Excess Baggage - now updated!

Not that you asked, but...
I am a terrible packrat.

Can anyone think of any earthly reason--and I mean a good, healthy one--why I have held onto a Sanrio notepad containing only two drawings made during my 6 month stint living in Georgia in 1980? Did I mention that the cover is torn off and the pages are falling out? What about a wall map of the world, dated 1955? Or the homecoming football game program from my sophomore year of high school? No? Neither can I.

While some people have the admirable ability to shed belongings, and others don't accumulate them in the first place, I hold onto things, even when reason and practicality dictate letting go. In particular I have kept a tight grip on an assortment of physical manifestations of my childhood. I've held onto things from adulthood too, but these tend to come in the form of books, music, and furniture, which seem more useful, even if more costly to transport.

My formative years are packed away for the most part in a stack of covered plastic tubs. Labeled "Michelle's Mementos", the tubs contain a hodgepodge of meaningful and superfluous objects. There's my Mrs Beasley doll (still in decent shape after nearly 40 years), a trophy for MVP of the 8th grade softball team (my winning was I believe a matter of favoritism rather than talent), a wood penguin coin bank made for me by my friend's sister in 1986, and a delicate ballerina cake topper from my 5th birthday at my grandparents' house in New York.

In some of these tubs I expect I'll find my Girl Scout sash with badges pinned rather than sewn on (mine was not a very domestic household), a finger painted and stuffed fish constructed in pre-school, an assortment of writings (7th grade was a particularly prolific period), toys (Adam has taken a shine to the soft Teletubbies keychains, but I've not let him near Super Nut), and small knick knacks.

The fact that the stuff is in distinctive containers is evidence of progress made a decade ago. As tends to happen with memento purgings, I have no recollection of anything I got rid of back then. (And how the Sanrio notepad survived, I know not. I'll blame it on purge-fatigue.) This is what I remind myself of as I sift through the stuff and make "Keep" and "Get rid of" stacks. Old copies of The Epitaph...gone. Completed get-to-know-you questionnaires from a series of parties I held with friends in the mid 80s...gone. The button for a magazine that no longer exists...gone. The pages of the Sanrio notepad have gone into the scratch paper drawer (they don't make paper like they used to--for good reason). And my drawing of "Amy" from Warner Robins, Georgia--who apparently had long blonde hair, glasses, freckles, and wore blue that day...gone. Bye Amy; I hardly knew ye.

Several hours later
I've now gone through four tubs. One turned out to be missing toiletries, including lots of great shades of lipstick, which was an exciting if counter-productive find. (I did purge a bit upon inspection, throwing away old lotions, my beloved cookie-shaped Avon lip gloss from the late 70s, plus a makeup kit from the 80s--after I shadowed my eyelids turquoise, yellow, and magenta.) I filled one of the emptied tubs back up with garage saleable items, such as a beautiful ceramic mask, some cute gardening magnets, and a life-sized stuffed macaw on a wooden perch (I named him Herbert back around 1988). Now residing in the trash bag are my high school graduation cap, an old red wallet, and a stack of wall calendars from college, among many other items (yea me!). I kept the photos from inside the wallet, a bag of foreign coins, and a letter my brother sent me from basic training which I will transfer to my letters and notes box.

I don't know why I keep this stuff--the photos, the coins, the letters. I don't want to consciously give up on certain memories, certain attachments, even when I know I'd feel better once I did. I know that if it went missing, I wouldn't actually miss any of this (mostly because I've forgotten it exists). But worrying about any of this will not help. I've got the stuff, the baggage, and I will deal with it, a little at a time. In the face of such slow growth, I am soothed by the knowledge that I am at least growing, keeping less stuff than I did in the past, willingly throwing things away. I'm letting go (yea me!).

P.S. I hope Herbert likes his fellow garage sale buddies. They all came from a good home.

UPDATE
I've gone through three more tubs. Barbie and Ken have been found! Also found were their pals Darcy (blonde) and Darcy (brunette), Archie, Skipper, and Cher in all her sequined glory (yes, as in Sonny and Cher). I located more of my Girl Scout badges, a stack of junior high school friend photos, my (very cheesy and very homemade) fifth grade poetry book with sticker from the Young Author's Fair, and an articulated moving snake toy which is as amusing now as it was 30 years ago (in other words, it's a keeper). One more copy of our high school newspaper (The Epitaph) was found, this one from senior year; David was upset that I had tossed the others so he said I should keep this one. I'll remind him of that next time he complains about all the crap we've got stored away.

I feel good that I'm not contributing to landfill with my purgings. It's largely recyclable stuff, or kid stuff I can pass on (such as a set of mini colored pencils--Adam took a shine to them). An oversized Skipper doll went to the trash because she was oozing a sticky substance from her joints. Gone to recycling heaven are a big stack of high school play programs and posters, my customs declaration form and boarding pass from a trip to Mexico in 1984, as well as the name and address of Jose Francisco, who apparently wanted me to write to him in Cozumel. In the give-away box went one giant yellow comb from Great America (I'm guessing it was a statement against the comb-in-back-pocket style of the time).

Disposition still to be determined: dot matrix photo printouts of myself with various friends, certificates of participation in a national academic talent search (yea ME), and the log of my adventures on that Mexico trip (including the unsolicited attention of a 19-year old who told my mother he didn't care that I was "only 13"). I've now got a stack of sheet music, mostly marching band stuff, from my own flautist days as well as music I got from my grandparents' attic. Is there any reason to keep these things?

It's a mystery

Each night before sleep I read a bit to clear my head. Most of my reading comes from a local library, one of my favorite places on earth. The world and everything in it seems accessible and interesting at a good library. The trouble with libraries, however, is that it's a tough place to find something you'll enjoy at random. So in my dedicated library bag I keep a running list of books I've heard about elsewhere, authors I've liked in the past, and topics I want to explore further. Then I hit the stacks. How much better can an hour be spent than perusing books, I ask you. Okay, don't answer that.

