Saturday, December 31, 2005

Kibble has really big ears, part 2


...This one is very recent. Posted by Picasa

Happy New Year

Our New Years Eve:

Moderate rains (nothing like NorCal). Around 3pm, Kibble helped us spot a leak in our ceiling--in the living room, which is below a bedroom, so an odd place to find dripping water. After investigating, we found a crack in the upstairs ceiling by the skylight, and a small but very steady stream of water running down the wall, where it (presumably) pooled on the floor and then leaked through below. We called Marvin, who is the world's best landlord and came out--on New Years Eve--in the rain--to climb up on our steep roof and patch the leak.

Well, it is his house. I'd take care of it, too, if I owned it. But still--we're lucky.

Kibble got his 7th-night-of-Hanukkah toy. He has learned the routine; when we start getting out candles, he gets really excited. The dining room has become the I Get A Toy Room. We light, we sing, we do the goofy dance (it's a Markewich thing), and then he gets really really excited, because after that we give him a toy.

And 20 minutes later, we pick all the stuffing up off the floor, and toss the empty fabric carcass into his toy basket with all the other eviscerated things.

And finally--I made the cookies! White sugar, red sugar, and cinnamon sugar. They ain't health food. But they're good!

Next--coconut margaritas and a movie. Perhaps some banging of pots and pans at midnight. Here I am blogging at 11, while Noah burns a CD. It is a wild, carefree life we kid-less couples enjoy.

Kibble has really big ears, part 1


Kibble when we first brought him home. Posted by Picasa

Friday, December 30, 2005

Deja Vu

The LA Times carries this story: a middle school in Culver City has outlawed any forms of touching between students. No hitting and no making out, sure, but also no hugging or other casual forms of connection. (Not clear from the story whether a pat on the back would be verboten.)

It's silly, but it's not new. I grew up a non-Mormon (heck, a no-religion-on) in a heavily Mormon town. Mesa, Arizona--at the time it had the second-largest temple outside Salt Lake City. At school dances, the boys would ask me to dance, and while we were doing the awkward lean right-lean left turnabout, they'd ask what ward I was in. Took a while to figure this out, but a ward is like a parish, a local church. When I said I wasn't in one (or early on, when I didn't have a clue what they meant), they looked frozen, and either stopped dancing then, or disappeared as the song wound down.

Anyway.

In this hyper-Mormon environment, my junior high (Mormon principal, Mormon vice-principal, remember the spelling: "the principal is your pal") instituted the same kind of no-touching rule.

One time, a girl was crying and her friend hugged her in consolation. They were punished. I can't say this is a confident memory, but pretty sure they were both suspended.

Another time, two ninth-graders (lord--they seemed so grown up and big then, when I was in seventh grade) were holding hands, both hands in her coat pocket in December. Their punishment I know, 100%: he was paddled, and she was forced to watch.

We were really progressive in Mesa.

Wednesday, December 28, 2005

Oh, snap!

There's a great video clip at Salon.com today (sorry I can't post the whole thing here, but it's worth following the link!). Keith Olbermann of MSNBC is my new partisan-news hero. He shows how Bill O'Reilly and John Gibson have complained about his putting them on his "worst people" feature, and then critiques their objections. O'Reilly's involves saying that his ratings beat Olbermann's--who then points out that O'Reilly didn't bother to address the substance of Olbermann's criticism.

Gibson is upset because Olbermann quoted his radio appearance in which he said that people who follow "the wrong religion" would "have to answer" to you-know-who. Gibson said Olbermann's quote was a lie, so Olbermann played the full, in-context portion of the radio show, and of course Gibson came off looking even worse. And Olbermann doesn't hesitate to call these guys corrosive idiots on the air.

Yes, it is just a perpetuation of hate media, and I would rather see none of that at all. But it is still quite satisfying to see a slap-down of the Fox hatemongers.

Followup to previous post

...ditto on cookies. I wander in the kitchen: "Why aren't there any homemade sugar cookies? I've been thinking about them for days."

Ummmm...because I haven't made any?

Tuesday, December 27, 2005

Update this blog!!

So the title for this blog comes from my love of reading. One of the principal reasons I love reading is that it provides multitudes of other worlds and other lives in which I can briefly immerse myself. I like my life very much, but get inordinate pleasure from forgetting for a few hours that I even exist, and plunging into some other adventures or concerns. Fiction is my favorite destination, but reading news on the internet, and other people's blogs, can satisfy the itch.

