have any proof or he would have turned McDonald's in and become the Erin-Brockovich-style folk hero he'd so clearly like to be.

A lot of Moore's and Spurlock's mistakes can be written off to bad research, which is what Moore always claims.

But I'd say both Moore's Heston thing and the Walmart folks' accidentally not telling us the real deal with the hardware store has to be intentional.

The worst part to me is, it's so lazy. Can't Moore figure out another way to get across the message that Charleton Heston is an asshat without lying? (The lie didn't fool me, and I still think he's an asshat.) Couldn't the Walmart people find another little town with a real business going under because of WalMart?

I guess lying was just easier and they assumed we'd never notice a different tie, know about the laws against ruminant feeding, or that the New York Times would send somebody to look into that hardware store. Like Howard Dean acting like the cocky kid who hasn't studied and trying to fake his way through a bible question, it just blows up in their faces every time.

I'm really starting to think Joel Monka has a point when he says that liberalism's greatest mistake is assuming people are stupid.

CC

For the record, I thought this before thinking this was cool.

Kevin Drum is looking at anti-anti-Walmart liberals.

CC
who doesn't love the place herself, but has observed that poor people do.

Showing off the scars of History

Sorry I've been missing in action recently. Ironically, though I'm not working, I've been really busy. I put in a lot of hours working on the church bazaar, painted several rooms in my house and applied for some jobs.

Anyway, last night I had a very odd experience.

I was at a large social gathering. Seated at my table was a lady who knew a lot about antiques. She talked about her antique business for awhile and somebody asked her how she got into it.

She blithely went in to how her mother had been an antiques dealer in postwar Germany, going around the country making fabulous deals.

I sat there, quietly appalled.

This was not the first time this has happened. A few years ago at another dinner party, another lady went on about how clever her mother was to have bought valuable antiques in postwar Germany.

This time, however, the lady kept talking. She blithely explained that her family had gotten through the war just fine as they were wealthy bankers who had paid lots of people off. (Leads one to wonder what the Nazis did with the money...) No one said anything, but she explained that rich people always survive wars just fine. As my family used to have money, but lost it by being enthusiastic tories and confederates, I had a ready response to this one. Rich people who don't play both sides do lose their money. My relations believed in England and believed in the confederacy and they paid dearly for their beliefs because they fought for them. I was trying to keep the party polite, though.

She later, apropos of nothing as far as I can remember, mentioned how she fully believed that anybody who doesn't like the way things are going in America should just leave. I wondered if someone had told the expatriates that. Probably a lot of people did. Ironic how I loathe it when people say that now. Viewed through the lens of the holocaust, it is excellent advice.

In the car on the way back after dinner, the CSO and I talked this out. Yes, lots of people were in denial about what had happened. Yes, it's not a crime to be an oppourtunist, especially when you don't fully understand the source of the opportunity. But talking about it like that? I compared it to bragging that your relations had gotten on TV when they were turning firehoses on people marching for civil rights. He compared it to how it is candor, not boorishness, to admit that your relations owned slaves. I understand his point that we cannot be blamed for the actions of our relations (oh, do I) and that holding family history up for the inspection of others can be a valuable way to put faces on historical events.

But to bring it up in social conversation in such a strangely light way, and with no acknowledgement that your relations had done anything wrong, just seems odd. Surely she herself as an antiques dealer understood where her mother's antiques had come from. It's remotely possible her mother was good and honest and fair, but if that were the case, wouldn't the lady have said something like "There were so many crooked antiques dealers at the time. I was proud of how my mother resolved not to be one of them" to clarify this point?* Did she expect us at the table to not know? Were we not supposed to care?

CC
Still thinking it over, perhaps overthinking.


*When CC's mother's job had a job description that sounded remotely like "slumlord," CC always was VERY clear on the point that while the Chalicemom does indeed work in minority housing, she is good and honest about it, genuinely committed to helping people make better lives, and certainly hasn't gotten rich from it.













Link: The Would You Have Been a Nazi Test written by jason_bateman on Ok Cupid, home of the 32-Type Dating Test

The Expatriate Achtung! You are 30% brainwashworthy, 18% antitolerant, and 9% blindly patriotic

Congratulations! You are not susceptible to brainwashing, your values and cares extend beyond the borders of your own country, and your Blind Patriotism does not reach unhealthy levels. If you had been German in the 30s, you would've left the country. One bad scenario -- as I hypothetically project you back in time -- is that you just wouldn't have cared one way or the other about Nazism. Maybe politics don't interest you enough. But the fact that you took this test means they probably do. I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt. Did you know that many of the smartest Germans departed prior to the beginning of World War II, because they knew some evil shit was brewing? Brain Drain. Many of them were scientists. It is very possible you could have been one of them. Conclusion: born and raised in Germany in the early 1930's, you would not have been a Nazi. The Would You Have Been A Nazi? Test

Best Email Evah

I was forwarded this by a close amigo, who got it from his cousin.


"Hello,
I have a wide screen plasm that Im trying to sell real cheap.
It was my ex boyfriends, but since I caught the bitch cheating on me with some gym rat from South Beach I figure its fair game. Anyways, its really nice and only a few months old and its still under warranty.
Please only serious people call since Im still shaken up over this whole ting."

A bad sign

CC tries to name the nine supreme court Justices:

Uh, ok, there's Ginsberg,

and Breyer

and Souter

and Scalia

and Roberts

and Alito, likely, but technically still O'Conner,

and Thomas

and...

um...

and...

CC tries to name all nine Bradys

In ascending order of age:

Cindy,

Bobby,

Jan,

Peter,

Marcia,

Greg,

Mrs. Brady,

Mr. Brady,

and

Alice.

Do I get extra points for remembering Tiger and/or cousin Oliver?


CC
pretty sure that if they'd ever done an episode where Stevens made two dates for the same dance or Kennedy got hit with a stray football and worried he'd never be a teen model, she would know them.

Can we all agree that THIS is wrong?

Since, well, all of my blogger pals who have written about the "guy who gives a sermon criticizing Bush two days before the election is accused of trying to influence said election" issue have disagreed with my stance that the FEC is at least somewhat justified in doing this, I'm wondering.

We can all agree that a public school teacher giving a vocabulary test with questions like:

"I wish Bush would be (coherent, eschewed) for once during a speech, but there are theories that his everyday diction charms the below-average mind, hence insuring him Republican votes."

is innappropriate, right?

Full story here.

That said, I have heard people put forth the theory that using poor grammar makes one sound more accessible to the average person, which would make the thrust of the question right, though the principle applies to both parties. On the Democratic side, no one with poor grammar comes to mind, but I remember a story that when he was a Senator, former Florida Governor Lawton Chiles would wear expensive dark suits in Washington, then change into cheaper, lighter suits to go home because that's the style in Florida so he could look like a man of the people. Same principle.

To me, poor grammar sounds sort of contrived in a man who learned these things at expensive private schools. But "Walkin' Lawton" never lost an election in 40 years and Kerry certainly didn't win any votes by being true to himself and using phrases like "would that it were," although I thought it was pretty cool.

So maybe there's something to be said for a man-of-the-people act well played, and Bush does seem to pull it off.

I should end there for the sake of a having a well-structured post, but my smart (and by the way, Conservative) friend Pam is a Floridian and she told me a funny story about Lawton Chiles.

The 1994 election between Jeb Bush and Lawton Chiles was a close one and came down to a debate less than a month before the election.

In the debate, Bush said Chiles was a good man who had served his country well, but the time comes when a person has to retire and let the younger generation take over.

And that's about all you need to say to lose an election in Florida.


CC
who suspects that teacher would be really annoying to know.

And who has never actually been able to verify that Bush said that, but politics friends of both parties love that story.

Tee hee.

A Chicago man dies and goes to hell.

When he gets there, the devil comes over to welcome him. The devil then says, "Sometimes it gets pretty uncomfortable down here."

The man says, "No problem. I'm from Chicago."