My point is, I make my way through one novel at a time, one chapter (or two) a day, and it adds up. When asked recently if I'd read anything good lately, I had a bevy of replies. A few I've mentioned here previously (my reading posts), but not enough. I'm here today partly to remind myself years later of books I already read before I check them out again (I'm talking to you, Girl's Guide), and partly to share my recommendations in hopes of spreading some reading joy.

I recommend (and loan out) Kathryn Stockett's Jim Crow-South novel The Help to everyone, though I've discovered it's too intense a subject for a few people. The three narrators (two black maids and a younger white woman who delves into her hometown's segregationist practices) take a bit of getting used to, but stick with it and you'll be rewarded with wonderfully authentic voices, moving stories, and a vivid history lesson no American should forget. I especially loved the Afterword by the author, in which she describes her own relationship history with her family's black maid. Touching, sad, important, personal.

It seems like I've always got one or two "serious" books on my bedside table, waiting for me to be in a contemplative mood. Don't worry, I won't dig out the titles at the moment, if for no other reason than that I don't have a good track record of recommending such books to others. (Avoid religion and politics, isn't that rule one of chitchat?)

Switching to the frivolous side of reading, I do enjoy a bit of good chick lit from time to time, but recognize that chick lit is not to everyone's tastes. Sophie Kinsella's Twenties Girl is cute, but not very memorable. I've not even requested Emily Giffin's latest, Heart of the Matter, from the library, because it looks to confirm my apathetic feelings towards her books since reading her stellar debut novel, Something Borrowed.

By far the bulk of my casual reading this past year has been mysteries. I wrote previously about the international phenomenon, the Millenium trilogy, which isn't so much a mystery series as one very long novel of intrigue and character studies. Replete with violence and minutiae, that is not for everyone. But I've got a few other more classic mysteries that I can recommend to any reader.

Mistress of the Art of Death is the first in a series of medieval forensics novels by Ariana Franklin. Adelia, the central character, is the modern day equivalent of a medical examiner, brought to England to help King Henry II solve a sensitive crime and thereby calm the local populace. The mystery aspect of the story is well done, with a wide cast of suspicious characters. The crimes are a bit gruesome, but I skim those descriptions and feel I miss nothing of the story development. There's something of a love interest for Adelia, though this enters the plot late and is not dwelled upon. What's most interesting about this story, I thought, is the incorporation of what seems to be well researched historical detail. All aspects of everyday life are touched upon, as are customs and language. I love that kind of thing. Right now I'm reading the second book, The Serpent's Tale, which is keeping my attention. After that, there are three more books featuring Adelia. Hopefully the plots remain appealing and the mysteries intriguing. I'll let you know.

The Sweetness at the Bottom of the Pie is the first of a very promising new series of mystery novels by Alan Bradley. It centers on an adolescent girl in post-War England who is obsessed with poisons and extremely well versed in chemistry. Alas Flavia de Luce has no one to temper her eccentricities. Her father is a stoic widower, and her two older sisters focus on relationships and music, far outside Flavia's realm. When Flavia becomes involved in a murder investigation, she gets in over her head, but of course ends up solving the crime before the police do. The story is told from Flavia's perspective, demonstrating her blend of sophisticated insight and childish views. It's a charming book, and one I recommend to mystery fans and historical fiction fans alike. The next book, The Weed That Strings the Hangman's Bag, came out recently and I've not read it, but again, I am hopeful that the quality is maintained.

A cute book I'd recommend to any reader is another unusual-perspective mystery novel, Dog On It. This is the first in yet another new series, the Chet and Bernie mysteries. In this case, the narrator is...wait for it...a dog. I can't tell you exactly why it works so well, but I can simply tell you it does. The author has done a great job of viewing a private detective's work through a dog's eyes. A rather insightful and well behaved dog, but a dog nonetheless. The mystery part of the story is secondary to the interactions of dog and human.

Speaking of mystery series, and the potential for storylines to get iffy after a while, I will recommend--with qualifications--the Stephanie Plum books by Janet Evanovich. I read the first one years ago, but I think I'd still recommend it to vacation readers. Stephanie is a bounty hunter, a profession she took on as last resort when she lost her job. She's also an accident-prone Jersey girl involved with two different guys, cop Joe Morelli, and mysterious fellow bounty hunter, Ranger. The first book, One for the Money, shows Stephanie as she learns her job and becomes reaquainted with Joe; it's fast paced, filled with oddball characters, and plain old lighthearted (adult) fun. A few of the other books, especially early on, are similarly amusing. But lately the stretching out of Stephanie's perpetual dilemma choosing between Joe and Ranger, and the repetitiveness of cases and improbable problems she encounters have grown tiresome. Still, I do hold out hope, like so many other readers who've been sucked into this series, that Stephanie will one day move on. At last count there were 15 published novels in the regular series, plus three supplementary stories, and the 16th book comes out next month. There's also reportedly a movie in the works. I'm sure I'll have an opinion when that arrives. Til then, happy reading.

Drive In

Yikes, I've been neglecting my poor blog. I'd like to think it's because I've been doing so much interesting stuff that I have no time to sit and record my thoughts, but one glance at my facebook page or twitter feed will show you this ain't true. Of course a closer look at the piecemeal comments and activities there will show why I might not be blogging as much. Just as I feel I am growing more light-hearted with age, I am also growing more light-brained. I prefer not to think about it, and thus my blog suffers. Sorry, little bloggy. But the event that will always trigger a return to my blog has occurred, and this brings me to why I am here today. That's right, I went to see a movie. (Cue dramatic swell of music.)

HOT TUB TIME MACHINE
The ads for this movie tantalized me back during the Olympics. I'm a sucker for fun John Cusack movies, and throwbacks to the 80s only entice me further. David did not understand my fascination with such a raunchy mindless movie (he was concerned for my pleasure, not his--isn't that sweet?), but still he agreed to accompany me to the drive-in on the film's opening night. With such lofty expectations (maybe lofty isn't the right word) the movie could hardly excel in my final estimation, and indeed it did not. However, it wasn't a waste of time.