Every once in a while, when I am longing for story-like excitement in my waking world, I remind myself that all my favorite stories involve just ordinary people, living their ordinary lives (though extraordinary obstacles may sometimes be thrown in their way). The author selects judiciously from the myriad moments and incidents that make up the characters' lives, but in the end all fictional lives are just like real ones--full of minutiae, obligations, and the need to put one foot in front of the other and keep moving forward. And that is what makes up any grand adventure, when you get right down to it.

Anyway, what brings me to this explanation is: I keep checking this blog to see if it's changed! No kidding. I come and look to see what's going on in my life (where are the moments and incidents??), and--here is the kicker--I am disappointed when there is nothing new.

This is why I have never, despite dreams and the partially-written novel on my hard drive, become an author. I forget that I'm the one who has to do the authoring!

Sunday, December 25, 2005

The day in question

I just read Rebecca's blog, and she says the kids got them up at 5am today. Noah and I got to bed at about 5am. (In my "vacation" period, I get very immersed in data and writing, and we develop a sleep schedule that involves bedtime around 4 or 5 am, and getting up sometime between 1 and 3. It's all very collegiate.)

Christmas Day here in Hermosa Beach is grey and cool. It's also very quiet--none of the usual mild street noise filtering through the windows. No big plans; we'll go see a movie (Harry Potter, and the fact that we are going represents the resolution of a long series of disagreements and negotiations, and Noah's enormously generous offer to go with me, since his antipathy to all things Potter is eclipsed only by his hatred of all things Bush). The movie-going is one of my childhood traditions, so that will be nice.

Of course, Hanukkah starts at sundown, so at around 5pm, we'll switch holidays. I'll be making latkes and we'll light our baby menorah using the gorgeous silver-ringed candles we found at Papyrus. We'll entertain Kibble with our rendition of Baruch atah... and give him his first-day-of-Hanukkah toy.

Throughout the day, I hope to keep thinking of the two holidays' themes of redemption and light. Translated into my own beliefs, they mean that this is a day of love for family and friends, a day of kindness toward others, and giving them the benefit of the doubt (if anyone cuts us off in traffic on the way to the movie, for example!), a day of gentleness, a day of patience, a day of giving more to others than I get myself. I'll say more in another post about that last one, but here, now, I want to end on a lofty note. These should be the themes of every day, but thank goodness, at least we have one day to bring them into focus.

Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, Happy Holidays to all.

Saturday, December 24, 2005

Just a link

This is a very interesting exchange from beliefnet.com, in which Fox's John Gibson (the real progenitor of the anti-HH crusade) "debates" someone from the other side. There are some interesting points made--and compelling ones, by both sides. But in the end it deteriorates. I think the ending is probably the most fun part, and the part that most shows that this is not an honest debate.

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

On a lighter (and more soothing) note...

Our local K-Mart just stopped carrying our toilet paper.

If that doesn't sound like a disaster, I'm just not selling it hard enough. We once spent a good, solid half-hour in our intermediate Spanish class, talking about this exceptional papel de baƱo. There was plenty to say. And the K-Mart was the last place we could find it, after Safeway/Vons, then Albertsons, then Target all slowly, quietly, one-by-one tipped over like little toilet-paper-store dominoes. We'd go to the store in a rush, left with only boxes of tissues at home (Puffs Plus! nothing else!), and stand stricken in front of the shelf, empty, tag removed--or worse, newly filled with stacks of something useless. We always found it somewhere else, but now our last source is gone. No more Charmin Plus (unscented, with aloe) for our tender regions.

Add this to the short but growing list of the things we can't live without, but can't actually go buy in the LA area (SporTea, Celestial Seasonings Lemon Ice cool-brew tea). Well, thank goodness for the internet. Last night, Noah found that we can buy online at Amazon! what a site!--it also has lively discussions and ratings of our TP, and lesser brands. I pass on this information as a public service, and as our celebration.