So the devil goes over to the thermostat, turns the temperature up to 100, and the humidity up to 80. He then goes back to the Chicago man to see how he's doing. To the devil's surprise, the man is doing just fine.

"No problem...just like Chicago in June," the man says.

So the devil goes back over to the thermostat, and turns the temperature up to 150, and the humidity up to 90. He then goes back over to see how the Chicago man is doing. The man is sweating a little, but overall looks comfortable.

"No problem. Just like Chicago in July," the man says.

So now the devil goes over to the thermostat, turns the temperature up to 200, and the humidity up to 100. When he goes back to see how the man is doing, the man is sweating profusely, and has taken his shirt off. Otherwise, he seems OK.

He says, "No problem. Just like Chicago in August."

Now the devil is really perplexed. So he goes back to the thermostat, and turns the temperature down to MINUS 150 DEGREES. Immediately, all the humidity in the air freezes up, and the whole place (meaning Hell) becomes a frigid, barren, frozen, deathly cold wasteland.

When he goes back now to see how the Chicago man is doing, he is shocked to discover the man is jumping up and down, and cheering in obvious delight. The devil immediately asks the man what's going on. To which the Chicago man replies.....

"THE CUBS WON THE WORLD SERIES!!!"
"THE CUBS WON THE WORLD SERIES!!!"

Contented

Well, we finally got to Atlanta having had a really spiff time with the CSO’s family. Tomorrow we’re meeting a college friend of mine for lunch and seeing his new house, hanging out all afternoon, then going to dinner with some friends of Petey’s in Atlanta.

Tonight, Petey made us spaghetti and now we’re sitting around playing cards and eating cookies. Petey makes good cookies.

Called home and the Chalicemom reported that Thanksgiving has been peaceful up there.

Smile.

Things still suck in lots of ways, but I have lots to be thankful for tonight.

Happy Thanksgiving.

CC

Thanksgiving MIsadventures

After hitting a freak snowstorm in the Virginia mountains, we found we were really tired, so we called up TheCSO's mother in Charlotte and asked if she'd like to have dinner with us so we could have an excuse to get off the road.

After dinner, we were tired.

Now we're staying at the CSO's mom's house for Thanksgiving lunch.

Smile. Nice thing about family, they have to take you in.

So I am blogging, drying dishes, watching the parade and eagerly awaiting the happy faces that will ensue when TheCSO's grandparents get here to find us. My sister-in-law has made a great Thanksgiving lunch.

We will get to Atlanta in time for dinner.

Katie Couric just doesn't sound into it this morning. She has a Ben-Stein-like delivery. Maybe she's not feeling well. TheCSO and I decided that it would rock if Comedy Central set up their own reviewing stand and had wiseass commentary. The CSO and I don't normally watch things like the Macy's Parade, but we would totally tune in for that.

Tommy Tune as Doctor Doolitte? Tell me Jon Stewart couldn't do something hilarious with that.

Kristen Chenoweth creeps me out. I'm not sure why. But as the ChaliceMom's daughter, I can totally sing along with "Oklahoma!"

I'm not sure why the Brooklyn bridge needs its own float, but the lead singer of the band playing on it is a cutie.

PB is live blogging her Thanksgiving, too.

CC
who really has asked "is there anything I can do?" a bunch of times.

Oh and here's a quirky blgo quiz:

The Dante's Inferno Test has sent you to Purgatory!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:

Level	Score
Purgatory (Repenting Believers)	High
Level 1 - Limbo (Virtuous Non-Believers)	High
Level 2 (Lustful)	High
Level 3 (Gluttonous)	High
Level 4 (Prodigal and Avaricious)	Very Low
Level 5 (Wrathful and Gloomy)	Very Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis (Heretics)	Very Low
Level 7 (Violent)	High
Level 8- the Malebolge (Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers)	Low
Level 9 - Cocytus (Treacherous)	Low

Take the Dante Inferno Hell Test

Politically-motivated sermon investigated in politically-motivated investigation

I've already detailed here why preaching a sermon about how Jesus would have disliked Bush's policies two days before an election and then playing at being shocked when somebody says you're trying to influence said election is a bit precious, IMHO.

But you don't have to agree with me, and if you'd like to sign a petition anyway, you can do so here.

CC

Character Education

In the supermarket, I ran into someone I know who was delighted to hear that I was looking for a job and offered me a position working under her designing "character education" programs for the county schools.

Though theCSO has said we're fine financially and I should look for something that really fits, even a casual job offer felt good. I've had a bull-in-a-china-shop day where I found out I did something that really offended someone I like a lot and wrote a long letter to someone else in which I'm pretty sure I said all the wrong things but can't for the life of me imagine what the right things were.

Anyway, the job only being two days a week made it easy to turn down, but I'm pretty sure I wasn't suited for it anyway. I'm not sure I am philisophically OK with character education in the first place. It's weird to hear people say that liberals are morally relative. The hardcore liberals I know aren't morally relative in the least. They are just as convinced as the hardcore conservatives that they know what is best for the world and everyone should do as they do. Neither hardcore liberal nor hardcore conservative values are mine.

People's characters are different. And different people are going to find different traits to be the most important and different families raise their kids to focus on different values. As a kid, my parents were big on loyalty to one's various commitments. The CSO's family was big on being open with one another. (We found out how different those values really were the first time a good friend told me a secret that she didn't want me to tell anyone. Eventually he found out from someone else and I mentioned that I'd known. To me, keeping the secret was the natural act of a good friend. To him, my keeping something from him was a big deal. We worked it out, but I can easily see how we both got where we are from the families we came from, though certainly a less pop-psychy explanation is possible. )

My favorite way of "teaching morality" is vicariously through literature. Most books of any quality have moral questions at their centers. As a junior high school kid, I was having some fairly sophisticated thoughts about the nature of good and evil that were inspired by Piers Anothony's Incarnations of Immortality series. Surely looking at what different characters value in great works of literature can get much the same message across, and in a way that will resonate far more than a more typical character education lesson could.

Besides, I have a large bias against the subject because I attended a day-long character education seminar when I was in high school. It was so very painful that when a kid who had mercilessly teased me in Junior High school dropped his wallet as he turned to leave, I almost didn't tell him lest somebody think the attempts to morally educate me had been successful.

But "don't be a jerk" has always been the heart of my moral code and when I saw him drop the wallet, I yelled after him anyway.

What can I say? I'm a girl scout.

CC
whose husband just leaned over the computer and said that a job teaching kids how to be characters is right up my alley.

OK, now be MY Fodor's

TheCSO's and my afore-written-about Thanksgiving with our Vegan friends fell through, so now we are going to Petey's house in Atlanta.

Anybody know of fun stuff to do in Atlanta or good restaurants where we can take our host?

CC

Rules the Chaliceparents imposed that I still think are kind of stupid today

A service to the kids of today

1. You can own computer games for the PC and watch lots of TV, but you can’t have a Nintendo. It will make you anti-social, despite the kids you see playing them together.
2. You can’t have a Walkman. It also will make you anti-social, despite the fact that all the kids with lots of friends have one.
3. You’re not allowed to watch Pee-Wee’s Playhouse. There was just something disturbing about that show.
4. You’re also not allowed to watch The Simpsons, though this rule was relaxed sometime in high school.
5. No magazines, except certain educational ones. Highlights and then 3-2-1 Contact were OK. But the Consumer Reports magazine for kids wasn’t for some reason. Fashion magazines when I got older were also out.
6. The ChaliceMom, a sweet person who likes things like bright colors and bold patterns, must approve all clothing purchases. My mother quite literally dressed me funny.
7. Family vacations must include many, many posed pictures of mother and children taken by the ChaliceDad. I remember these sessions as very unpleasant and at my wedding asked for minimal posed photographs and tons of candids, which produced amazing results, particularly since the CSO and I had hired a former AP news photographer. My mother had let the picture point go, but my Aunt Barbara was so lost by the lack of structure that she actually started organizing her own posed photos and pulling the photographer over to take them. So my wedding pictures have a couple hundred shots of my friends and relations captured mid-giggle, mid-dance or mid-serious-looking-conversation, and a section in the middle that is my grandmother, aunt, uncle, cousin, cousin’s husband, cousin’s children. Etc, all in a group, smiling obediently at the camera.