Hot Tub Time Machine centers on a trio of middle aged men who have grown apart since their glory days as debaucherous youths. Now facing the sad realities of adult life (lost dreams, shattered marriages, etc) they are thrown together for a weekend and decide to make the most of it at a ski resort they used to frequent. (Inexplicably) joining them is one of their nephews.

Cusack is the nominal star, but his character Adam is fairly flat, and he virtually phones in the performance (I'm excited to finally use that phrase). Clark Duke is amusing as Adam's nephew Jacob, played as the modest-quippy-geek type Duke is building a career of (check him out on ABC Family's Greek or the deadpan online show Clark and Michael). Craig Robinson plays Nick, a former singer now married and working for a dog care business. And the most outrageous--and in this case funniest--of the characters is Lou, played by The Daily Show's hilarious Rob Corddry. Lou is a foul mouthed, hard drinking, insecure man-child whose antics are at the center of the laugh-out-loud moments of the movie.

The plot barely holds together and centers on a hot tub that takes the guys back to the mid 1980s, where they must recreate what turned out for some to be a pivotal night of relationship letdowns and inappropriate sex. As that combo implies, the movie never quite figures out whether it's trying for heart or pure outrageousness. Like the 80s teen sex movies it attempts to harken back to, HTTM at its best succeeds only on a sophomoric level, though it's sometimes a very funny level. So the movie didn't live up to my hype. But it delivered laughs, had a good soundtrack, and kept me awake on a Friday night. No need to relive the night, but I certainly won't regret it either.

REMEMBER ME
First a bit of explanation...
My intention had been to switch venues in order to watch When In Rome instead of She's Out of My League, which was what was paired with Hot Tub Time Machine as a second feature. Thus we had to relocate within the drive-in during intermission. I had scoped out the other screens to see where The Bounty Hunter was playing, which I thought was paired with When In Rome. Logical, right? So we maneuver, find a space, and await a Kristen Bell-Josh Duhamel fluff movie. This would all be a lot easier to do if, a) I could recall from one visit to the next how best to determine what is playing with what at the local drive-in, or b) the 6-screen outdoor theater were not so elaborately walled off and riddled with oddly parked cars and bits of tire-threatening flea market detritus. Five minutes into the movie we "chose"--after a dark slow moving murder scene unfolded without titles (maybe I missed them?)--I turned to David and said, "This doesn't seem like the start of a romantic comedy." Boy was I right.

So I didn't intend to see what I ended up watching, and--once I'd figured out what it was--knew nothing about the film other than the names of its stars (Robert Pattinson, the British actor who is so pretty and square jawed as to be occasionally distracting, and Emilie de Ravin, the Australian actress who plays Claire on the tv show Lost). Indeed, I spent a full quarter of an hour contemplating how we could politely move our car to the opposite end of the complex, where I now saw brightly colored scenery at the start of the lighthearted rom-com I'd expected to settle into. This was not helped by the quiet, deliberate pace of Remember Me (a title I had to look up after we got home). But I gotta say, in the end I actually liked this movie.

Remember Me is about two damaged young people who get together under somewhat false pretenses and then have to deal with their family traumas (past and present). There's basically no soundtrack, the scenery is nothing special, and the various foreign actors playing New Yorkers with accents can be irritatingly distracting (to me, although maybe you don't care). But just let yourself sit and watch and wait, and the movie delivers. I think anyone who knows too many details of the story would be very disappointed, but with an open mind and a patient mood you might find you like this movie too. Read nothing more about it, just check it out. How's that for a rousing endorsement?

Highbrow, lowbrow

I've got two tv shows to recommend this week: one that aired originally a few years back but is still fabulous; and the other a new show that's just ended its first season and whose future is up in the air.

I just caught a fabulous episode of the PBS program Nature entitled Queen of Trees. It's a largely unnarrated film about the ubiquitous fig tree (there are 1000 varieties, who knew?) and its direct and indirect role in sustaining many lifeforms (the show's summary implies this is just about a tree and its dedicated wasp, but really the show is about one tree and the entire ecosystem it feeds). Beautifully filmed in high definition and thoughtfully edited, I found myself contentedly oohing and aahing repeatedly (such as when the guy patiently smokes out the bees then digs out the honeycomb, or when the alligator waits with its mouth open at the rockfall in the stream). And for what it's worth, even Adam was enthralled. (Before you ask, I will admit to allowing my 8-month old to occasionally watch nature programs and nonviolent sporting events with me, an extent of tv viewing I think reasonable for the next five years or so.)

The second show I recommend is the season finale of 10 Things I Hate About You. Loosely based on the movie of the same name (which was a loose adaptation of The Taming of the Shrew, one of several modernizations of classic stories that I also heartily recommend), this 30-minute ABC Family teen show features a solid cast, amusing storylines, and some very clever writing.

Cameron: Despite everything, I still feel that Bianca and I are meant to be together. Haven't you ever known something deep in your heart?
Michael: I'm fifteen, I know things deep in my pants. That's why I don't waste time on chicks that aren't into me.

Okay, so it's not Proust. But it's cute and contemporary and generally compelling, and it could use a few more viewers to ensure its return. Check it out.

There's a time and a place for expanding one's mind, and there's a time and place for relaxing it. I'm proud to offer you opportunities for both.

UPDATE 9/17/09: The 10 Things season finale, that I enjoyed so much, drew this response from David (imagine him looking completely unimpressed as he says...): "This is the episode you were so excited about?" Well pttht to David. I for one am quite happy the show was renewed, and I know he'll be right next to me as I watch them.

Fourteen Is Enough

Debate topic for today: The world would be a happier place without the news.

