Something to talk about

Ok, SO, to catch up on that whole "5 minutes a day" vow I ambitiously took, oh, a month ago, I just calculated that I'd have to type on here for 3 hours 20 minutes (!). That, my friends and onlookers, is not happening. BUT this time, instead of wracking my brain for interesting nuggets of conversation, this post is practically written for me what with the past few weeks of election drama and melodrama! "I've been busy" is the most banal and most common excuse anyone ever makes, but I'll join the bandwagon and make it too! BTW, if anyone is interested in literary Modernism check out my other blog --you know, the one I'm compelled to do for class hehe. Far more erudite than this one, far less applicable to everyday life and its minutae. And, you know what, I HAVE been busy: anyone else trying to plan a wedding in grad school? It's done often enough, I know, but as soon as I feel all "caught up" or ahead or excited about one, I get a feeling of encroaching and horrific guilt that I have been neglecting the other. Most often, I neglect the wedding planning actually. I'm excited though, the Hilton I'm planning to have the reception at that I'm visiting tomorrow has had all kinds of food from a "pig picking to a sushi chef", they said. Man, I would love to have both. That's what I'm looking forward to folks -- the food. Not gonna lie. Won't be able to eat much of it, what with my skin-tight fuschia dress (my fiancee reads this and he cannot know the truth!). Also cake. I love cake. Mmm cake. Bridezilla I am not, obviously. If I could write a check and have someone else do all the work and make all the decisions, I sure as fuck would.

But enough about my personal life: I want to talk politics. Namely, my elation that McCain is the Republican nominee!! Huckabee's pleasant enough but too populist-y for my tastes (also too, I dunno, preach-y? hahaha), Romney, as I've said, a creepy asshole, the rest irrelevant. So yay for McCain -- if a Republican's going to win, not that that party deserves it after Great Society Conservative George Bush, it's him. I get this feeling that after 8 years, in which McCain SHOULD have been the leader to rise to our crises, it's his turn. Same way I feel about Hillary, actually, as well!! They say young people support Obama in droves over her; well, not this one. He's a whippersnapper. With no EVIDENCE of cooperating with "independents or Repubicans in a great big happy tent" like he always claims (I'm paraphrasing here). He's a straight, down-the-line Dem with no proof of this mysterious independence of thought he is leading everyone to expect. It would certainly be heart-warming to have our first black president, but preferably our first would be less virginal. How interesting that the far-right nuts characterize Hillary as the demonic, wicked witch of the left, when her own record shows more cooperation, moderation, and independence. Not to play the gender card, but it's because of her gender. Women, throughout history, are either this or that, in this box or that one, virgin or whore, crazed or placid, housewife in mumu or executrix in dominatrix stillettoes. How annoying. Hillary is establishment and middle-of-the-road, with great potential. And yes, I totally mean "establishment" as a giant compliment. How do you think the "establishment" gets to be what it is, other than the hard work of individuals coming to fruition? I hope it comes down to the Tammany-hall style, smoky rooms of the superdelegates: what this country needs is much more elitism. Otherwise, you get the will of the people, voting for which one wears better suits and throws out better nebulous, feel-good abstractions without specifying their goals. And how the hell is poor Hil supposed to run against, um, "hope" in any case? "Oh yes, I disagree with my rival about x, y, z." "YOU'RE RUNNING AGAINST HOPE AND CHANGE!" What does this remind me of? Oh yes, how conservatives co-opt "patriotism" to mean "agrees with us". It is a pretty smart and near-unassailable tactic, maybe I'm not giving Obama enough credit? Speaking of the Democratic rift, David Brooks's article comparing Hillary supporters to "Walgreens", less educated shoppers, and Obama's to "Body Shop, pretentious Whole Foods" shoppers with college degrees was pretty darn hilarious. I, for one, may be a professional student, but I'll be damned if I'm not a Walgreens shopper. I don't look to the prez for self-fulfillment or inspiration or really much of anything, other than get the job done and don't mess things up! Well, that's all I've got for now folks -- see you tomorrow! (mayybee...)

