Here's that Cliff's Notes version of an old joke: a U.S. Senator spends his whole life fighting for single-payer (Medicare for all) health care. He loses a lot of battles. Towards the end of his life, people ask the Senator, "will the U.S. ever have single payer health care?" The Senator says, "yes, but not in my lifetime."
The Senator dies, goes to heaven and gets a special audience with God. He only has one question, "God, will the U.S. ever have a single payer health care system?" God yes, "yes. But not in my lifetime."
I've been working for universal health care reform since 1993-94 when I fought for it at Public Citizen in Washington DC at the height of the Clinton reform effort. The past few years I do it by working to pass public financing of elections.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that the folks in Sacramento like Senator Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica), Senator Don Perata (D-Oakland) and consumer groups are giving it another try. But despite Schwarznegger's stated intentions and leadership on the issue, and the crying public need, it still seems that there's very little that can be done as long as health care controls a huge percentage of the Gross Domestic Product and the interests that are benefiting from the current system disproportionately fund campaigns.
That's why I like AB 583 by Loni Hancock, a bill which creates a pilot project for public financing of elections for the Governor's race as well as one assembly and one senate seat. The bill has passed the Assembly and is in the Senate Elections Committee where it died last legislative term despite Senate Pro Tem leader Don Perata's promise that it wouldn't.
This year Senator Perata is a co-author of the reform legislation. If he wants to eventually get universal health care, I think it's essential that California start moving seriously in the direction of public financing of elections. AB 583 is a good way to start.
Saturday, June 23, 2007
Friday, June 22, 2007
Public Outcry: "Garamendi, Name the Smelt!"
Delta--With the number of smelt in the California Delta dwindling daily, the public is an uproar calling for Lt. Governor John Garamendi to name the remaining smelt.
"Let's get real," said Gloria Gussmacher, a petite resident of the Delta region, "while the rest of the state government seems powerless to stop the daily smelt slaughter, there is one man who can help--Lt. Governor John Garamendi. Please Mr. Garamendi, these smelt are going to their deaths nameless and afraid. Please Mr. Garamendi, name the smelt!"
The Lt. Governor has already established clear naming jurisdiction over whales who have made their way within the Delta region. Recently he made headlines by naming a mother and calf "Delta and Dawn" as they explored the Sacramento River.
But does the Lt. Governor have the authority to name anything but sea mammals? And who is looking into the problem?
"Frankly, I'm upset. The Lt. Governor keeps holding these press conferences and workshops to discuss what happened with the whales. But they already have names!!! Meanwhile the smelt are dying daily, and we have no idea what to put on their graves," said 10 year old Emily Stevens, an avid smelt watcher.
Others have suggested that the Lt. Governor could spare 3 or 4 members of his staff to at least research whether he has the authority to name tiny fish.
And some have gone straight to a solution. Apparently there are only about 2 fish left, the popular and obvious choice for their names seems to be "Smelta and Spawn."
But will the Lt. Governor leap into action? Or will he remain focussed on the animals he has already named? Stay tuned.
"Let's get real," said Gloria Gussmacher, a petite resident of the Delta region, "while the rest of the state government seems powerless to stop the daily smelt slaughter, there is one man who can help--Lt. Governor John Garamendi. Please Mr. Garamendi, these smelt are going to their deaths nameless and afraid. Please Mr. Garamendi, name the smelt!"
The Lt. Governor has already established clear naming jurisdiction over whales who have made their way within the Delta region. Recently he made headlines by naming a mother and calf "Delta and Dawn" as they explored the Sacramento River.
But does the Lt. Governor have the authority to name anything but sea mammals? And who is looking into the problem?
"Frankly, I'm upset. The Lt. Governor keeps holding these press conferences and workshops to discuss what happened with the whales. But they already have names!!! Meanwhile the smelt are dying daily, and we have no idea what to put on their graves," said 10 year old Emily Stevens, an avid smelt watcher.