The reporting of live octuplets born this week in the Los Angeles area was intriguing enough. Now comes word that the mother has 6 other children, all under the age of 8. Wow. Make that WOW. It's no shock that the woman used fertility treatments, but it is rather amazing that with so many children already she would either want or need to use artificial means in order to have more. No doubt anticipating the incredulity such news would inspire in readers, the above story ends with quotes from several fertility specialists. "Who am I to say that six is the limit?" one said, while the other commented, "I don't think it's our job to tell them how many babies they're allowed to have. I am not a policeman for reproduction in the United States." True enough, but I don't think there will be any shortage of others willing to fill in the passing judgment void.

My grandfather always decried the unhappy focus of the news, and today's headlines would offer him no respite. First we have the latest depressing statistic on the economy; apparently we're doomed to a deep recession. (Side note: I'm rather surprised the media hasn't started stirring up fears of a depression. Probably they want to hold onto that one for next month, so as not to waste the recession momentum they've built up. UPDATE Mar 11, 2009: The Freakonomics post today is entitled "Yes we're in a depression", referring to the opinion of a new book.) Elsewhere in the news we hear that the peanut plant responsible for countless contaminated products should have recalled their peanut paste--or at least checked production thoroughly for source of salmonella--2 YEARS ago. And then there's ExxonMobil, who posted ANOTHER record breaking year of profits. Happy news for stockholders, but a sad statement for those of us concerned about deep imbalances in the world.

And last but not least is the news that former San Francisco Giant Bobby Estalella is ready to testify against teammate Barry Bonds in the grandaddy of all steroids cases. It's obvious Estalella was on something during his time with the Giants. No one gets as ripped as the catcher was during the 2000 season just naturally. And given that he and Bonds shared a locker room and a trainer, it's not surprising he may have some insight into Bonds' fellow bulkiness at the time.

Some may view the firming up of the anti-Bonds case as good news, and you might think that as a fan of baseball I'd be one of them. But in this instance I can't get happy over news of impending justice. In truth, the steroid years offered some of the most fun, exciting sports spectating I've ever witnessed. And in fairness to the doped-up players, the use of all performance enhancing drugs was not strictly forbidden at the time (never mind that users hid their habits because they sensed it was wrong and were playing Russian roulette with their bodies to boot--idiocy and self destruction have never been outlawed). As much as I may want to, it's not fair to judge past actions using today's standards.

But then Bonds isn't being tried for his use of steroids, past or present; it's the lying about it that is at issue in this case. Which is why my unwillingness to celebrate his demise befuddles even me. Maybe it's my compassion coming out. After all, Bonds has become persona non grata in what was virtually his entire world, which can't feel nice. Maybe it's me healthily letting go of the past. But more likely it's just a desire to not have to hear about unpleasant things and a wish to return to a slightly delusional present. After all, how can bad news get me down if it doesn't exist? There, I'm feeling much happier now. :)

Funny Baby

I might be taking the "having a child can be such fun" notion in a new direction here, but I've started clipping cartoons that sort of bust on parenting. Thus far I've found two amusing parenting-related comics to hang on the baby room door. One's a New Yorker cartoon by Drew Dernavich. It shows two parents cribside as they tell some visiting friends:

We've decided that it will be better for his later development if we speak to him only in legalese.

:) An amusing take on the absurd directions some people take while educating their children for the world, IMHO.

The other one I've taped on the door thus far makes me giggle everytime I read it. I just love the play on words in this Pardon My Planet comic by Vic Lee.


Fun stuff, eh? If you come across something funny that you think would make a good addition to the above, do send me a copy or an electronic link.

UPDATE 11/10
Speaking of baby showers, I've added a sampling of shower pics to my picture pages. Oddly enough, each shower at some point featured me wearing a towel on my head and me poised over a large, sweet, delicious cake. Just a coincidence? I'll let you be the judge.

Burning obsessions

Not that you asked, but...

I'm nearing burnout on election coverage. I know, amazing, huh?

Egg Beaters are absurdly expensive.

I'm well past burnout on financial coverage. Yes the stock market has tanked recently and our financial markets are having to regroup en masse, but the world is not ending.

Here's what I remind myself when the whiff of panic emanates from a TV news channel nearby: Stocks are best as a long term investment. Investing is a form of gambling; you can bet wisely, but you can't guarantee winning. You do not have the money associated with your stock portfolio unless/until you cash out the investment; until then it is for all intents and purposes Monopoly money.

I've discovered that Tums are as tasty as any after dinner mint. And they are a good source of calcium. Plus, they help with heartburn. Amazing, huh?

I know how it feels to lose Monopoly money in a hurry due to a series of unlucky rolls of the dice (and a brother who buys up property more aggressively than I do then lords over me when I land on that property). It sucks.

I have this parasite growing inside of me and it moves. Plus it makes me move. Involuntarily. It's a very odd sensation.

Thinking David would take the financial crisis in stride, I felt secure in knowing the world was not coming to an end. I was happy to know I didn't need to panic (when others about me were losing their heads). It's nice to have someone in your life to make you feel that way. Then David started to fret. Grrr.

I miss sleeping comfortably, restfully on my back. Very, very much.

I've never eaten so much red meat in my life as in the past 6 months. I'm actually starting to develop preferences among types of steak. Ack!

I am a big fan of odd sensations. In the past they've tended to be random enough (or not for public disclosure) that I didn't get the chance to obsess over them. At the moment I am almost encouraged to obsess over odd sensations. This can't be good.

I love Mad Men as much as ever.

My left ear has been doing this annoying vibrato thing off and on for at least a month. It does not respond to any normal ear clearing efforts. I would like it to stop.

I've been experimenting with using a traditional, multi-pocket, carry in your hand type purse. This vision of myself hasn't disturbed me yet. I know, amazing, huh?