CC at the movies

Saw the Harry Potter movie at Tysons Corner’s very large and extremely kickass new movie theatre. On the whole, not as good as the third movie, but better than the first two. It probably did a better job than any of the others at showing the importance of the supporting characters. Neville and the Weasely twins made much more of an impression in this movie than they had in other ones. The director also did a nice job of not showing us much Quiddich. Quiddich, like most sports, bores the pants off CC.

Smile. The candles just hanging in the air in the Hogwarts main hall make me smile every time.

But the weirdest thing was that the wizard kids absolutely flipped out over a carriage pulled by flying horses, leaning out the train window are pointing.

Apparently to them, this is weird.

Oh, and judging by the previews, King Kong will rock.

CC

The Mysterious Ways of Adults

Tonight, PB wrote about a fairly offensive ad comparing Dr. Phil to Jesus Christ. (And BTW, the evangelical feel of Dr. Phil's approach is discussed here if you're interested.)

I really do think the ad is too much and that PB's criticisms are justified, but I couldn't help being reminded a time when little CC was sitting at the breakfast table, eating her raisin bran as Aunt Jackie was reading the paper.

"Look at this!" She said, thrusting the paper across the table at me. She was showing me a full-page ad in the Washington Post with a large, pre-Raphealite Adam and Eve.

"This was a big mistake," the ad copy read, "but not as big a mistake as missing Daffy's spring sale!"

Little CC thought it was pretty funny, but didn't let on. After all, when CC had expressed skepticism about the talking snake, Mommy had explained that the Story of Adam and Eve was like that story about the dog who was carrying a bone, but lost it when he saw his reflection in the stream and jumped in after the bigger bone he thought the dog in the stream had. You didn't have to believe the story, you just had to learn from the story. Bible stories were allegories, Mommy had said.

Aunt Jackie raved about how tacky the Daffy's ad was for at least five minutes, and then showed it to Mommy and Daddy, who were equally upset. There was much loud complaining from the adults in Little CC's life that morning, and it had nothing to do with anything she herself had done. They were upset over somebody insulting the allegory. CC just ate her breakfast and listened.

And somehow, she remembers that as the best morning of her entire childhood.

CC

Ps. Picture is by William Strang and hangs in the Tate Gallery. It's not the one from the ad, but fairly representative.

Another briefcase in another hall

I just got laid off.

I got the speech about how good I am and how this is a business decision, etc, etc and soforth. No snarking on my evil Republican bosses, please. Though two weeks notice so I could apply for something else from a position of strength would have been nice, they were on the whole quite reasonable and seemed to feel bad. The loud smiley partner offered me a glowing reference. That should make me feel better as people tend to like loud smiley people.

Naturally, my closest friend in the office hid in her office and didn't say goodbye. Sucks but typical.

If anyone knows of anybody hiring in Washington DC, please let me know.

CC

Awake, again

I was kind of bummed out for most of the day, but cheered up significantly when I talked to Linguist Friend and TheCSO (who is in New Haven this week) and am feeling better. Still, prepare yourselves, my annual Christmas bad mood is looking to be huge this year. I pass the giant inflatable snowglobe and I feel my snarky senses tingling.

Yes, new readers, as JField once noted, I don't like Christmas, kids OR
puppies.

They don't call me a "Cranky Humanist" for nothin'.


CC

Can't win for losing with dolls.

I did actually buy the child of a friend a Che Guevera doll, with his Mom's hearty approval of course.

But now that I read this, I feel all sort of trendy and lame for doing so.

Kate Hudson? Cringe.

Not to mention, that as Catallarchy notes, Che was kind of a scary bastard.

"Hatred is an element of struggle; relentless hatred of the enemy that impels us over and beyond the natural limitations of man and transforms us into effective, violent, selective, and cold killing machines. Our soldiers must be thus; a people without hatred cannot vanquish a brutal enemy."

Probably not the sort of thing I would want the theoretical Chalicekids to be spouting, but it still beats the heck out of "Math class is tough!"

CC

Idle thoughts

Today while updating the database at work, I discovered that we have a guy whose first name is "Spofford" in it.

And I wonder:

1. Does his wife call out "Spofford!" during the act of love?

2. If so, how does she keep a straight face while doing so?

CC

Yeah, Jesus would have been totally fine with Pat Robertson saying that

"I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God. You just rejected him from your city," Pat Robertson on Dover, Pennsylvania.


Jeezum crow.


CC

Sabina Fallacy reviewed

The world needs a review of the Sabina Fallacy.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Explained this CC-invented term to a friend the other day, and now I am presenting it for the edification of the viewing public:

The Sabina Fallacy a system of misguided thinking held by a person dating/marrying someone who treats others badly that allows the Obvious Future Victim (OFV) to believe that though schnookums may have behaved badly in the past, he/she would NEVER treat OFV this way.

If you hear someone* say “Well, yeah, she got her last boyfriend arrested for stalking her, then sat outside his dorm room for two hours so he couldn’t go to class without violating the restraining order, but she wouldn’t do that to me. Things between US are different.”

Or “Well, yes, she does scream at her adult son for minor things in front of dinner parties all the time, but she would never humiliate me like that because, well, I can’t articulate WHY, she just wouldn’t.”

Or “Sure, his last five wives died mysteriously, but I still can’t wait to be wife number six!”

Then just smack the OFV upside the head.


CC

*The Sabina Fallacy is named for a real person who actually did this.

CC can't sleep

I should be pretty happy tonight. I emailed back and forth all day with a buddy of mine who used to work at Cato. We were gently debating voter turnout. I may not like politics in church, but I do actually do this stuff for a living and I dig a good conversation about voter turnout. Especially when I'm right. Which I was. Northern Virginia did turn out, delivering us a Democratic governor who did a great job of being "not odious" on the campaign trail, which was all the race really required given that his opponent reminds one of Mr. Garrison from South Park, but evil.

Way back in June, I linked to a story about turning politically damaging recordings into ringtones and commented on what political genius it was. Now if you want a "Brownie, you're doing a heckuva job!" ringtone, you know where to find one. I'd get one, but it has "The Train they call the City of New Orleans," in the background as Bush speaks and I found out recently that song still depresses me.

CC

Election Day

Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick and his wife, Carlita, cast their votes in the city's hotly contested mayoral race. Picture stolen from WashingtonPost.com




CC always feels this way when she votes, too.

She stood in front of the machine tonight, carefully voting for Kaine, then stepped back a bit and had to suppress a little squeak of excitement as she pressed "Vote." Democracy never gets old, kids.

CC

This was much funnier when it was happening to Conservative churches.

Philo gave us the scoop on a church getting investigated by the IRS for having an antiwar sermon where the minister, by total coincidence, having nothing to do with influencing thoughts on the upsoming elections, told the church what Jesus would have thought of the war that just happened to be a huge campaign issue.

I have to say that I find the general "Boy, if Jesus were alive today, he would totally agree with my political views" topic really tired, no matter which side is preaching it.

That said, I think the IRS should have many more blatant cases of politicking from the pulpit than this one. Heck, I could give them three or four that I've actually witnessed that were more blatant. Not going to, but just saying...

I prefer going one notch more careful than the IRS standard Derek cites in Philo's comments. I'd like to see a standard where we don't endorse/criticize candidates OR policies, but the moral stands beneath them. That seems firmly religion's territory. And if we don't change people's minds about the moral questions, killing one referendum or getting one candidate elected is just a band-aid over a deeper wound anyway.

In my church we just had a sermon on the evolution debate where our minister spent a good ten minutes telling us over and over how right we are to believe in evolution. (Before giving us the great insight that evolution and God's hand in creation are not at all incompatible, a point my mom made as convincingly and a hell of a lot more concisely when I was ten. But I'm getting off track...) We're all very certain that the church should stay out of science, even when a church thinks it knows what is best for science.