Morning

Morning, which I usually sleep through during a break such as this, are really not so bad. Not so bad if you are up before everyone else, doing whatever solitary activity, reading, watching a decent huckabee interview on meet the press, ect., that you want to be doing. No, mornings are only bad when there are other participants attempting to talk to you and clancking their coffee cups around. I don't mean any offense, ghandi himself could be around me, and I think I'd glare.

brief feminist rant

hey hey, returning to comment briefly on more, yes, CNN that I've seen. It was a report on the current status of Afghani women, you know, the ones we've "saved" already. The part that struck me most wasn't the child brides, the soccer stadium assassinations, or even the ubiquitous burka shots -- it was when the reporter came across a few "liberal" male teachers and asked them about general social roles. "I wouldn't let my friends see my wife. I just bring a picture," one said. "She's under lock, key, and password," he joked. Another: "If most women dressed like you " (she had a veil and loose clothing on , no burka), "men couldn't handle themselves." It just goes to show us that all -- men and women --need to be vigilant. Most women including myself expect some level of protectiveness and solicitousness from their menfolk, as a sign of their caring, which men are only too happy to provide. The interview showed how complex cultural codes can be, how they can start from the most well-meaning, even universal, intentions.

The boyfriend did it!!

Ok, so the title is definitely an inside joke, but what I truly speak of is, of course, the Bhutto assassination. It won't come out immediately. It won't even come out before around 10 years pass and the revelation is a footnote in the "international" section of our papers' 10th page. But it will out. Bhutto's death has inside job written on it like an epitaph. And I will go further than people who think her email to "blame Musharaff" deals with his lack of action in giving her security detail and at some level "allowing" extremists to off her. Perhaps it wasn't the president himself, but at some level of his administration, there was involvement. Think: while Musharaff nobly offered to "share" power with her, who believed this from the man who shut off the press, civil liberties, attorneys? And would this not be an ostensible effort to paint a (throughly undeserved) picture of innocence amongst his regime? Not only do these suspicious factors exist, but wouldn't a show of shock and angst over the murder allow Musharaff himself what he wanted: an excuse to further grasp at power with the obvious excuse of maintaining order and destroying "the people who killed Bhutto". Someone, somewhere, cut a deal. Nevertheless, I will admit that my assumption is flawed in displaying the type of conspiracy-minded thinking that attributes uncertainties and the random, senseless acts of individuals to far-reaching forces that truly do not exist, as Penne Gillett eloquently stated of the so-called 911 "truthers" on Glenn Beck last night (Glenn himself annoys me, his guests do not). Yet, knowing a fair amount of history makes the connection of intrigue to logical for me to currently resist.

On a lighter note, why the HELL do northerners like cakey donuts? (I am speaking of Dunkin Donuts and their ilk). We all know the gooey glazed of Krispy Kreme that I enjoyed this morning is far, far superior. Even glamorous New York Carrie Bradshaw couldn't disagree :).

Speaking of Bradshaw, I AM looking forward to the Sex and the City movie, I don't care if anyone thinks I am frivolously feminine because of it! I do not think the show was a feminist masterpiece, or even feminist in the least, like some, but the characters are hilarious and I don't watch many girly movies so I'm not a stereotype so there!!! Most of us need a little escapism, and watching women live lives far more glamorous than any of us will experience is sheer joy. I only wish I could have followed it on TV. I wish I could follow ANY show on TV. I work too hard, I need to quit that. Nonetheless, there has always been a bit of the loser-y element to having nothing better to do that sit around and wait for a tv show, at least from my perspective, so maybe I am undermining any televised undertaking subconciously with the mindset that I should be socializing, drinking, dancing, living the glamorous life instead of watching it. But sometimes, watching it is better! Or maybe I am exhibiting a Puritan aspect on the other hand -- I "should" be studying, cleaning, doing something "useful". When I've worked hard, or had a bad day, I can lay down and TV away sans-guilt.

Speaking of guilt, I've just made up fior my holiday lack of blogging. So long!

Cheaters = Good Politicians

I may be stating the obvious and indelicate here, but why the moral crusade against philandering politicians--Clinton, Guiliani, Charlie Wilson, hell even Larry in the bathroom stall--when we all know that the qualities of smarm and charm that gets things done also gets the ladies (and perhaps gentlemen). Now, I am far from being an antifeminist by acknowledging this fact of life. In fact, I am sure the same rule applies to women in politics as well, heretofore unnoticed because:
1) women haven't been involved in American national politics very long
2) women don't get caught.
I am not condoning adultery either, but can we not accept some level of moral ambiguity along with its necessary counterpart, intelligent thinking?

CRITTERS!

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/22/us/22crash.html?th&emc=th

Apparently, more and more unfortunate individuals are encountering DEATH by critter on rural roads...mainly because more people are driving on them from the exurbs...what I want to know is what prevents these people from seeing a grizzly, for instance, right in front of them....or even better -- a flock of wild sheep. Did anyone else know that there still existed wild sheep? Didn't they get domesticated about...ohh 5000 years ago?

haiku

Brad on Larry King,
The smell of cookies cooking;
Always nice to laze at home.