Others have suggested that the Lt. Governor could spare 3 or 4 members of his staff to at least research whether he has the authority to name tiny fish.
And some have gone straight to a solution. Apparently there are only about 2 fish left, the popular and obvious choice for their names seems to be "Smelta and Spawn."
But will the Lt. Governor leap into action? Or will he remain focussed on the animals he has already named? Stay tuned.
Thursday, June 21, 2007
I love you, Chuck Calderon
I'm here to impart some shocking news. After 15 years of examining Congressmen and California state legislators at close range, I've determined that they are human beings. In fact, I think a mistake that many public interest advocates make (and lord knows I was one of 'em) is forgetting the degree to which they are dealing with human beings not some sort of super race, or robot version of ourselves, but ourselves.
Like people, legislators breathe, eat, sleep, have dysfunctional upbringings, and experience a full range of human emotions.
We tend to remember that they lust for power, praise and money and that they respond to pressure from constituents out of fear for their political future. But we tend to forget that most basic human desire, the need for love and understanding and compassion. The need to belong. The need to be okay with themselves and their own core values. And yes, they all have core values, even if they don't seem to be driven by them.
I am mindful of a story about Martin Luther King Jr. prior to his first face to face meeting with Attorney General Bobby Kennedy. As he prepared for the meeting with his closest advisors and allies, they talked trash on Bobby--he was white, he was Catholic, he was never going to understand, the administration would never help--they despaired of getting through to him.
King said something to the effect of "no, we can't go into this meeting with any of that in our minds. We have to love this man as we love ourselves. We are not going to anything else to prepare for this meeting but pray for the love and understanding of this man." And so they did. They prayed and focussed on love of Bobby Kennedy for several days prior to the meeting. And when they went in, they made history.
Too often here in Sacramento, I've been a party to preparation for meetings where we have the idea that the legislator we're talking to is a lost cause, an asshole, a coward, a sell-out. I doubt it would go over well if I asked us to hold Chuck Calderon in love, for example (a California Democrat whose voting and legacy has been a constant challenge to liberals).
But I have noticed that even a Chuck Calderon wants to think of himself as a good guy. Even a Chuck Calderon wants to believe that he does what he does for the benefit of all. He tells himself that siding with a business interest against a consumer group thereby killing bills that would advance the rights of working people is seeking "balance" or protecting jobs. He has a strong rationale for all he does.
Who among us has not rationalized harmful behavior? I know I have. I have hurt people I loved and come up with a way that it is okay. Ultimately it is this weakness, this humanity that binds us together, not our strength, or show of force. Ultimately, I can't help but think that love is the missing ingredient in public policy.
I love you, Chuck Calderon, for you are me.
Like people, legislators breathe, eat, sleep, have dysfunctional upbringings, and experience a full range of human emotions.
We tend to remember that they lust for power, praise and money and that they respond to pressure from constituents out of fear for their political future. But we tend to forget that most basic human desire, the need for love and understanding and compassion. The need to belong. The need to be okay with themselves and their own core values. And yes, they all have core values, even if they don't seem to be driven by them.
I am mindful of a story about Martin Luther King Jr. prior to his first face to face meeting with Attorney General Bobby Kennedy. As he prepared for the meeting with his closest advisors and allies, they talked trash on Bobby--he was white, he was Catholic, he was never going to understand, the administration would never help--they despaired of getting through to him.
King said something to the effect of "no, we can't go into this meeting with any of that in our minds. We have to love this man as we love ourselves. We are not going to anything else to prepare for this meeting but pray for the love and understanding of this man." And so they did. They prayed and focussed on love of Bobby Kennedy for several days prior to the meeting. And when they went in, they made history.
Too often here in Sacramento, I've been a party to preparation for meetings where we have the idea that the legislator we're talking to is a lost cause, an asshole, a coward, a sell-out. I doubt it would go over well if I asked us to hold Chuck Calderon in love, for example (a California Democrat whose voting and legacy has been a constant challenge to liberals).