Is it so unreasonable to ask the church to do the same when it comes to politics?

Is there anyone here who can tell me with a straight face that listing off one candidate's policies and how much Jesus would have disliked them two days before an election has nothing to do with influencing votes?

Furthermore, if the church is so known for its liberal social activism that church members suspect this is political payback, why on Earth is telling its members that Jesus was a liberal necessary? They pretty obviously already believe it. Sermons that tell me how right I am mostly bore me.

CC

Ps. Yes, I would feel the same way if a conservative church preached about how the capital gains tax makes baby jesus cry for half an hour, then added a quick disclaimer that moral people can vote both ways. Of course, it sucks when conservatives do it too. Duh.

Where are we going?

During my lunch with Boy in the Bands yesterday, he raised the question “Where is the UU blogosphere going?”

It’s a good question, and I don’t think I gave him a particularly good answer in that I responded by talking about how one of my favorite things about the blogosphere is that a 27-year old fundraising consultant finds the real live ministers actually talk to her like she’s a peer and take seriously what she has to say. This is a continuing source of amazement to me, I can assure you.

(I do not typically talk to people about politics like they know what they are talking about. My general impression is that most people in no way think through their political opinions or double check to make sure their facts are right.)

Anyway, getting the luxury of being taken seriously is part of what I’m doing here. And I really do feel like I have a lot to say about UUism and the world in general. And when I post about one of my problems, people advise me how to solve it. And when I read a good book or find a good sushi restaurant, it’s my impulse to let the world know.

It’s funny because linguist friend introduced me as a “UU blogger” to someone at his church one time and I about fell through the floor. I love the Chaliceblog, but I can’t escape the suspicion that religion blogging is still a little bit lame.

OK, so we’ve established that I blog for various self-serving reasons.

But what about the rest of us. And where are we going?

Well, all I can say is that we all influence one another and we all pull the blogosphere in our own directions. If I put up a pointless screed about my personal life, I have to assume I’m encouraging other people to do the same. So I at least try to make it entertaining and I hope they will too. I really do think that thoughtful, quality posts improve the blogosphere. I know that when I read one, it makes me want to write one.

So where are we going?

Probably about where we are.

All over the map.

CC

Information Gaps

In the days after the 2004 election, I had a huge pet peeve about people saying “I just didn’t know what Kerry’s plans were. What was his plan for jobs? He never communicated that well.”

To which I would typically respond. “Well, Kerry being a far more moderate Democrat than he typically got credit for, the plans were sympathetic to big business in lots of ways. Mostly, he focused on job training programs to prepare people to do the jobs that big corporations are hiring for and doing things like giving tax breaks to companies who brought outsourced jobs back to America.”

“Wow.” Said person would say. “How did you know that?”

“JohnKerry.com?”

The assumption that if a piece of information hasn’t been tossed up into our collective faces, we haven’t been given it annoys me. Right now, I’m seeing it from the opposite side in that people are so upset that at McDonalds one must WALK OVER TO THE POSTER on the wall to get the nutrition information on one’s Big Mac rather than having the information printed on the packaging.

In California, Conservatives are all in a fuss because Union members have to LOOK IT UP ON THE INTERNET if they want to know what political causes their union dues are supporting.

All this makes me want to make the internet available as a public utility. Already, you can get a cheap computer for not much more than you would pay for a decent TV. (Dell’s low-end models start at $349. Emachines at $339, etc. Yes, those both include monitors.) For other folks, there’s always the library.

Anyway, we aren’t quite there yet, but I look forward to the day when people having internet access is as natural assumption the way people having a phone is.

Then I will finally be able to respond:

“Shut up and Google it!”

CC

Pretty romantic as slime molds go

If my fossilized remains are going to be found some day, I'd like to be found like this.

CC

theCSO: More on the HPV vaccine..

There is another reason for this, one I see as primary. One of the major scare tactics used by the abstinence-only folks is "Condoms haven't been proven effective against HPV, so you could catch HPV even if you use a condom.. better wait until marriage."

They're mostly banking on how HPV has a very similar acronym to HIV. Nevermind that condoms, properly used, have been proven highly effective against HIV which, unlike HPV, is deadly. Nevermind that HPV has no serious symptoms (and is often completely asymptomatic) except for the cervical cancer risk, and that there IS evidence that condoms reduce that risk. For that matter, nevermind that the increased cervical cancer risk is actually quite small.

When it comes down to it, I think the real issue is that this vaccine would take away a favored arguement against premarital sex. I don't think it's the reason anyone will rally around, but I think it's a large part of the real issue.

I do wonder what the religious right would do if an effective HIV vaccine was to be announced. Would they oppose mandatory vaccination?

Also, there's a quite different question about this vaccine, one that probably won't be asked as much as it should be. And I'm not anti-vaccination in general. I have some reservations about the chicken pox vaccine for this same reason, but generally support vaccine and mandatory vaccine programs.

Basically, the only group that needs this vaccine from a *clinical* perspective is girls. And even then, the risk that's being protected against is pretty small. In men, HPV is generally asymptomatic and doesn't increase the risk of any disease, so there really isn't a clinical reason to inoculate boys. There isn't even a good *test* for HPV in men - in women, there's a limited test for some of the high-risk types that can be done during a pap smear. Even there, the treatment is basically "Be really sure to not skip your next pap smear, just in case." From a public-health perspective, it makes sense to eliminate a reservoir, so any mandatory vaccination program would have to include both.

There is also the consideration that it would reduce the number of 'nuisance' cases by preventing the three most common strains that increase cervical cancer risk - but that's only some of the high-risk types, and not even the low-risk types that cause more visible lesions. It's also possible that widespread vaccination against these more common strains would help make the other strains more common.

Basically, it comes down to whether preventing a few cases of cervical cancer and some people from getting annoying but treatable warts that eventually go away is worth the risk and expense that goes into vaccinating everybody. Chicken pox doesn't kill or cripple in kids either, it's just annoying, and the chicken pox vaccine got pushed through on that basis.

This is about money, just like the chicken pox vaccine was. Merck would love to sell millions of doses of this vaccine, and what better way to do that than to make it mandatory?

You say potato, I say pah-tah-to.

Linguist friend is visiting and today we were in the car on the way to a booksale (naturally) when he noticed the vanity plate on the car in front of us.

"A href," he read aloud.

"Yeah," I said, "that's a blog thing. It's part of the code you type when you want to link to somebody. The person in the car must be a blogger, or at least somebody who knows HTML."

"Oh," he said. "Looked like Old High German to me."

CC

Sigh. Watch this one become a study action issue.

A few liberal blogs, and even some atheist ones have raised the issue of the HPV vaccine.

Basically, there is a sexually transmitted virus that a woman can get that makes it much easier for her to get cervical cancer. Merck has developed a vaccine against it and some are calling for every little girl in America to get it along with her regular round of vaccines.

The problem is that the Christian right objects to the idea, saying that to vaccine against a sexually transmitted disease is to condone premarital sex.

IMHO, this is an asanine view. The theoretical Chalicekids would get vaccinated against anything and everything so fast it would make your head spin and the idea that kids today are worried enough about HPV not to have premarital sex but would go right ahead if all they had to worry about was AIDS is ridiculous.

That said, I am skeptical that it is my right to impose that decision on other people. HPV is not particularly easy to spread in the sense that the measels or mumps are, nor is it remotely resembling an epidemic.

After all, we are talking about people who really honestly believe that it would be the best thing if every kids got saved. And at least right now, nobody's trying to impose that.

But more to the point, it seems like every time we decide to impose something like this, even when we're right, it creates a huge and pointless backlash.

If "our side" succeeds in imposing this decision, we may or may not be doing the right thing. But either way, my conservative clients are going to make so much money from this...

CC

CC and the CSO's Christmas Card

Will be pretty freaking spiffy.

If you didn't get a wedding invitation from us, or you have moved since we last mailed you something, shoot me an email at chalicechick at gmail and I will put you on the list.

