Sorry is Sorry except when it's NOT

Just a little note about apologies.  Anything qualified, anything that contains the words (or similar sentiment) "but YOU?" Not an apology.  Anything that goes on to defend whatever's being apologized for?

Not an apology.

So do me a favor, wouldja?  Next time the words "Hey, I'm really sorry, it's just that you . . . " start to come out of your mouth?

Just hush, okay?  Because you're not apologizing, and you're not improving my mood even a little.

Thanks!

________________________________

A little lesson in reality for the wanker-baggers out there who seem to think that shutting down the government will "undo" the Affordable Care Act:

It's LAW, you guys. Remember the whole School House Rock gig, with "I am a Bill?"  Remember how that works?  Congress enacts, the President signs, and WOW, it's the law?  Yeah, that's what happened, it is how our country works, it's exactly the process it was founded on.  And you remember what happens when a LAW's constitutionality is challenged?  It goes before the Supreme Court.  You remember them, right?  With their bagger victories like Citizens United and the garroting of the Voting Rights Act?  Yeah, those right-leaning freaks!  They examined the Affordable Care Act and found it . . .

NOT IN VIOLATION OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION!

That's RIGHT, boys and girls, the ACA (often known as "Obamacare") is the LAW, and it's CONSTITUTIONAL.  And you know what else it is?

FULLY FUNDED REGARDLESS OF GOVERNMENT SHUT DOWN.  What, no one told you that?  Your histrionic, fundamentally unstable, utterly dishonest bagger representatives didn't tell you that?  Oh, no!

Yeah, they shut down the government in protest of a law that shutting down the government won't interfere with.  But really, it goes deeper than that.  They shut down the government because they want a Presidential do-over. They're still butt-hurt because they lost.

They LOST!  Probably THE defining issue this past election was Affordable Health Care, and they LOST.

I find it deeply embarrassing that there are so-called Americans who have to be dragged, kicking and screaming, toward health care.  That there are some who view the INTERNATIONAL STANDARD of care as something evil, something to be avoided at all costs.  

Shameful!

The rich, who have gotten so much richer in the past few decades, and who contribute so much LESS to our society, be it through wages or taxes, have actually managed to hoodwink us, to turn us against our weakest members, so that we point fingers at the poor and bemoan their need, begrudge them a buck-twenty a day in food assistance, all the while not noticing that we're being buggered senseless by the right and their "corporate-people" masters.  

It's always worked that way.  Always.  If you can turn a people against those weaker than themselves, you can manipulate them all sorts of ways while they're distracted by their hate.  Immigrants, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, the poor, Blacks, Hispanics--it's what the "upper class" does--it distracts us, lets us feel superior to some other group, and takes advantage of our inattention.  

I think it's worse this time around because they managed to tie it all up with "patriotism."  And raging nationalism combined with vicious xenophobia?  Stirred up in a pot of falling educational standards?

Disaster.

We lag behind the rest of the industrial world in . .  . well, pretty much everything but military spending and the percentage of people in prison.  

Think about that.  Educational attainment?  Nope.  Life expectancy?  Nope.  Literacy?  Nuh-uh.  Infant mortality?  Nopers.  Maternal deaths?  Nope.  Health care?  Not even close.  

Oooh, I know!  Guns!  We have more guns per capita AND more murders!  So our proud country can boast top honors in violence, weaponry, military spending, and incarcerated citizens.

And the right has us waving those flags and shouting "America, love it or leave it!"

Which is THE most UN-American thing to say.

We are AMERICANS, when we see something wrong, we're supposed to FIX it, not DEFEND it! I get that our educational standards have fallen, I get that people just aren't as smart as they used to be.  But are we really THIS stupid?

Really?

_________________________________________

Speaking of stupid, I made the mistake of checking the profile of a Facebook friend's friend.  On it was a rather racist/anti-Arab cartoon.  Enough to make me wince just a little, but not enough to really make me upset.  It was the dull-wit comment left by another friend of a friend that got me going.  She says (and this is copied and pasted) "I wish they would all do it once out in the desert..All mussies." 

I.  I don't.  

Oh, gosh.