But I have noticed that even a Chuck Calderon wants to think of himself as a good guy. Even a Chuck Calderon wants to believe that he does what he does for the benefit of all. He tells himself that siding with a business interest against a consumer group thereby killing bills that would advance the rights of working people is seeking "balance" or protecting jobs. He has a strong rationale for all he does.
Who among us has not rationalized harmful behavior? I know I have. I have hurt people I loved and come up with a way that it is okay. Ultimately it is this weakness, this humanity that binds us together, not our strength, or show of force. Ultimately, I can't help but think that love is the missing ingredient in public policy.
I love you, Chuck Calderon, for you are me.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Craig's List is God
I have determined that's Craig's List is God--not figuratively, and not in the sense that we're all, like, God, but, literally, Craig's List is God.
Craig's List has all the qualities of God:
It is ever present, all-knowing, all powerful.
It is free most places.
It is a consistent loving presence.
It is all-sufficiency--meaning it fulfills all your needs.
It always says yes.
The more specific you are, the more you know about what you want, the more quickly and particularly Craig's List fulfills your deepest desires.
What am I talking about?
It's this: there are always lots of ads on Craig's List for everything under the sun. As in all things, if you don't rely on what you perceive 'out there' to determine what you get, you can be disappointed. Hence, if you simply browse on Craig's List kind of looking at want ads, looking at furniture ads, looking at housing swaps, hoping that something may catch your eye, you will find things. Just as you will see things outside of you in the world that you desire all the time.
If you email the people who put up those ads, you may be the one that gets to buy it, live in it, work for it or own it, but you may not. It's hit and miss, a crap shoot--sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.
On the other hand, instead of looking outside yourself to see if someone has what you vaguely want, how about you look inside yourself. Figure out what it is that you want with a great deal of specificity, and place a free ad on Craig's List--voila!
Now it's a different story--in Craig's world, the advertiser always wins. The people answering your ad are now in a crap shoot--but you're lucky every time.
An example: I wanted to find a cheap apartment to rent in Manhattan for a few nights--a real place that someone lived, not a hotel. There were two adults and 4 kids among us. Most of the apartments were too small or fancy. Everything suitable turned me down. So I placed an ad, "two law professor moms seek any manhattan abode big enough for 1 10 year old, 2 8 year olds and a two year old from August 1 to August 10, will pay up to $100 a night." Within hours, I get all kinds others-- one of them is perfect, we stayed there and all was well.
This has happened over and over again for me on Craig's List. Recently I came to the realization that this is exactly how God works. If I am clear about what I want and place my free ad with audacious specificity--God comes through, lickity spit. It's when I'm vague and "shopping" for happiness, that I falter.
How good it is to know that Craig's List is God.
Craig's List has all the qualities of God:
It is ever present, all-knowing, all powerful.
It is free most places.
It is a consistent loving presence.
It is all-sufficiency--meaning it fulfills all your needs.
It always says yes.
The more specific you are, the more you know about what you want, the more quickly and particularly Craig's List fulfills your deepest desires.
What am I talking about?
It's this: there are always lots of ads on Craig's List for everything under the sun. As in all things, if you don't rely on what you perceive 'out there' to determine what you get, you can be disappointed. Hence, if you simply browse on Craig's List kind of looking at want ads, looking at furniture ads, looking at housing swaps, hoping that something may catch your eye, you will find things. Just as you will see things outside of you in the world that you desire all the time.
If you email the people who put up those ads, you may be the one that gets to buy it, live in it, work for it or own it, but you may not. It's hit and miss, a crap shoot--sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.
On the other hand, instead of looking outside yourself to see if someone has what you vaguely want, how about you look inside yourself. Figure out what it is that you want with a great deal of specificity, and place a free ad on Craig's List--voila!
Now it's a different story--in Craig's world, the advertiser always wins. The people answering your ad are now in a crap shoot--but you're lucky every time.