CC
who really does want to send a Christmas card to anybody who takes time to read this blog.

If Linguist Friend had an advice column

It would probably read something like this:

There is some debate on the UU blogosphere about the meaning of the word "censorship."

If I remove someone's post from my blog, can I be said to "Censor" them?

My understanding was that "censorship" could only be done by a government, and that was the crucial difference between "Censorship" and "Editing." Looking at the word in the Shorter O.E.D. and the Random House Unabridged, I can see some justitification for the first definition, though.

Shed some light?

Thanks,

CC

The third place I would look for an authoritative view would be the
Webster's Third International, which recognizes both governmental and
non-governmental censorship, and distinguishes them. For instance, s.v.
censor: "2. a supervisor or inspector esp. of conduct and morals: a: an
official empowered to examine written or printed matter (as manuscripts or
books or plays)in order to forbid publication, circulation, or
representation if it contains something objectionable . . . e. One who
lacking official sanction but acting ostensibly in society's interests
scrutinizes communications, compositions, and entertainments to discover
anything immoral, profane, seditious, heretical, or otherwise offensive".
e. seems relevant.

Best Wishes,

Linguist Friend


Clarification:

If I am not removing a response to one of my posts on the basis of a MORAL objection, but rather a PRACTICAL one.

(E.g. The response is about something that has little to do with the post and I don't wish to derail discussion)

Is that really censoring?

CC



I do not believe that the situation you describe constitutes
censorship. It simply constitutes a recognition that there is a continually
shifting window of focus of what is relevant for posting. The subject
window for the posting you refer to is not the one currently effective. It
is like when the dean of a medical school was put in charge of long-term
planning, which meant that he was removed from control over anything that
affected the medical school in the present or immediate future, at any
given time, which was a very good idea.

Best wishes -
Linguist Friend

It's a boy! (And more importantly, it's a judge!)

CNN thinks it knows who Bush's next Supreme Court pick is going to be.

Does the blogosphere seem louder to you?

Hoo boy, Robin Edgar has a blog.

CC
who has seen Robin write many insightful and cool things that aren't about how wronged he is, and hopes to see lots of those. But early indicators are not good.

The Top Ten reasons Halloween is better than sex

10. You're guaranteed to get a little something in the sack.

9. The uglier you are, the easier it is to get some.

8. It doesn't matter if the kids hear you moaning and groaning.

7. Less guilt the morning after.

6. It doesn't matter if they fantasize you're somebody else, because you are.

5. Forty years from now, you'll still enjoy candy.

4. If you don't get what you want, you can always go next door.

3. If you get tired, you can wait 10 minutes and go again.

2. You can wear a Batman mask and nobody thinks you're kinky.

1. You can do the whole neighborhood!


CC
who was just in the mood for a cheap laugh

Nora Ephron with fangs

When CC lived in New Orleans, Anne Rice promoted one of her vampire books by staging an elaborate jazz funeral with herself in a coffin as the corpse.

That was a lame cry for attention.

It's going to take a lot to convince me that this isn't one too.

CC

CC hearts technology

On a flight from DC to Sacramento tonight, I noticed a completely
empty seat in the last row. I abandoned the CSO and trooped back
there, where I watched "the Apprentice" and fell asleep as we flew
across Wyoming.

I ended up sort of stranded as I didn't wake up until the "fasten your
seat belts" light came on, and when the plane landed we were told we
would have to wait on the groud for another plane to be moved out of
the gate.

So I pulled out my BlackBerry and called the CSO on his to say
"hello," then listened to the stewardesses sitting in the back bitch
about what a cranky plane we were.

And now I'm typing on my BlackBerry, sending out a blog post, goofily
delighted to live in this wacky decade.

Time to deplane.

CC

--
http://chalicechick.blogspot.com/

"And she suddenly realized that what she thought was freedom and joy
was nothing but anarchy and sloth."

--Norman Juster's "The Dot and the Line"

Oh, OK, that's good

Harriet Miers just withdrew.

Nice to know that, provided by the pledge of allegiance or not, there's sometimes a little justice.

Head still hurts, though.

CC

Something else to be depressed about

We undeniable still have a justice system that does not provide justice for all as provided by the Pledge of Allegiance. One justice for the rich, one justice for the poor. One justice sometimes for minorities, one for whites.

From a speech Harriet Miers gave ten years ago.

Yes, kids, a lady who thought the pledge of allegiance provides justice ten years ago is about to get on the Goddamned Supreme Court.

I'd have some scotch and go to bed, but Kaiser's website says booze will aggravate my headaches.

CC

CC's ironic horoscope- a headache post

According to an old Tibetan saying, "It is better to live one year in the life of a tiger than 100 years in the life of a sheep." I'm not saying you're a sheep, Cancerian, but I do believe you haven't allowed yourself to enjoy nearly enough experiences as a tiger. It so happens that it's a perfect astrological time to make up for lost time. May I suggest that you turn into the human equivalent of a big, fast, wild feline? Halloween costume recommendations: tiger, panther, leopard, lion.

No one on this earth has ever felt less like a tiger than headachy, depressed CC, who discovered that her new migraine medication doesn't work on her about halfway through a luncheon for a distinguished congressman from the great state of Virginia and worked for the rest of the day as it's not her company's fault her head hurts and she had stuff to do because she was going to take a vacation, but now it's looking like she's not. (Long story.)

And now she's lying in a dark room giving herself thirty minutes or so to feel sorry for herself before she goes back to being stoical. Because there's no point in being anything but stoical about an undangerous pain that won't go away.

Yes, I know you're sorry. And that's nice to know, thank you.

CC

Ps Blush.

Dum de dum

There's nothing like teaching to wake someone up. I have to be in at work early in the morning, but after teaching algebra and geometry for two and a half hours tonight, I'm pretty awake.

TheCSO is off doing his computer stuff. Normally at such times I'd call a friend, but I got home pretty late and the list of friends willing to entertain me at eleven o'clock at night. My feet are too tired to stand in front of the stove and bake something for the Chalicerelative.

So I'm watching "Medium" and trying to relax.

CC

Ps. Sorry about the disappearing Linguist Friend essay. I'll try to get it back up within a few days.

Sweet Mother of all that's swell, I have a diagnosis!

Latest Kaiser doctor says Roger was right. It's cluster headaches.

My Immitrex is on order and I start it tomorrow.

Right now, I get one more night of happy, silly, functionally illiterate CC on tylenol with codeine.

CC
who has a lot to say, but can't, you know, say it really. *Giggle*

Sniffle.

Really nice photos of New Orleans.

CC

ok, fine another headache post

I'm at Kaiser so much these days I should be walking through the place like a casino greeter.

Pain hit about a 5 on my pain scale of choice and I made another appointment for tonight, whch turned out to be pointless. They offered me narcotics injections but the pain wasn't the central issue. They couldn't give me a neurologist referral. I will have to come back on Monday for that.

CC

Ps. While I am starting to think Roger's diagnosis of cluster headches was spot on, the doctor sure laughed at me when asked for his suggested medcation. Tylenol with codeine will have to suffice apparently.

Headache Update

Kaiser gave me perscription Motrin, which has been enough to get the pain down to where I can pretty much function. So I am going to function for a few days and catch up on things in my life. I will probably make a doctor's appointment for sometime this weekend.

Soon I will write about things other than my headache, I swear. I am aware of the degree to which I am being humored in y'all still reading my blog.

CC

"Devil went down to Georgia" and separation of church and state: CC finds she doesn't care

I know it's an American classic and all, but I can take or leave Charlie Daniels band's Devil Went Down to Georgia. Primus does a decent cover, but on the whole, meh.

So I'm finding myself having trouble getting excited one way or another about a high school band director pulling it from the school's routine because someone in a local papar complained about separation of church and state. I can sort of see both sides. And mostly, I think it's stupid either way.

Have I mentioned that my head hurts?

CC

cranky

Yep, still in pain and add Kava Kava and pressure points to the list of things that don't work, at least on me, at least right now.