UPDATE (Nov 3): Staying away from news for a while has allowed my natural love of election day to re-emerge; I am ready for a long election night watching returns and listening to absurd speculation. Mad Men season 2 is over and I miss it, such a well written interesting show. I've taken to carrying a few Tums tablets with me, and of course now I find my heartburn is not so bad. The experiment with traditional purse ended; it's in my bag rotation, but the oversize purse thing just isn't for me on a regular basis. Left ear stopped vibrato-ing, thank goodness. Good news: I've been able to back off on the red meat consumption. Not so good news: instead I have to take a heavy dose of iron each day to ward off anemia. But wow I'm breathing much easier now when I exercise. As always, good with bad.

Fiscal Incompetence

Today's Fresh Air featured a thoughtful and amusing take on the current financial crises facing banking giants and the economy as a whole. I highly recommend a listen.

Have I mentioned how frustrated I am by the fact that California does not yet have an approved state budget? The tenth largest economy in the world is over 2 months overdue on figuring out how to pay the bills for the next year! Argh.

And the United States deficit continues to grow. And we continue to import heaps of stupid (and some not so stupid) stuff and borrow money from foreign governments and exercise funky public reporting practices to ignore/avoid dealing with this growing problem. All the while infrastructure crumbles, imbalances in wealth increase, and we focus our attentions on how potential Presidents/Vice Presidents promise the moon without thinking about who else is not only useful but required in lassoing it. Double argh.

UPDATE
Lots of people blame California budget delays on the fact that the state (namely, its voters) requires a two-thirds majority in the legislature to pass each year's budget. Others get frustrated with career politicians who can't seem to think outside the box (or their district). I agree that these are part of the difficulty. But a much bigger portion of blame goes to the voters of the Golden State who continue to pass boneheaded (or well intentioned but ill conceived) ballot initiatives that tie the legislature's hands when it comes to how the budget is divvied up. See Comment section for more grievance-airing on this subject.

I've mentioned previously my love of letters to the editor. Today's San Jose Mercury News had a bunch of good examples to keep my love affair going. And one just happens to make a perfect addition to this blog posting. The following is San Jose reader Chris Bencher's (tongue-in-cheek) take on how California can get out of its financial messes just like big financial firms do:

Maybe feds can bail out California
How about this? Let California take extra withholdings from our paychecks, which will be settled up when we do our income taxes next year. It's effectively an "interest-free loan" to the government. Then, if California does not pay us back by April 15, 2009, we impose a 12 percent interest rate. Then we'll call this a "sub-prime" loan from the people to the state.

Then, the people can have the option to sell those sub-prime loans to companies like Freddie Mac and Lehman Brothers. The federal government will bail them out when Californai defaults, and voila! We just passed the California budget problem to a federal budget problem. A perfect solution.

By the way, the paycheck withholding part of the above deal is attached to the actual proposed budget for California. The legislature proposes the state withhold $1.6 billion this year from state worker paychecks, thereby giving the state coffers a $1.6 billion influx of cash. Then California would refund the full amount next year in state tax returns. All I'll say in response is, please go listen to Michael Greenberger's observations about shady financing (yesterday's Fresh Air).

UPDATE #2
Check out David's take on the government bailouts of financial firms. You go, David.

UPDATE #3
The credit crunch and California's slow movement to a budget have converged. Now the state is asking the US government for a $7 billion loan because its usual source of short term loans has dried up with the credit crisis (read the NY Times story). As if our existing bond-debt and fiscal short sightedness weren't sufficiently burdensome. ACKK!!!

Is it elitist to say this whole thing is ridiculous?

The cover of The New Yorker this week--the July 14 issue depicting the Obamas surrounded by evidence of various false rumors--was, I thought, kind of funny. Not hilarious, mind you, but certainly not completely un-funny. Unfortunately I did not get to arrive at this conclusion before I had been told 12 ways how offensive it was. Apparently no one in the media who commented on the cover is an actual reader of the magazine (hello, context). Fortunately I can think for myself and can take political art with a grain of salt and a sense of humor.

I understand where artist Barry Blitt took a risk. Clearly not everyone has been following the easily disproven rumors that have been circulated concerning Barack Obama. David's grandfather thought the cover was terrible; I feel I should add that he is not a New Yorker reader and only heard about the cartoon from the story's heavy rotation on TV. When we discussed it over lunch I realized that where I saw a picture poking fun at all the absurd allegations and conjectures about our democratic Presidential nominee, he saw an artist promoting such allegations and conjectures.

As a political cartoonist I'd say it's Blitt's job to push the envelope, and sometimes it works better than others. While this one probably helped the New Yorker sell more newsstand copies, it probably won't go down as one of Blitt's best loved works. Consideration for that honor ought to go to Blitt's October 2007 New Yorker cover depicting Iranian President Ahmadinejad in a foot-tapping bathroom stall. Now that was some clever political-fun poking.

To finish things off I encourage you to check out a few other elitist funnies right after you read a bit more about charges of elitism in general.

• MUST READ: Jon Stewart on The Daily Show had a hilarious take on the latest New Yorker cover, including a fabulous response suggestion for the Obama camp.
• Daily Kos posting, The New Yorker Cover: An Anti-Elitist Opportunity
• And two more elitist New Yorker cartoons: one and two. (It's okay to label them as such; they use the word themselves.)

Drilling down

Take a look at this informative little financial opinion piece from The New Yorker on why oil prices are so high. After outlining a number of reasonable points, the author asserts that:

none of the problems that have driven up the price of oil lend themselves to a quick fix, and most, like the boom in global demand and the inaccessibility of certain oil fields, aren’t under our control at all.

Now go read what the Freakonomics guys have to say about why rising gas prices are so disturbing to us. Notice any similarities in the source of panic?

And on to a related topic...
Expanding offshore oil drilling alone will never solve our energy problems. Even if it were to be expanded (and politically, environmentally, and financially this is a huge longshot), the impact would be relatively small and not immediate (estimates vary, but the amount of oil and gas the industry itself predicts could be harnessed might get us only two years' worth of supply--then what do we do for a fix?). We might feel better in the short term by expanding drilling offshore, just because we took some action over which we seem to have control (it's a domestic bandage of sorts), but a year or two from now we will have moved on to whatever our latest insecurity is and not necessarily fixed the underlying need for the bandage. I don't think the environmental risk of drilling and piping-in is worth taking just so I can feel better for a few months, especially as it won't have effected a substantive solution whatsoever.