An example: I wanted to find a cheap apartment to rent in Manhattan for a few nights--a real place that someone lived, not a hotel. There were two adults and 4 kids among us. Most of the apartments were too small or fancy. Everything suitable turned me down. So I placed an ad, "two law professor moms seek any manhattan abode big enough for 1 10 year old, 2 8 year olds and a two year old from August 1 to August 10, will pay up to $100 a night." Within hours, I get all kinds others-- one of them is perfect, we stayed there and all was well.
This has happened over and over again for me on Craig's List. Recently I came to the realization that this is exactly how God works. If I am clear about what I want and place my free ad with audacious specificity--God comes through, lickity spit. It's when I'm vague and "shopping" for happiness, that I falter.
How good it is to know that Craig's List is God.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Elizabeth Edwards is Inspiring
You need to watch Elizabeth Edwards' inspiring speech captured by the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights at their recent annual "Rage for Justice" Awards Dinner.
I believe her when she says that she and John Edwards are running for President because they want to speak out against the current policies. She speaks from her heart but with a depth and specificity that we rarely hear from mainstream candidates (or their wives).
It is imperative that we begin to work for a progressive viable Democratic candidate who has actual conviction and the courage of those convictions. I think John Edwards may just be that candidate.
Listen and tell me what you think.
I believe her when she says that she and John Edwards are running for President because they want to speak out against the current policies. She speaks from her heart but with a depth and specificity that we rarely hear from mainstream candidates (or their wives).
It is imperative that we begin to work for a progressive viable Democratic candidate who has actual conviction and the courage of those convictions. I think John Edwards may just be that candidate.
Listen and tell me what you think.
Monday, June 18, 2007
4 Snouts Up for The House of the Scorpion
(:)(:)(:)(:) for The House of the Scorpion by Nancy Farmer. This is the best "children's" book I have read in years. Anyone who likes good fiction should read it.
Written from the perspective of a brilliant, inquisitive growing boy who is painfully (and uniquely--from our perspective) different from other children, the book beautifully examines the many forks in the road of human moral development. Each painful experience we have (and he has many) shapes us and gives us an opportunity to choose compassion, love and redemption, or to choose bitterness, isolation and hatred as a matter of survival. Sometimes we start down one fork, only to cross over to the other.
This perfect coming of age story is set in a compelling yet subtly revealed back-drop of a futuristic North America that plays out one set of disturbing consequences to the current environmental, trade, immigration and labor practices.
Although the cover boasts a Newberry Award and other accolades, none of the blurbs on the back really do the book justice, perhaps because they are pitched to the target market: people buying books for 13 year olds. The target market should indeed buy this book, but so should everyone else.
Written from the perspective of a brilliant, inquisitive growing boy who is painfully (and uniquely--from our perspective) different from other children, the book beautifully examines the many forks in the road of human moral development. Each painful experience we have (and he has many) shapes us and gives us an opportunity to choose compassion, love and redemption, or to choose bitterness, isolation and hatred as a matter of survival. Sometimes we start down one fork, only to cross over to the other.
This perfect coming of age story is set in a compelling yet subtly revealed back-drop of a futuristic North America that plays out one set of disturbing consequences to the current environmental, trade, immigration and labor practices.
Although the cover boasts a Newberry Award and other accolades, none of the blurbs on the back really do the book justice, perhaps because they are pitched to the target market: people buying books for 13 year olds. The target market should indeed buy this book, but so should everyone else.
Wednesday, June 06, 2007
Mark Leno Ends the Suspense on Clean Money
Having written before how the Assembly Appropriations Committee was keeping me in suspense, I am remiss in not stating precisely that Assemblymember Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), chair of the Assembly Appropriations Committee, ended the suspense last week by bringing a streamlined, pilot project of public financing out of committee. AB 583 by Loni Hancock, as I reported yesterday, will go to the floor of the California Assembly today for a vote.
This is significant not only because it will be the first floor vote in California on a real clean money bill, but because of what it says about Mark Leno.