My test prep company couldn't find a substitute so I had to teach algebra with huge screaming pain in my head. By the time class was over, I could have fallen asleep right there. Of course now that it's the middle of the night I'm wide awake again.

After a long day at work, I went to check on the ChaliceRelative, then I actually did a pretty good job of teaching despite everything. My minister is preaching on stoicism on Sunday and for a few minutes tonight I actually entertained the thought that I could feel smug as I listened before remembering that I had regaled the entire internet with my tale of woe. Oh well.

I'm trying not to mention it at work (I think it's a good sign that I'm coming off as not too dramatic when people think brain tumor* jokes are still funny. WtF people?)

But I'm being all needy and lame around TheCSO and my assorted pals. And that's not good. Now that I've had it for a week, I am starting to wonder if I should be trying to eatablish a new headache normal. I mean, giving myself special treatment because I have a headache is getting old. Earlier in the week the answer to "How long have you had the headache?" was "a couple of days." Now it's "Since Thursday." On Friday the answer will become "Since last Thursday."

I think by the time the answer becomes "Since October" my friends will be a little tired of me being snappish and bitchy for no reason.

All right, NOW I'm being melodramatic. So maybe that's a sign I should curl up in bed and give sleeping another shot.

CC

*For the record, my headaches are worst in the afternoon and early evening while the warning sign for a brain tumor is when they are worst in the morning, I'm not vomiting, no seizures or weird weaknesses and the optometrist didn't see any signs of increased intracranial pressure. But it still scares the shit out of me that I can't remember recent things well when I'm normally then one who remembers everything. Intellectually, I realize this is because my brain is spending a lot of time these days going "Ow ow ow ow ow ow"but it is still freaky. Upshot: Not funny.


Ps. Apologized to theCSO for being such a whiner recently. He responded "You've been much worse before with less reason." I'm such a lucky girl.

Headache Update

Day six

Optometrist says it's not my eyes.

GP says she doesn't know what it is, so she gave me medicine for a sinus infection.

Things I have tried to make my headache go away:

1. Extra sleep
2. Extra water
3. Extra caffeine
4. No caffeine
5. Tylenol
6. Steam
7. Over-the-counter decongestants
8. Bayer (helped some)
9. Excedrin (ditto)
10. Sitting in the dark (also helped a bit)
11. Talking out emotional stuff (there's a few things up, but not an unusual number or of an unusual intensity.)
12. Prescription decongestants and nose drops.

CC

CC's favorite Desperate Housewife

In response to Fausto's question

Duh!

Bree!

Lynette is so self-pitying as to be totally unwatchable. I fast forward through her scenes. When I don't, I'm always sorry. What a megabitch. Does she actually give her kids a bunch of sugar so they will behave badly when other people watch them, so that said other people will feel sorry for Lynette? Yes, she does. Can you freaking believe girlfriend was jealous of her kid's IMAGINARY FRIEND? Why, yes, she was.

And every episode had the same Lynette plot for the entire last season.

Susan and Gabrielle are OK, in their way, but I wouldn't watch a show about just them. That I don't hate Susan is a compliment to Teri Hatcher, not the writers.

But I found Bree's attempts to make sense of the world in the early episodes absolutely riveting. She's a person who wants to live an unambiguous life in ambiguous world. I see a lot of depth to Bree and a lot of really interesting complexity. Her character was very consistent, yet never exactly predictable last season. I think she's very well written.

Or, well, I did. I don't know what the hell is up with her now.

I was actually planning a "Let us now praise Bree Van Kamp" post at the end of last season going into some of the theology of her way of dealing with the world. Now it will probably never happen.

CC

Revenge is Sweet, huh, DHL?

Y'all may remember my rant about DHL a few weeks ago.

Well, we bought our negatives from our wedding photographer last week and she sent them, you guessed it, DHL.

The CSO reports that he fished them out of the puddle just fine and that our always-on-the-ball photographer had put them in a plastic bag inside the soaked cardboard envelope.

They weren't damaged a bit.

So there.

CC

I'm getting sick of Desperate Housewives, BTW

Unbelieveable things about Bree's storyline:

1. Her husband has been murdered and she just doesn't seem to care why or by whom.

2. A woman obsessed with propriety is dating a month after her husband died.

3. The new man doesn't get along with her teenage son, and she acts like it is the son's fault and he is being unreasonable for objecting to the above two.

4. She could love someone whom she basically doesn't know anything about.

5. The cops would ask "Do you love George" on a lie detector test and the results would be at all meaningful.

OK, that's it. I think I'm done with this show. The plots were never worth it. I watched for the characters and they are writing my favorite character so badly that I'm just losing interest.

CC

How much to talk about

The great headache of 2005 is on its fourth day. Both the CSO and Cecily-with-a-calling have suggested dehydration as a possible cause so this morning I have drunk two liters of water. Now I'm pissing like a racehorse and my head hurts. I've take ibuprofen. I've gotten my glasses readjusted. I have a doctor's appointment for Monday.

Part of me is considering committing suicide by bashing my head into something and part of me is starting to wonder if perhaps I will miss the headache a bit when it is gone. As I often do, I find myself thinking of Kierkegaard writing "My depression is the most faithful mistress I have known -- no wonder, then, that I return the love."

All of this has put me in an extremely bad mood, which is probably why some things I've dealt with recently are producing this reaction.

Today I am pondering how much we have to tell people about what's going on in our lives. My issue is that I almost never tell anyone (outside a very tight inner circle of friends) about the upsetting things in my life for the simple reason that there are too many of them. My family is a big southern novel and somebody is always getting arrested, getting fired, getting estranged from somebnody else or doing something self-destructive and having to go into the hospital. The only reason that I am not a colossal bore to all my friends is that I do not talk about it. Yes, some individual events are upsetting enough that I write about them or talk about them here, but as a general principal I ask people what's up with them instead.

I don't want to punish people for caring about me, just sometimes I wish they didn't quite so much.

I had told one lady in my church that my Dad hasn't been doing well. Today in front of another lady she asks how he is. Lady #2 says "Is your dad sick?" I mumbled a yes (the truth) and that he would be fine (a lie) and shuffled off, hoping that the whole church wouldn't find out. My parents' church is full of well-meaning people who have a nasty habit of turning church families into community service projects, a tendency that brings to mind C.S. Lewis' comment "She's the sort of woman who lives for others - you can tell the others by their hunted expression."

I really do only announce births, deaths and marriages at Joys and Concerns.

This attitude is fine when it comes to church, but it has created issues for me when friends of mine have been offended that I didn't confide. But those who aren't really close to me seem uncomfortable when I do.

So that's what I'm thinking about today. At least for an hour as I go take a nap before I meet a friend for lunch. My head hurts, you know.

CC

Sniffle.

The two she worried about are safe, BTW

CC

Ow Ow Ow Ow Ow Ow Ow Ow Ow

CC has a weird headache behind one of her eyes. She's had it for about three days now but right now it is really bad.

That's my excitement, kids.

CC

What's in a nickname?

You entered: Chalicechick

There are 12 letters in your name.
Those 12 letters total to 57
There are 4 vowels and 8 consonants in your name.

Your number is: 3

The characteristics of #3 are: Expression, verbalization, socialization, the arts, the joy of living.

The expression or destiny for #3:
An Expression of 3 produces a quest for destiny with words along a variety of lines that may include writing, speaking, singing, acting or teaching; our entertainers, writers, litigators, teachers, salesmen, and composers. You also have the destiny to sell yourself or sell just about any product that comes along. You are imaginative in your presentation, and you may have creative talents in the arts, although these are more likely to be latent. You are an optimistic person that seems ever enthusiastic about life and living. You are friendly, loving and social, and people like you because you are charming and such a good conversationalist. Your ability to communicate may often inspire others. It is your role in life to inspire and motivate; to raise the spirits of those around you.

The negative side of number 3 Expression is superficiality. You may tend to scatter your forces and simply be too easygoing. It is advisable for the negative 3 to avoid dwelling on trivial matters, especially gossip.