Her  name isn't Olga (but it's close) and she lives in Wisconsin or Minnesota or Michigan or some such northern clime.  Lovely places.  But one of them has Olga, and that makes it a bit less lovely. Olga's wall is crowded with painful stupidity--so much so, you'd think . . . well, I was going to say "you'd think it would be spilling over," but considering her idiot post on someone else's wall, I'd say it HAS spilled over.  Her wall offers up such gems as Reverent-posted/Olga Shared Photoshopped images of dead babies with comparisons to Hitler.  With her pithy comment "Yep.  Sad."  Memes squealing about "defund Obamacare!" and "Send him back to Kenya!"

And guns, of course.  

And Jesus.  Vertiable butloads of Jesus.  

Because nothing says "Jesus" like hate, bigotry, stupidity, and guns, right Olga?

Olga?

Her friends list is crowded with folks who have guns for profile shots.  A few have bagger takes on Confederate flags.  A bunch of Jesus-y stuff.  A lot of Obama-hating.

She's a stereotype.  Heck, Olga may not actually be real.  Isn't that a reassuring thought?

Here, a collection of meme's from Olga's wall:

I think you get the point.  Olga's an idiot.  But the crowning glory, the one that really drives home just what kind of ugly creature she is?

That's right--our First Lady as a flying MONKEY.  Yeah, racist point made, Olga.  I'm sure your "Tea Party Patriots" will reward you for your slack-jawed adoration.  No, really, I'm sure they will. They'll probably even give you health care that almost begins to approach the industrialized world's standard. 

Or at least easy access to a gun so you can end it when the health problems progress beyond your ability to pay.  Which, considering the breathtaking sums our medical complex demands for even the simplest of treatments, shouldn't be long.

________________________________________

And that's that.  I'm all politicked out for the day.  Haven't run across any really awful baby names, though I did come across a bit from a guy who won't hire people with crappy names, with a specific stiffy against "black" names.  And I think that sucks--you can't help what your parents named you.  Bad names should result in parental slapping, not prejudice against the victims.

Niiiiiice.

Smart Women, Stupid Women, Marriage Equality and Your Right to Remain Silent

First off, right off the bat, WENDY!

That's right, Wendy Davis--holy cow, what an amazing person, huh?  Wendy for Governor, Wendy for Senate, Wendy for President!  Thank you, Wendy, for putting yourself out there for women.  I hope you can turn Texas BLUE!

Here's a video from her last campaign, and I'm posting it because it segues into something else I wanted to discuss:



You see, just a couple of days ago, I saw a piece about what may possibly be the most ill-informed woman alive.

Jodie Laubenberg

Yes, that's a live link.

Now, Ms. Laubenberg, who has been stumping for an amazingly restrictive abortion law in, of course, where else, TEXAS, stated that (and I'm paraphrasing here) there's no reason to keep abortion safe, legal, and available, because women can just go to the emergency room and have a RAPE KIT performed.  Which, according to this silly person, "cleans women out."

I may scream myself to DEATH.  

I spent years working with rape and domestic abuse victims, mostly in the Emergency Room.  I'm wondering, Ma'am, precisely what part of a RAPE KIT "cleans a woman out?"  Is it the swabs for gathering DNA/semen samples from the victim's rectum, vagina, and/or mouth?  The baggies and vials into which those swabs are deposited?  Perhaps it's the DROP CLOTH the victim is required to stand on as she removes her clothing (meant to catch any evidence that may drop off as she disrobes).  Maybe it's the PUBIC COMB used to comb through the victims pubic hairs in search of any left behind by her attacker?  The fine-toothed comb used on her head for the purpose of finding her attacker's hairs?  Is it maybe the combing and sampling done to her loved ones and friends to eliminate their evidence from consideration?  Oh, wait, I know!  Duh!  It's the little "orange sticks" used to dig evidence out from under the victim's fingernails, isn't it?

You misinformed (and misinforming) woman.  You slow, dangerous creature.  It's bad enough when mean, cruel old men turn on women, but when one of our own does it, and does it in such a spectacularly Sarah Palin-ish way, it's particularly painful.

And enraging.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So, this meme came across my wall yesterday.  Not the first time.  Heck, might not be the first time I've blogged about it.  But, as always, it got me going.