As Chair of Assembly Appropriations Committee, Leno is in a position to (and indeed is expected to) raise a lot of money from special interest groups. Last week, he was appropriately taken to task for holding a fundraiser the night before his committee's biggest hearing of the year so far--the one where they decide which major bills live or die.
Believe it or not, holding it the night before was actually an improvement over the practice of former Assembly Appropriations Chair (now Senator) Carole Migden (also D-San Francisco) (against whom Leno is running for State Senate). At least one year, I can remember Migden breaking for lunch in the middle of huge Appropriations hearing, announcing that she hoped to "see us all across the street at a little event"--her big fundraiser. After the event, she moved the business of the committee to the most important issues.
Either way, fundraising of powerful committee chairs right before or during a huge hearing is distasteful at best and unethical at worst. If memory serves, another former Assembly Appropriations Chair Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) declined to hold "events" (insider speak for fundraisers) anywhere close to the hearings he would run--a better choice.
Still, in moving AB 583, a bill which would benefit no well-heeled special interest and only the people of California, out of Assembly Appropriations Committee, Leno paves the way for a new era of politics in California. He is to be applauded for his leadership and courage.
This is significant not only because it will be the first floor vote in California on a real clean money bill, but because of what it says about Mark Leno.
As Chair of Assembly Appropriations Committee, Leno is in a position to (and indeed is expected to) raise a lot of money from special interest groups. Last week, he was appropriately taken to task for holding a fundraiser the night before his committee's biggest hearing of the year so far--the one where they decide which major bills live or die.
Believe it or not, holding it the night before was actually an improvement over the practice of former Assembly Appropriations Chair (now Senator) Carole Migden (also D-San Francisco) (against whom Leno is running for State Senate). At least one year, I can remember Migden breaking for lunch in the middle of huge Appropriations hearing, announcing that she hoped to "see us all across the street at a little event"--her big fundraiser. After the event, she moved the business of the committee to the most important issues.
Either way, fundraising of powerful committee chairs right before or during a huge hearing is distasteful at best and unethical at worst. If memory serves, another former Assembly Appropriations Chair Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) declined to hold "events" (insider speak for fundraisers) anywhere close to the hearings he would run--a better choice.
Still, in moving AB 583, a bill which would benefit no well-heeled special interest and only the people of California, out of Assembly Appropriations Committee, Leno paves the way for a new era of politics in California. He is to be applauded for his leadership and courage.
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Clean Money to Assembly Floor
SACRAMENTO - Last Thursday, an amended version of the Clean Money and Fair Elections Act of 2007 (AB 583) was voted out of the Assembly Appropriations Committee by a vote of 12 to 5. The bill now moves on for a vote of the full Assembly, most likely on Wednesday. If enacted, the amended version of AB 583 (Hancock, D-East Bay) would create voluntary, fully-funded public financing for the 2010 Governor's race, one open Assembly seat, and one open Senate seat.
In its amended form, AB 583 will serve as a pilot program and allow California voters and candidates to see how a Clean Money system would actually work in California. "We applaud Appropriations Chair Mark Leno and Assemblymember Hancock for adopting this creative answer to the question of whether a system which works so well in Arizona and Maine can be properly scaled for California. We know that it can, and we are excited about the possibility of testing the system on the offices which the public feels are primary magnets for outsized campaign contributions. AB 583 will help restore faith in California's government," said Susan Lerner, Executive Director of the California Clean Money Campaign.
Clean Money systems have been adopted across the country; Arizona and Maine started public-financing state elections 7 years ago, Connecticut's legislature passed a Clean Money bill last year, North Carolina provides public financing for judicial races, and New Mexico just instituted a similar system for its judicial elections. New Mexico also established a pilot Clean Money program for elections for its Public Regulations Commission, while New Jersey has a pilot program for public financing of three legislative districts.
Speaking after the Committee vote, Assemblymember Hancock said, "AB 583 is an effective way for the public to test how well the full public funding of campaigns system runs. AB 583 will go a long way to restoring faith in our campaign financing system."