Your Soul Urge number is: 8

A Soul Urge number of 8 means:
With an 8 soul urge, you have a natural flare for big business and the challenges imposed by the commercial world. Power, status and success are very important to you. You have strong urges to supervise, organize and lead. Material desires are also very pronounced. You have good executive abilities, and with these, confidence, energy and ambition.

Your mind is analytical and judgment sound; you're a good judge of material values and also human character. Self-controlled, you rarely let emotions cloud judgment. You are somewhat of an organizer at heart, and you like to keep those beneath you organized and on a proper track. This is a personality that wants to lead, not follow. You want to be known for your planning ability and solid judgment.

The negative aspects of the 8 soul urge are the often dominating and exacting attitude. You may have a tendency to be very rigid, sometimes stubborn.

Your Inner Dream number is: 6

An Inner Dream number of 6 means:
You dream of guiding and fostering the perfect family in the perfect home. You crave the devotion from offspring and a loving spouse. You picture yourself in the center of a successful domestic unit.

Life imitates Saturday Night Live

Weird.

CC

An obvious comparison?

Though I don’t post on beliefnet anymore, I do still stop by to read occasionally. Lately, it’s been pretty sad with most of the discussion in the debate section consisting of the people who like to pick fights thrashing around frustrated since there’s no one to fight with.*

But there is a cool discussion going on right now about whether the comparison of civil rights for gays and civil rights for African-Americans that so easily leaps to lips like mine is, in fact, an accurate and reasonable comparison to make.

For me, it is a great comparison for making points. In a recent discussion over a restaurant that had a sign up saying “For Service, Speak English,” and has gotten in trouble for it, the comparison to a sign that said “Only whites served” or something like that seemed obvious enough. But the language issue is essentially a racial one as well.

The homosexuality comparison is a little farther off, I’ll admit.

But why supporters of gay rights want to make it seems clear enough. Nobody’s saying that race relations are anything like perfect in this country, but we have gone from a time when blatant racism was perfectly acceptable to a time when far more subtle racism is big-time frowned upon and in many ways illegal. Again, the journey isn’t over, but African Americans have gone an incredible distance and that gays and lesbians would like to go as far seems reasonable enough to me.

Can one hide one’s homosexuality? More easily than one’s race, but one can’t really hide it for long without considerable cost.

Anyway, it’s an interesting discussion and good points have been made on both sides.

Check it out and let me know what you think in the comments.

CC

*By far the best is a guy bitching because a woman named Kitty’s church with 225 people “only” raised $5,000 because he says that $22 from every man, woman and child in the congregation isn’t very much. Nothing says “I’ve never worked in professional fundraising” like that.

Kitty, I do this stuff for a liveing and I would kill to make $5000 for every 225 people I tried to raise from. Your church did a damn good job and don’t let anyone tell you different.

More ways to help Katrina victims

Peacebang has some ideas.

CC

Anal Electrocution. That's all I have to say.

A vegan or a big fan of PETA I am absolutely not, but I am also a little skeptical on the principles of this article, which claims that to be made into a beautiful coat is the nicest thing that could happen to a mink.

I've always thought that if I were a slave in ancient Egypt, I might rather die building the pyramids at 30 than of old age at 35, so this is a point I have already considered from several angles. Readers of mine who think I make controversial points for sheer shock value or to show my hipness would expect me to leap gladly onto this particular bandwagon. (Item: My points aren't shocking, they just might be different than yours. And I may not know much about hipness, but I know that if I want to be hip, writing a religion blog is not the hobby to have.)

I stopped eating red meat several months ago and am cutting down on chicken and pork. But actually I'm in the large middle ground here with those who find actual mistreatment of animals bad, but don't particularly care one way or another whether a fish gets eaten by a bear or eaten by me. Cecily-with-a-calling is a vegan and her partner and children are too. They are coming for Thanksgiving and she warned me her daughter might ask me why I ate animals. I said I planned to respond:

"It's OK, the salmon I ate was a bad salmon who voted Republican."

(To her credit, C had much more of a sense of humor about this comment than lots of people would expect a vegan to as they have a reputation as a pretty dour bunch. And no, I wouldn't actually say that. Probably.)

That having been said, that the animals fur products are made out of are skinned alive is indeed nasty and gross and the distinction that the animal is crying out not because it completely understands what is going to happen to it, but is instead crying out for its mother is not nearly so significant to me as it is to the writer. I will never look on Linguist Friend's fur hat the same way again, which is not to say I was a great fan of fur hats in the first place, because, well, come on. Look at them. If I wanted my head to look like that, I'd just ask Joe-the-hair guy to cut my hair a little more like Phyllis Diller's.

Up until now, I'd thought animals being skinned for fur were killed by anal electrocution.

I guess when it comes to fur "nasty and gross" is a relative thing.

CC

Knock Knock

Who's there?

Harriet Miers.

Harriet Meirs who?

Exactly.

Bitchin'

Nikon does a Microscopy photo competition and this Chuck-Close-like portrait of a fly was the big winner.

Best evah.

CC

CC defends Madonna

Read an article on MSN this morning about how members of Madonna’s faith are all upset that she was written a song about 16th Century Jewish Mystic Yitzhak Luria.

OK, if I understand the folks who are complaining correctly, they believe that Madonna is capitalizing on Kabbalah mysticism. While she’s obviously no icon of propriety, I have to say that I really don’t understand how this can be the case. When, say, the mother of a dead soldier becomes famous by making a big show of asking the president to pray with her, then giving lots of interviews to newspapers about how he won’t do it and lining up the book deals and speaking engagements, that, arguably, is capitalizing on one’s faith.

But for Madonna to write an album about her religion and praising a historical rabbi doesn’t seem that way to me at all. I mean, it’s not like people are going to pick up the album, saying “I figured I’d get this, even though I’ve never heard of this Madonna chick, because I’m really into 16th century Jewish mystics and Yitzhak Luria is my total fave.”

Call me a Pollyanna here, but as far as I can tell Madonna really believes this and her faith is sincere and deeply felt. I think she wrote the song because she’s into Luria’s writings and I really can’t think of any other explanation that makes sense.

As a member of a small faith, I can assure any of my readers of more mainstream faiths that being a member of a small religion in no way makes you cool. At best, it makes you mildly eccentric, at worst, people look at you funny, then go check cultwatch.com just to be sure. And while I don’t particularly want Madonna to convert to UUism and put out an album about Theodore Parker, I think she’s owed the benefit of the doubt for trying to spread her faith in a sincere manner.

That said, she's probably better off donating a bunch of profits from the album to charity or the church, not that she hasn't been a famously big doner already.

But I still don't think she has done anything wrong.

CC

Late night insomnia reviews

Since I can't sleep anyway, I'll fill y'all in on things that don't suck and those that do a bit. One movie I keep seeing and a bunch of books I've read since August or so:

• The Corpse Bride I've had death on my mind a lot recently and I've seen it twice. Both times I teared up a bit at the scene where the little kid goes "Grandpa!" I amy go see it again. That I'm seeing it multiple times is probably a little psychological dust devil of mine, but it really is a very good movie.
  
  And Victor is quite CSO-like in looks and manner, so much so that it was a little weird.
  It's like "The Nightmate before Christmas" but I think it is visually far more sophisticated. It's also a good deal less wacky.
  
  
• Douglas Coupland's Hey, Nostradamus It's sort of weird to find usually comic author Douglas Coupland writing about school shootings. I'd only read a little bit of his stuff before and it seemed like it was mostly comedy, not that this book doesn't have funny moments and some weird twists. I like novels that deal with religion without being "religious novels" per se. Also, there's a conservative Christian in it and I began it hoping that somebody had actually written a mainstream book with a really sympathetic conservative Christian in it. (I don't think I've seen one since Clyde Edgerton's Raney.) Reg, the Christian, is pretty amazing by the end of the book, but he's still not sympathetic.
  
  Reminds me a bit of Don DeLillo's White Noise and gives one a similar feeling of having suffered an intellectual asskicking.
  