Okay, one, I almost never share anything that admonishes me to share.  It's just a thing.  Two?

I don't necessarily agree.  There are . . . issues.

First, when I shop ANYWHERE with employees who have kids, I'm helping with dance lessons, team jerseys, moms and dads putting food on the tables, paying mortgages, etc.  That goes without saying, and I find it disingenuous to suggest that those things are only true if I shop small and local. That said, I do NOT shop Walmart.  Why?   Well, because their business model offends me and their treatment of employees horrifies me. I shop Wegmans and Costco, both of which are known for their fair treatment of workers.

In addition, shopping small and local is, almost by definition, more expensive.  Some of us are able to make that financial leap.  For others?  Not so much.  Plus, shopping small and local often leaves us either unable to find products we need OR having to drive from place to place to shop rather than doing it all at one central location.

Which  brings us to the environmental impact of shopping small and local.  It can be a CO2 disaster.  It can be a pesticide and herbicide disaster.  It can be an irrigation disaster.  You see, when large operations produce large amounts of food, they tend to do it far more efficiently than small farms.  In addition, when foods are shipped en mass, it tends to produce a lot less CO2 per pound of food.  And finally, when we drive from market to market, store to store to find our locally grown foods and whatever-friendly products, we're pumping an astonishing amount of exhaust into the air and chewing through a breathtaking amount of fuel.  

I'm not arguing against locally grown or local businesses, but understand that there are trade-offs.  For the benefits (and there are benefits, to both individuals and communities as well as to any livestock involved), there are definite drawbacks.  Some smaller farms are pooling resources and combining harvests for more efficient shipping and distribution, which is wonderful.  Some are making weekly shipments to large, central distribution areas rather than having individual consumers drive dozens (or more) miles to make pick-ups.  Again, this is wonderful, and it helps address the above concerns.  Some small farmers are engaging in friendlier, more responsible, more conserving methods of irrigating, fertilizing, etc.  And, again, that's wonderful.  We should encourage that.  But the next time you gear up to go nuts on someone who shops at a larger grocery store, remember that YOUR way has it's own drawbacks and downsides.  

Here, a couple of links:

http://www.salon.com/2012/06/16/eating_local_hurts_the_planet/singleton/

http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/11/14/the-inefficiency-of-local-food/

CO2, wasted water, and chemicals aside, there's also the "opposing" side's issues of "factory farming" livestock, widespread mistreatment of animals, and the use of various substances to treat infections, encourage wowser growth, etc.  Oh, and we have the whole GMO thing going on with larger agribusiness.  So this is NOT an easy issue, and what's the TOP concern for me might not be for you.  You may have your own "thing."  It's been my experience that farmers who sell animal products at the Farmer's Market don't tend to box their animals up in small cages and treat them like hell.  That's not a guarantee, just an observation.  And that might be something that sways you.

All of that said, we shop at the Farmer's Market for specific products one day a week.  Our Farmer's Market is close (less than three miles) and the farmers who come there are, in fact, LOCAL.  They aren't driving 100 miles to sell a tiny bit of produce.  They are open about their growing practices, and those we patronize use water-saving, low-chemical methods of growing.  Still not as efficient or as clean (CO2 per pound of produce-wise) as huge agribusiness, but improving, and, for us, worth the trade-off because we're not driving from place to place and our food isn't being driven long distances in small amounts.  For us, it's worth the trade-off one day a week.  And that's what I'm talking about--I'm not condemning small growers (gosh, no!) or local businesses.  Instead, I'm saying we should all be aware of where our stuff comes from and how it gets to us rather than embracing dippy memes aimed at influencing without real information.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

An extremely mixed bag from the Supreme Court this past week or two.  On the bright side?  Well, the repeal of DOMA and the striking of Prop h8, of course, plus the decision that human genes cannot be patented.  On the not-at-all bright side?

Chewing away at the underpinnings of the Voting Rights Act.  It only took HOURS for various legislators from various "red" Southern states to start hatching plans to interfere with voters of certain "groups."  When Governor McDonnell said he was handing it over to Ken Cuccinelli, something cold grasped my heart.  Virginia is a state vulnerable to the effects of "redistricting."  Virginia is a state that has already seen interference at the poll, limited poll access, and interminable polling lines.  This can't get anything but worse.