In its amended form, AB 583 will serve as a pilot program and allow California voters and candidates to see how a Clean Money system would actually work in California. "We applaud Appropriations Chair Mark Leno and Assemblymember Hancock for adopting this creative answer to the question of whether a system which works so well in Arizona and Maine can be properly scaled for California. We know that it can, and we are excited about the possibility of testing the system on the offices which the public feels are primary magnets for outsized campaign contributions. AB 583 will help restore faith in California's government," said Susan Lerner, Executive Director of the California Clean Money Campaign.
Clean Money systems have been adopted across the country; Arizona and Maine started public-financing state elections 7 years ago, Connecticut's legislature passed a Clean Money bill last year, North Carolina provides public financing for judicial races, and New Mexico just instituted a similar system for its judicial elections. New Mexico also established a pilot Clean Money program for elections for its Public Regulations Commission, while New Jersey has a pilot program for public financing of three legislative districts.
Speaking after the Committee vote, Assemblymember Hancock said, "AB 583 is an effective way for the public to test how well the full public funding of campaigns system runs. AB 583 will go a long way to restoring faith in our campaign financing system."
Monday, June 04, 2007
Hillary Nightmare Starting to Come True
It's happening, people. Hillary Clinton is scooping up prime endorsements and fattening her campaign account at an alarming rate. It's starting to look possible, even probable, that she will win the Democratic nomination (hence lose Democrats the White House).
But, Sara, hold on, you say. Remember Howard Dean whose victory was "all but assured" in November of 2003, how can you say anything in June of 2007? Answer: I can't. And believe me, I'm hoping for the front-runner mantle to eventually smother her. I have a sneaking suspicion that the Hollywood stars, politicians and union leaders that Billary is able to snooker into endorsing her cannot deliver the average Democratic voter to Clinton in the primary.
Aside from a giddy group of professional women who go verklempt at the idea of someone in the White House who has been at the business end of a tampon, most Democratic voters, whether they like Hillary or not, intuitively get that she's just the person to lose us the White House.
Don't get me wrong, I don't absolutely hate her. There are things I admire about her and she's obviously got some real strengths as a candidate and a campaigner. The problem is, as I've stated over and over, a poor combination of factors:
1) She voted for the war. In an election that will be decided on the basis of the war, how can we rally around her? How can she distinguish herself from a Republican who wasn't in Congress? (like Guiliani?)
2) She is the poster child for all the Christian right hates: the "feminazi" who is out to force your daughter to have an abortion, wear a business suit and marry a man named Gloria. Hillary Clinton as top of the ticket could energize and motivate an otherwise dispirited band of conservatives to prevent the "Hollywood elite" from re-taking our country.
3) She's not a "feminazi" -- she's a pragmatic centrist who as far as I can tell has no closely held beliefs other than it's better to be in power than out of power. So if she's the Democratic candidate and we want to forestall four more years of Republicanism, we're forced to rally around and cheer for someone who may or may not stop the war and protect our civil liberties and most assuredly will not stop the encroachment of big corporate control of our government--paving the way for the 2008 summer blockbuster, "Ralph Nader III: Curse of the Toxic Tomato."
In short, I'd urge us all not to leave this completely to chance. I think we should begin looking very closely at Edwards and Obama (and, no, sorry to my real lefty friends, not Dennis Kucinich--although we may agree with all he says, he's not viable and that's that) and start giving them some early time and money.
I still don't know where to come down between Barak and Edwards. I'm going to read Dreams from my Father by Obama, which I have heard is great. Keep me posted on what you hear and what you think.
But, Sara, hold on, you say. Remember Howard Dean whose victory was "all but assured" in November of 2003, how can you say anything in June of 2007? Answer: I can't. And believe me, I'm hoping for the front-runner mantle to eventually smother her. I have a sneaking suspicion that the Hollywood stars, politicians and union leaders that Billary is able to snooker into endorsing her cannot deliver the average Democratic voter to Clinton in the primary.