Twisting arguments

Here's what I'm talking about. In today's LA Times op-ed section, Max Boot chastises those of us who find the possibly-illegal, certainly-political leaking of Valerie Plame's identity appalling, for not being equally outraged at the NY Times' revelations of Bush's domestic surveillance program. Boot says:
I suspect it'll be a long wait because the rule of thumb seems to be that although it's treasonous for pro-Bush partisans to spill secrets that might embarrass an administration critic, it's a public service for anti-Bush partisans to spill secrets that might embarrass the administration. The determination of which secrets are OK to reveal is, of course, to be made not by officials charged with protecting our nation but by journalists charged with selling newspapers.
See how skillful this is--how it changes the basis of objection and makes us sound hypocritical. No, Max. The Plame leak was likely illegal, and was motivated by an overweening sense of executive power. The domestic surveillance program was likely illegal, and was motivated by an overweening sense of executive power. Wow--consistency. Who'd a thunk it.

He also says

The president has an even stronger moral case. Before condemning him, ask yourself why there have been no terrorist attacks on American soil since 2001. Not one. It's hard to know the exact reason we've been spared, but surely part of our good fortune should be attributed to the very measures — the Patriot Act, the NSA surveillance, the renditions, the enhanced interrogation techniques — that are now being pilloried by self-righteous journalists and lawmakers.
Sorry again, buddy. You'll have to wait until early 2009 to make this argument. That's when the amount of time elapsed since the 9/11 attacks will be equal to the amount of time that passed between the prior terrorist attack on US soil, and 9/11. You'll remember that one--the 1993 WTC bombings. Would you attribute our safety during that 7 1/2 year period to the lack of the Patriot Act, surveillance, renditions, interrogations...? Isn't it a problem for your propaganda, that we stayed unattacked for a longer period of time without all the heavyhandedness and law-breaking?

Thanks, Noah, for pointing out the column. Although, gah.

Monday, December 19, 2005

And here's why it's scary

A new CNN article. Now we learn that Americans prefer "Merry Christmas" in greater numbers than last year. This is the scariest thing about our new political landscape, to me: the ease with which our view of reality can be manipulated.

I wish they had asked about (or, reported) how closely respondents had been following the chrismahol issue in the media. It would be nice to know whether attitudes have changed more among those who have been watching the assault (I won't say "debate"). I would expect a very strong relationship.

According to Steven Lukes, true power is the ability to convince people that they want what you want, even when what you want will actually leave them penniless, endangered, and spiritually bereft. They pick up your banner, and you sit back and watch your battles fought for you. Conservatives have been masters of this in recent years--and they add an ingenious twist. They manage to do it while portraying themselves as powerless and oppressed; not only disinterested parties, a la Lukes, but cowering and helpless innocents. So "Happy Holidays" is an attack, the fact that students must learn science is a manifestation of tyranny.

Even the thoughtful and intelligent among us aren't immune to the crafting of our reality. I just hope some rational voices start chiming in again soon!

Merry ChristmaHoliHateful Days

I've created this blog just to have a place to post this one thought. I may never post again, so enjoy!

Today, CNN's top-headlines section had a piece on the current "Merry Christmas"-"Happy Holidays" (manufactured) wars. It's a decent story, though IMO it understates the role that Fox broadcasters have played in creating the whole so-called controversy.

But it made me think of a new perspective on the whole issue. Bill O'Reilly seems to want us all to think that saying "Happy Holidays" started practically at gunpoint: the ACLU and bands of militant Christian-haters tackled people and pointed lawsuits at their heads, and only out of fear and intimidation did the dreadful new greeting emerge.

Well, thanks for giving so much credit to the American people, guys. Didn't "happy holidays" actually begin out of kindness and brotherly love? Didn't Americans--ordinary, sensitive, caring, and even Christmas-loving Americans--realize that not everyone around them celebrated Christmas, per se, at this time of year? And didn't these Americans, full of the joy of their own holiday season, buoyed by the thought of giving and the happy music playing in all the stores, earnest in their desire to live up to the Christmas messages of peace on earth and goodwill to men (and women)--didn't they want to give a greeting that allowed them to share their sense of joy and childlike wonder with everyone else, not just those who shared their own religion? Didn't Americans who aren't Christian want to acknowledge the common bond running through different religions and creeds, all of whom find something special in the darks of December?

In fact, isn't the genesis of "Happy Holidays" to be found in our kindness and shared reverence? I think Americans are hungry for reminders of our better natures. Who needs to think that every kind thing we do was borne of someone else's pettiness and oppression? Sounds like the Fox guys are doing just what they accuse the dreaded liberals of doing--such a focus on the negative! Such a lack of faith in the ordinary American!