Another not-good SCOTUS decision?  The attack on our "right to remain silent."  

If this doesn't scare the daylights out of you, it should.  Refraining from answering police questions now considered admissible evidence of guilt?  

Here, from the piece:  " . . . 

prosecutors argued that Salinas’ silence during a police interview prior to his arrest was a “very important piece of evidence” and that only a guilty person would have remained silent when questioned about his connection to a crime."

That is terrifying.  "Only a guilty person would have remained silent."  How breathtakingly McCarthyish.  How happy Edwin Meese must be right about now.

What a mess.

So, while I'm thrilled about DOMA and Prop 8 (and the gene patents), fact is, we lost a lot of ground to what has shaped up to be a conservative activist court.  The damage they do could last . . . forever.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Boy, that was pure-D politics.  That's all I've got today.   Oh, except the Boy is 1/3 of the way through his annual exams, and seems to be doing quite well.  Love him like nobody's business, you know.

And a quick thing

With all the missteps and corporate bendovers we've been seeing from the SCOTUS, I didn't think we had a chance.  So thank you for the surprise gift--this means SO much to so many!

I love fish, you know . . .

I want to talk about racism and "trailer trash."  Oh, and being "pretty."

Let's start with racism.  I was talking to a female relative yesterday about the murder of the toddler in Georgia.  We were talking about what can be done as a society to make this better, to lessen the violence.  As I spoke of possibly removing children from the homes of convicted gang members and drug addicts, she told me that was racist.  That by saying that, I was being a racist, I was being prejudiced against Black Americans.  Even though she knows that my beef is with the ACTIONS, not the skin color.  That's why I don't think my sister-in-law, who is white, should have custody of her children--she's a drug addict with repeat arrests and an established history of exposing her children to drugs and "inappropriate" behaviors.

It wasn't until later I realized my relative's statement was, itself, racist.  She assumed that, when I said "drug addict" and "illiterate" and "gang member" I meant Black American.

Oooh.  How do we feel about that?  I don't like it at all.  Again, I'm after the behaviors, not the race.  I think we can safely assume that no one, regardless of race, thinks that poverty, illiteracy, drug addiction, and gang activity are good for our society.  And I think most of us can agree that children growing up surrounded by drugs and gangs are being damaged.  And that's not racial, that's absolutely behaviorally based.

On the subject of racism, I'm growing concerned with the increasing use of the term "trailer trash" and the growing disdain for poor white Americans.  We know that stereotyping the poor of other races is a no-no (which doesn't mean our society doesn't do it, just that we know it's not right), but poor white folks seem to be wide open and fair game.  Honey Boo Boo and har-de-har, aren't those "People of Walmart" so FUNNY?  Look how they dress, look at their teeth, look how sloppy and poor and fat they are!

We are so sick.  So broken.  Why is poverty, illiteracy, and poor access to medical care FUNNY to us?  Why is it okay to point at people who live in trailers or receive food stamps and call them names?  Cracker?  Hillbilly?  Redneck?  Shitkicker? How are those any better than the lousy names  used to degrade other races?

We need to stop.  We need to stop aiming our aggression and our frustrations at people who are struggling, at people who are poorer than we are.  I know, I know, I took Psych 101, too, I get the whole "feeling better about ourselves by downing or degrading another group we perceive as even weaker than we are."  Fine, there's a possible explanation--so what?  It needs to stop--if we feel powerless or degraded or downtrodden, we should look UP at whose boot is on our neck rather than DOWN at who we can make even MORE miserable than ourselves.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Had a video come across my news feed today.  Strangely, it didn't quite make me cry; probably because I'm all cried out over the poor dog.  But it did make me think, and more than that, it dredged up some not-so-good memories.  Memories of my Mom and how she responded to my sudden and drastic weight loss in tenth grade.

Did my mom freak out when her fat girl became her bony girl, losing 135 lbs in six months?  Sort of, if you consider dragging your starving, gums bleeding, hair thinning, hasn't had a period in months daughter to Nordstrom, The Bon, The Limited, and even (no kidding) to Vegas for a spin through Saks (yes, THAT Saks) "freaking out."  Oh, I became her special, wonderful girl, her clothes hanger, her PRETTY daughter.