So expanded offshore drilling is not going to supply enough oil and natural gas to make an appreciable difference in energy prices for long enough to be significant, and once it’s used it’s gone (aka it is completely non-renewable). What are we supposed to do then? Oil is a one-trick pony (or Clydesdale horse, as the case may be); aren’t there other options we can expand upon? That’s what I want to hear people talk about—realistic, get started now, varied solution plans. What I’m sick of hearing about is how tough we all have it (I got it, can we move on now?), predictions of just how high gas/crude oil can/will go (predicting earthquakes holds about as much appeal for me—why do I want to constantly hear about something that might happen instead of living my life, which really is happening?), and arguments about whether offshore drilling is good or bad (there are other options, people, so get your heads out of your bottoms!).

Maybe when it comes to this latest oil/fuel price crisis we're both over-reacting and under-reacting. One on hand, the price of gas is in many ways out of our control, and what's the point worrying over things out of our control? On the other hand there's something we can very much influence: public policy. Last I checked, we live in a representative democracy, electing our public officials and voting not only in private at a ballot box a few times a year (assuming you take advantage of this nice privilege), but also in how we spend our money, how and how often we publicly state our opinions, and what news we choose to read. Imagine what would happen if we all started educating ourselves about government policies and practices?

Sorry, I’m just getting a bit tired of negative news and hype, people selfishly complaining but not taking care of themselves or contributing to meaningful solutions. *sigh*

If you choose not to decide,
You still have made a choice.
--from "Freewill" by Rush

I recommend these interesting reads, for your edification on the gas/oil/energy issues that are undeniable, if occasionally overhyped:

• Take a look at the article from The New Yorker entitled The Island in the Wind for an example of how a community of apathetic skeptics turned the idea of renewably energy into a successful, proud local enterprise
• Check out the Energy Information Administration, out of the Dept of Energy, for facts on the United States’ sources of crude oil and refined petroleum products.
• Follow this discussion about the gasoline market (warning, it's a bunch of economists)
  
• Read this progressive policy take on Gas Prices: Why Our “Free-Market” Economy is Anything but Free

Snuffed Out

Today I went to San Francisco to watch the Olympic Torch Relay. Here's a list of things I encountered there:

• A lot of people waving gigantic Chinese national flags.
  
• Train cars and vans full of pro-China attendees, most carrying Chinese flags.
  
• Several arguments between small groups of Chinese nationals and frustrated middle aged American men.
• Chants of "Li-ar! Li-ar! Li-ar!" as anti-China/pro-Tibet protestors passed by.
• Counterchants, intended to be said just ahead of the above, of "Chi-na! Chi-na! Chi-na!" (To clarify, this last was said by the anti-Chinese government protesters, meaning presumably the pro-China ones were claiming honesty for their own government.)
• A fair number of ridiculous and superficial barbs hurled from both sides.
• More Tibetans (or Tibetan-looking people, I didn't stop to ask or question their ethnicity) than I will likely ever see in one place again, unless I someday travel to Tibet.
• Various pro-Turkmenistan and pro-Burma demonstrators, as well as many combinations of other anti-China message promoters ("China out of..." followed by a list, for example).
• A lot of "stop the genocide" sort of generic protest signs (to which I wanted to ask just which genocide they were referring exactly, because really, this is a rather big request to be just bandying about inefficiently).
• Countless "Another [fill in the blank] for a free Tibet" and "China: Listen to the Dalai Lama" signs, some alongside anti-Dalai Lama signs.
• A rather well organized and thoroughly peaceful multi-generational group of green-clad Save Darfur demonstrators, standing along the road behind professionally made banners and large clusters of green balloons.
• A megaphoned message from an unseen individual several hours later and a mile up the road, announcing, "Attention Darfur people, we need everyone to go to Justin Herman Plaza. Do NOT let the torch reach the closing ceremony!"
• One of the cheesiest cover band performances ever, on stage at the planned site of closing ceremony.
  
• Pot smoking, incense burning, whistle blowing, and meditation bell chiming.
• Three naked men standing in the middle of the Embarcardero engaged in some sort of peaceful political commentary which I missed because I was trying to get a picture of them all lined up and kept getting blocked by others trying to do the same.
• A family of balloon artists cranking out red and yellow hats decorated on front with Olympic rings.
• More reporters than I have ever seen at any event in my life, and I've attended some pretty large or at least significant events.
• A lot of people apparently there on this beautiful day to just peacefully and happily watch the torch and surrounding events, not cause any sort of a ruckus. (How much of a ruckus can you cause in a suit on your lunch hour or while carrying a toddler?)
• A lot of people waiting all along the planned route--but also room for even more people (it was never difficult to find an open space along the barricades to easily view torch passing, that is, if the torch had ever passed it would have been easy enough to get a front row view).
• A lot of confusion about where the torch was and when it would be appearing.
• A gorgeous, lively day spent along the waterfront of San Francisco.

What I did NOT see at today's torch relay:

• A litter problem
• Violence
• Out of control crowds
• Concessions of any kind (and I'm not referring to the food variety)
  
• Exertion in attempting to dissuade crowds from gathering along or entering the proposed route
• The torch (sigh)

Titles

My Peculiar Aristocratic Title is:

Her Grace Lady Michelle the Talkative of Pigotts Sty,
Most Noble and Honourable the Prohibited of Withering Glance

For a random title generator, I think it did eerily well. Get your own peculiar aristocratic title.