  
• John Hassler's Grand Opening There was a time when I was really into coming of age stories. This book proves that time is over. Well written enough in its way, but overall? Meh.
  
  
• W.A. Swanberg's The Rector and the Rogue was in a used bookstore I went to with Linguist Friend in July. Somehow it showed up in the trunk of my car last week. A very strange non -fiction book detailing a late-1800s practical joke played on a New York minister. Nice descriptions, lots of cool backstory and obvious affection for the prankster made this an unusual read. Way the hell out of print, but if you see a copy, pick it up.
  
  
• T.C. Boyle's The Human Fly and other Stories was quite good as well. I find much of Boyle's work rather depressing. (Fellow UUs, in The Tortilla Curtain he's talking about us...) These stories were actually a little more varied that Boyle's usual "aren't people ever hypocrites" schtick. (Though of all the people who have that schtick, Boyle is the best I've ever seen at doing interesting things with it.)
  
  
• Actually, the book I've most enjoyed all year thus far may be former New York Times food critic Ruth Riechel's autobiography Tender at the Bone, which does have a certain coming-of-age quality about it. I worry about myself liking a book that is so completely about food. The recipies in it look good, and the description of a souffle Riechel got at a Canadian friend's hoouse did send me to a French restaurant for ill-advised indulgence, but what really got me were Riechel's stories about growing up with a schizophrenic mother who inadvertantly poisoned her dinner guests on a fairly regular basis by serving them old food. Now THAT's a coming-of-age story I would like to have read more of. (The book does slow considerably after her childhood, but I still kept reading. She's not quite M.F.K. Fisher, but girlfriend can describe a meal.)
  
  CC

i don't even remember this kid

You are Rerun!


Which Peanuts Character are You?
brought to you by Quizilla

OK, so editing IS everything.

Just makes you want to shake your head.

CC

More on Mindfulness

A recent post on mindfulness on Ibeth makes me think that I'm not the only one with issues in this direction. In Beth's post, she describes a dream where she sends herself a reminder to do something while in a meeting and thus is unable to ask someone a question because she hasn't been payhing attention.

In my own defense, lack of mindfulness aside, that sort of thing really doesn't happen to me. I have kind of a knack for being unmindful. I'm good at it. In Geometry class, I frequently confounded Coach Pleasants by turning around to talk to Jenny in the seat behind me, yet being able to call out the answer when he tried to embarass me by asking for it. (I have kind of a knack for Geometry, too.)

I'm finding my quest to be mindful sort of difficult. I feel like I don't know the rules.

1. If I'm eating lunch with a coworker, can I check my Blackberry while she's at the buffet? Please?

2. Do I have to be mindful all the time, or can I, say, write a blog post and watch this week's Boston Legal on the TIVO at the same time when I'm by myself in the morning because it feels good and it isn't hurting anybody and damn Betty White makes me chuckle?

3. What if I'm on the phone with Linguist Friend and he uses a word I don't know or vice versa? Our usual habit is to stop and discuss the word while one of us looks it up. I realize you don't want me at your parties now, but is that unmindful? Perhaps it's more mindful given the attention we are paying to our conversation? But it does get the topic off track...

4. OK, checking my blackberry during the sermon is obviously tacky as hell, but how about during Joys and Concerns? Can we call that civil disobediance?

5. Speaking of the TIVO, is fast-forwarding through the commercials unmindful? That sounds like a stupid question. But I have to think that if I had a TIVO remote for life, I would absolutely fast forward through CK telling me, starry-eyed, what Ann Coulter had to say last night, and that sounds like it would be against the rules, so I thought I'd check.

Lots to think about and puzzle over.

CC

Being in the Moment

Ever notice how themes sometimes appear in one's life? I think of my life as having something of a John Williams score, where recogizable themes will slip in and out of the music. (Anybody catch that during the scene with the big snake in Harry Potter 3, the "snake pit" theme from Indiana Jones slipped into the music? Or am I just an orchestral score nerd?) Anyway, a recent frequent theme has been mindfulness. There was a sermon at church on the subject, and several minor issues have resulted recently from my addiction to my cell phone.

Inattention has been something of a life theme. I didn’t think I got enough attention as a child, though probably every kid feels that way. I've had romances with inattentive people, but to me it has always been funny. My big reaction to one theologically-inclined lover was to write:

A book lover Suzyn once knew
Would procrastinate ere he would screw
"Lust after," said she,
"Pagels, not me,
And the Messiah will come before you."

Pithy verse did little to dispel the problem, but I don't think an argument would have either. I've always thought in lovers and friends that occasional inattention was sort of the cost of hanging out with the dreamy, in their heads sort of people I tend to associate with.

But I have a close friend to whom my own inattention is a big deal, so it's something I've vowed to work on. The situation came to a head this afternoon with a cell phone conversation (had while I was driving, of course) where she announced that my checking my blackberry during meals with her was very rude and I had hurt her feelings last time I'd done it.

To me, a person who checks their phone while waiting for the waiter is not a big deal, but even my snarky self doesn't like to hurt people's feelings, so I vowed to do better.

I arrived at my destination, a restaurant where I was meeting the Chalicerelative and her best friend for dinner, and rang off with my friend, slipping the phone into its case on my clutch purse and vowing not to remove it for the duration of the meal. I came in and sat down and put the bag on the table. The Chalicerelative was away from the table and after her greeting, the first thing the Chalicerelative's friend said was

"Your phone is blinking a green light. Do you need to check it?"

"No," I said, "It just does that."

When the Chalicecrelative returned, we got into a conversation about, of course, the Presbyterian Church and a full five minutes went by before she said,

"Miss Sue," (No, you cannot call me that. Only the Chalicerelative can.) "Your phone is blinking."

Sigh. "It's fine," I said. "It blinks all the time." And we had a good laugh over how her firend had pointed out the same thing.

This is getting predictable, I know.

Naturally, mid-rainbow trout, my phone starts to buzz.

"Do you need to get that?" the friend asks.

"Nah,'" I said, enjoying the moment, fully experiencing my trout.

"Miss Sue, your grandmother is sick. And your father had another fall yesterday. You really should answer your phone when it rings!"

"Guys, that buzz just means I got a text message. It's cool,"

And we went back to dinner.

Can't win for losing in this world.

CC

Umm... I was kidding about the parental liscensing thing

But some people in Indiana aren't.

I'd say "What the fuck?" sums up my reaction nicely.

I hope to God this is something from the Onion.

CC
whose own parents might not have passed.

CC, Ayn Rand and Pinker vs. the ChaliceDad, Orwell and the State of South Dakota

I was reading this morning about how the state of South Dakota is considering a bill that would legally require abortion providers to tell pregant women seeking abortion that the abortion would kill a "living human being." It made me think of previous discussions I've had with people against legal abortions who made big fusses abotu how if only we would call the fetuses "babies" it would change our national perspecrtive on the issue.

The ChaliceDad and I used to argue about the premises beneath this discussion frequently. He really does believe that language can create thought. He once grandly pronounced "De Maupassant could never have been born a German." That Orwell is on his side would come up all the time in these debates and while I like Orwell well enough and find that a good rereading of The Road to Wigan Pier fixes me right up when I start getting a little TOO libertarian, I do think Orwell is wrong on this issue.

His whole argument is based on the now basically disproved Sapir-Worf hypothosis.

I have always taken the opposite view, that language can influence thought, but thought basically creates language. I don't think there's a person in America who would seriously question the premise that the "Department of Defense" is anything but the old "Department of War" but with a different name. I agree with Stephen Pinker (who admittedly has a lesser mind than Orwell's I'm pretty sure, but one doesn't get to pick one's friends in intellectual arguments.) That using euphemnistic language is only really harmful to discourse when it consists of straight up lying. Ayn Rand's Anthem is on my side, featuring a collectivist state where individualism quietly goes on despite the state's banning of the word "I." (Again, can't pick one's friends in an intellectual argument.)

CC

CC the jungle gym

Ok, I like SOME children...