The message was deep and devastating and so clear.  She loved me okay when I was her fat girl, but man, I was the BOMB when I was thin.  She was hauling me to work-related parties and dragging me along the floor to show me off to her coworkers.  Less of me to love, but what was left was obviously SO much more lovable.

I worry about this so much with my boy.  He could stand to lose 30 pounds in order to be a good, solid weight.  And he knows it, the doctor told him so.  It's such a fine line between encouraging him to eat better and work out more and HARPING on him or making him feel bad about his weight.  I dance that line every day, try to be matter-of-fact without being judgmental or in any way deriding.  My parents?  My dad ridiculed pretty sharply, hoping to shame me into weight loss. Problem was, the only foods we were served were incredibly fatty, sugary, salty, and breathtakingly calorie-laden.  And my Dad?  Would LOSE it on us if we didn't clear our plates.  Marvelously mixed message there.  And my Mom?  My Mom equates food with love.  If she loves you, she buys you one pound bags of M&Ms and dozens of sweet rolls and donuts and cheesecakes.  Of course, it's not all love there, either--there's the rewarding me for starving, the valuing me less when I'm heavy.  Again, seriously mixed messages.  So I KNOW how hurtful and how unproductive being mean or sarcastic about a child's weight can be.  I try to dream up meals both tasty and not over-the-top in calories or fat.  I make sure there is always a variety of fruit in the house.  

And yeah, I've taken to rewarding him for going to the gym.  He goes to the gym and gives it a good effort, he gets an hour of video game time on a school night.  "Good effort"  means aerobic and weights.  

I don't want him to ever feel that my love or my respect for him is rooted in his weight or his appearance.  I've felt like that my entire life, and I almost certainly always will.  I have friends coming to visit next week, people I've known online for . . . gosh, 15 years?  But we've never met. And I'm not excited, I'm not thrilled, I'm not anything but mortified because of my weight.  I don't want my boy to ever feel that way.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So, discussing the Supreme Court, DOMA, and marriage equality on Facebook.  A friend comes in and tells me that it can be decided by the states because ALL states will abide by another state's ruling, i.e., if you're married in Vermont, Utah will recognize that marriage, should you move there (or just be passing through, I guess).  That, of course, is utter bull.  Ohio has flat out stated it will not recognize marriages between same-sex partners.  Period.  And I said so, copied and pasted from the Ohio State Bar Association on the matter.  Another friend came in and said, "It's called full faith and credit, it's in the Constitution.  Look it up."

Oh.  Oh, gosh.  Have I just been schooled?  I'm honestly not sure.  The tone seems sharp, but maybe I'm misinterpreting it, right?  I mean, it's not like him to do something like that, so I'm probably seeing it wrong.  For the record, while I'm no Constitutional scholar, fact is I actually took law courses in college, including Constitutional Law.  I am, in fact, familiar with the "full faith and credit" clause.  I'm also familiar with how little practical impact it has in modern matters.  

So, I don't know if I was just "dissed" or not, so I guess I'm going to let it go.  

*****UPDATE***** I was seeing it wrong.  Glad I asked.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

HUGE dinner tonight--baked cod, baked red potato (with just a tiny bit of Kerry Irish butter), carrots and onions, green beans and almonds, AND a salad!  I know, sounds like a lot, but I'm totally under on calories, carbs, salt, and fat, and over on potassium and fiber.  It's been a long time since I memorized which fish are okay and which are environmental disasters.  This is Pacific Cod.  I seem to remember Atlantic cod not being okay.  Time to go do my homework again, before our next shopping trip.

Okay, looks like my memory was right--Atlantic Cod is out, Pacific Cod is okay (though a couple sites said there may be mercury or PCB issues if eaten too often).  

Here, this is a Pacific Cod (thank you, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife):  

And that's about it.  Rode that stationary recumbent for 50+ minutes tonight, and I am superbly tired.  Doctor's appointments day after tomorrow.  Gosh, I can hardly wait, lemme tell ya.

Oh, and one last thing, because I'm on the right side of history here.  Hope you are, too.

Do not reprint without permission. © KAQ