Last night David and I huddled around the laptop to watch The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters on DVD (Why watching on a laptop? Because we are currently in possession of not one, but two non-functioning DVD players. Maybe Tomminy Tivo intimidates them?) Anyway, King of Kong starts off kind of slowly, and early on it just seems like a history of the arcade game variety of the Uber Geek species. But then it turns into a near-infuriating but compelling human drama centered on two men's claims to World Champion status on the game of Donkey Kong. And my description still doesn't do justice to the oddness of the flick. Naturally I recommend it.

Puppies!

I'm all about the fun stuff today. At some point during the Super Bowl you should switch over to Animal Planet. Why? Because Puppy Bowl IV is on! At any given time, eight puppies crowd a miniature football field strewn with play toys and a water dish (including hidden water-dish-cam) and all you have to do is watch and try not to squeal and coo too much.

The New York Times wrote about this adorable, growing hit:

There is commentary, by Harry Kalas, the legendary N.F.L. and Phillies broadcaster, who in this case says things like: “He’s at the 20, he’s at the 30! O.K., now he’s back at the 20, the 10.” There are M.V.P. and viewer’s choice awards. And there is a referee to call the action, such as it is, and deal with what the show refers to as “puppy fouls.”

“The puppies are running around, playing with squeak toys, mock footballs — whether they realize it or not, some of them do make touchdowns,” Ms. Toporoff (Exec Producer) said. Still, no points are kept.

And censors need not worry: there are no wardrobe malfunctions during the kitten halftime spectacle, in which 15 or so cats climb on and play with toys. This year’s version is more sparkly, with falling confetti and a background of silver streamers. “We took more, like, a burlesque approach,” Mr. Schechter said.

Puppy frolics, burlesque kitties, and pointless scoring. I am so there.

P.S. At one point there was a Bernese and a Westie on the field together. I took it as a good opportunity to see how our imaginary (aka "sometime in the future") pets would get along. Oh dear. Let's just say the Westie (named Jackson) ran many rings around the Bernese (named Colt). Jackson was such a rambunctious player that he won the favor of the fans who voted him #1 in the Viewer's Choice MVP.

Leaner pork

Have I mentioned before how much I love the movie Dave and its idyllic depiction of a pared down governmental budget? Yeah, maybe a few times. Anyway, I cling to the dream of a clean budget. Today comes news from the Bush administration I can get firmly behind. It's a happy Monday. :)

President Bush previously signed into law the 2006 Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act. The bill, coauthored by Senators Coburn, Obama, Carper, and McCain, required the creation of a website (USAspending.gov) for regular people to identify budgeted recipients of federal funding (above $25k). Funny how my political interests come together, eh?

Learn more about pork barrel spending (aka "earmarks"):
* An obviously anti-pork barrel viewpoint can be found at Porkbusters
* Wikipedia's intriguing definition and history of the pork barrel
* Check out the encyclopedic SourceWatch/Congresspedia entry on the above law

14 Feb UPDATE: Washington Post reported today on the 2007 earmark securing habits of this year's top Presidential candidates, in "Candidates' Earmarks Worth Millions." Notice I said top candidates. Maybe you're always suprised come voting time, but there are in fact more than two parties in this country. Check out this list from Project Vote Smart of all the people who formally put their name out there as candidates for President. Wow, that's a long list.

Editorializing

Not that you asked, but...
I love editorials, whether officially sanctioned editorial board pieces, letters to the editor, or political cartoons (such as by Tom Toles and Pat Oliphant).

Here is a nice example of an informative editorial piece, one which I'd encourage potential Democratic voters to read. The New York Times has endorsed Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary. Why do I recommend you read an article endorsing Hillary? Because it is a good example of the informative nature of editorials, it is well argued, and it includes much praise for my preferred candidate. :)

By choosing Mrs. Clinton, we are not denying Mr. Obama’s appeal or his gifts. The idea of the first African-American nominee of a major party also is exhilarating, and so is the prospect of the first woman nominee. “Firstness” is not a reason to choose. The times that false choice has been raised, more often by Mrs. Clinton, have tarnished the campaign.

Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton would both help restore America’s global image, to which President Bush has done so much grievous harm. They are committed to changing America’s role in the world, not just its image.

On the major issues, there is no real gulf separating the two.

It's the less major issues, like adherence to machine politics, that do it for me, but I'll leave that argument for another day. Regardless of my issues with the Clinton campaign, I am very excited that the Democrats overall have such a decent crop of candidates this year and that the primaries, although too expensive for my tastes, are at least getting people across the country involved.

You may now return to your regular Friday frivolity. :)

UPDATE: I realize now that op-ed is the more accurate label for the news articles I recommended. In this opinion piece in the Jan 27 NY Times, Caroline Kennedy says that she had never before been inspired by a candidate like people did during her father's campaign. She supports Barack Obama's bid for presidency.

Stimulating

A rambling soapbox comment on helping the economy. I will clean it up later....

As happy as I am to see Congress acting fairly quickly and cooperatively on an economic stimulus proposal, and I recognize that such a thing could have a positive impact, I have concerns about how the household tax rebate will be spent.

I like the parts of the proposal that focus on helping businesses expand (a peek at the plan). But the personal rebate part of the solution leaves me wondering if we've forgotten part of the equation. I understand that if even half of us ran out and spent or invested all of the couple hundred bucks we get, the economy would feel a poke. Like a jump start or defibrillation, maybe a household cash infusion would put things back on track and ready to chug along. But maybe we'd be propping up a dying entity. Sometimes the only real cure is not a jump start, but a new battery. I see no new batteries in our future.

The United States national debt, according to the Treasury Department's own calculations is over 9 trillion dollars. Our current balance of trade (exports versus imports) means we are dependent on other countries for most of the tangible stuff we buy. The most recent figures (November 2007) show we imported $730 billion dollars' worth of stuff more than we exported--in one month. Check out the value of our imports from China over the last few years, or any of the other countries we trade with. I'm not a big fan of growing increasingly dependent on others; a little dependence is nice, too much and we become hostages. (Um, heard such arguments about foreign oil dependence, anyone?)

I'm no financial genius, but doesn't it make a difference what people spend money on? The rebate plan seems tied to the idea that most people will spend the money they receive, rather than save it (here's insight into how the 2001 rebate was spent). Fine, I'll leave that be. But if we all run out and spend it on cheap clothing for our kids, we might be defeating the purpose. Maybe what we ought to do is encourage this temporary windfall be spent on good quality, domestic (or balanced trade nations') services and manufactured products.

Before you head out to spend your rebate at American stores like Wal-Mart, consider the source country for anything you consider buying (check the inside label or box--where was it made? And don't assume groceries are domestic. Even agricultural products come from overseas nowadays).

Your spending sends a message; consider the quality and nature of the business you give money to before you turn the funds over. Support buying local, and building it better (rather than encouraging the creation of more cheap crap). Balance out some imbalances, if only slightly. Not all domestic spending is created equal, and not all that is manufactured in the US is good quality. Just a few things to think about as you spend your rebate.

Instead of buying unnecessary kitsch cranked out in a sweatshop far away or poorly constructed clothes made close to home, why not use part of your rebate to invest in auto maintenance and a few American made cloth carrying bags. Then, next time you shop for knickknacks or a loaf of bread, you can can return home in a car that burns less oil carrying your purchases in something other than a plastic environmental choke hazard. See, you can boost our domestic economy and help the environment at the same time! (For plan to work you must keep your own carrying bags with you, and stop accepting the plastic bags they give out at store. You can do it.)

Michelle's suggested ways to spend rebate:
* Buy several cloth carrying bags for carting home groceries and other purchases (next day, deliver your accumulated plastic bags to a recycling bin like those in front of some grocery stores)
* Do necessary or preventive auto maintenance (can reduce reliance on oil products and prolong life of your car)
* Buy 1 or 2 products from American manufacturers, such as non-trendy, well constructed clothing, shoes, or furniture (next day donate some older clothing/furniture and check out second hand store for a few additional purchases)
* Cover cost of an hour without pay to volunteer your time with a community organization
* Purchase higher end domestic appliances that reduce your energy or water consumption
* Cover cost of an hour without pay to spend quality time with partner or kids

I like my idea and plan to promote it until someone can show me evidence that it wouldn't help. I figure how much damage could it do to encourage domestic spending?

It frustrates me that the fiscal stimulus idea phase seems to have ended with the rebate and business tax credits. What is lacking is the leadership to get a secondary message across. "Here's money, now spend it wisely. And by wisely I mean XXX." Is it wrong to expect our chosen leaders to advise us? Why are politicians so afraid to lead? And why do we let them get away with it? Maybe we know less than they do about these issues. And maybe there are well paid special interest groups controlling the message in their favor. Hmm, I may be on to something here. :)

This is a good time to remind us all that politicians are elected, and that eligible voters--whether you register and vote or not--are responsible in many ways for the direction this country takes. I cannot beg you enough--PLEASE inform yourself and take positive action. Here's a good reference for contacting politicians. It includes a lookup feature to find your Congressperson, good tips on most and least effective methods, as well as how you should address various elected officials.

Learn more about our trade deficit and debt
* Economic Policy Institute on Debt and the Dollar, 2004
* Brookings Institute on Foreign Holdings of US Debt, 2007
* Business Reference primer on Balance of Trade, what it is and how it affects economy

Revised

Sometimes I read through old postings and, although I crack myself up, I see that there's room for improvement. I know, big of me to admit, eh? Anyway, I often end up making changes in such a way as to make the revision practically a new post (for example, today I significantly added to this one). It's not a new post, truly, but I fear loyal readers will miss out. Then again, maybe I am deluding myself, for I know not whether you all even read enough of this blog to make it matter to anyone other than me. Hmm, that's sort of depressing. Maybe just a new tag--revised--and a little moving on is in order. :)

Free the rice

Next time you are looking for something to do on the web, check out the simple to use, free vocabulary quiz FreeRice. It may feel like test prep all over again but this time the stakes are higher, so check your answers before submitting. Each correct answer generates a donation of 20 grains of rice. Read more about the project or just go play. (And if you need help, that's what a dictionary is for.) Thanks to Lisa for pointing out this webgem.

Nov 30 update: Apparently I am de rigeur (and you can be too!). The latest issue of Rolling Stone listed the FreeRice site in its what's hot on the Internet section.

Studying

I see today that my dissertation topic (individual- and environmental-level predictors of Latino student achievement, not that you asked) isn't nearly as tantalizing as what other people get paid to investigate. How rigorously did researchers have to prepare academically to conduct this study of owners' emotional attachment to their Roombas? I bet they have PhD's. I wonder how many social sciences doctoral students are inspired by after-the-fact revered researchers like Kinsey, who broke some of the most fertile ground in academia by pioneering research in sex. We all realize sex isn't the subject he started his career out with.

A little digression, which possibly this entire blog could be called...
Paul Ehrlich points out that studying sex is "a lot more interesting than studying the pollination of plants." He also observes that "being human beings, scientists, too, are fascinated by sex"; how sad that we need reminded. Of course this makes me wonder about those who do choose to study plant pollination, but I wish not to pass judgment, lest they tell me to cast the first stone. I won't bore you at present with what else Ehrlich has to say about the way scientists study sex and other topics, and the inevitable bias that comes into alleged "scientific" studies. But I will tell you that the rest of his book Human Natures is quite worth a read.

Back to the serious matter of scientific research...
Here's a transcript of a very interesting discussion about the need for, and misunderstood nature of, basic research (aka, research that doesn't appear immediately useful). Hmm, I wonder if the people engaged in that discussion would think differently about research if they owned--and loved--a Roomba. I see a study in there somewhere. In the meantime, read the results of a study on "friends with benefits" here. Or take a look at this study on spousal arguments (women argue most about children and housework, men about sex, money, and leisure). Wow, research can be fun. That's my cue to get back to work....