Aside from a giddy group of professional women who go verklempt at the idea of someone in the White House who has been at the business end of a tampon, most Democratic voters, whether they like Hillary or not, intuitively get that she's just the person to lose us the White House.
Don't get me wrong, I don't absolutely hate her. There are things I admire about her and she's obviously got some real strengths as a candidate and a campaigner. The problem is, as I've stated over and over, a poor combination of factors:
1) She voted for the war. In an election that will be decided on the basis of the war, how can we rally around her? How can she distinguish herself from a Republican who wasn't in Congress? (like Guiliani?)
2) She is the poster child for all the Christian right hates: the "feminazi" who is out to force your daughter to have an abortion, wear a business suit and marry a man named Gloria. Hillary Clinton as top of the ticket could energize and motivate an otherwise dispirited band of conservatives to prevent the "Hollywood elite" from re-taking our country.
3) She's not a "feminazi" -- she's a pragmatic centrist who as far as I can tell has no closely held beliefs other than it's better to be in power than out of power. So if she's the Democratic candidate and we want to forestall four more years of Republicanism, we're forced to rally around and cheer for someone who may or may not stop the war and protect our civil liberties and most assuredly will not stop the encroachment of big corporate control of our government--paving the way for the 2008 summer blockbuster, "Ralph Nader III: Curse of the Toxic Tomato."
In short, I'd urge us all not to leave this completely to chance. I think we should begin looking very closely at Edwards and Obama (and, no, sorry to my real lefty friends, not Dennis Kucinich--although we may agree with all he says, he's not viable and that's that) and start giving them some early time and money.
I still don't know where to come down between Barak and Edwards. I'm going to read Dreams from my Father by Obama, which I have heard is great. Keep me posted on what you hear and what you think.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
I'm Grateful for Bill Magavern reducing Diesel Emissions
Every day I start my day making a list of 10 things for which I am grateful (well, truth be told, the first thing I have to be grateful for is that I often start my day cuddling with a sleepy 10 year old girl and prodding her gently to get on with her day).
I do this because it makes me have a better day. It shifts the focus of my attention away from what I don't have, to what I have (which is plenty!). Even though I have a conscious relationship with God, I am not grateful to God. God doesn't need my gratitude. The universe is providing what it's providing, whether I'm grateful or not.
No, the gratitude is for me. The gratitude is, cliche and rhyming but nonetheless true, an attitude. I need the gratitude.
I do this especially when I'm at my worst. I try to make every single thing on the list unique. In other words, I am not grateful for my husband and children and mother every day (even though I am).
Today I am grateful for the way N. head-butted me and grunted at 9:45pm last night when I told him it was time for lights out. I am grateful for Emily's 4th freckle below her right eye.
I am grateful that even though I missed the Capitol Public Radio report last week, I (and you) can hear Bill talking about reducing diesel emissions it by clicking here (or above).
I do this because it makes me have a better day. It shifts the focus of my attention away from what I don't have, to what I have (which is plenty!). Even though I have a conscious relationship with God, I am not grateful to God. God doesn't need my gratitude. The universe is providing what it's providing, whether I'm grateful or not.
No, the gratitude is for me. The gratitude is, cliche and rhyming but nonetheless true, an attitude. I need the gratitude.
I do this especially when I'm at my worst. I try to make every single thing on the list unique. In other words, I am not grateful for my husband and children and mother every day (even though I am).
Today I am grateful for the way N. head-butted me and grunted at 9:45pm last night when I told him it was time for lights out. I am grateful for Emily's 4th freckle below her right eye.
I am grateful that even though I missed the Capitol Public Radio report last week, I (and you) can hear Bill talking about reducing diesel emissions it by clicking here (or above).
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Sacramento Humans Swim Circles Around Whales
I admit it, I keep up on current events--the things of importance to the world, like whales in the Sacramento River delta. The kids and I scour the news every day for the latest on these large mammals in our midst. I haven't been obsessed enough to join the 10,000 people who endangered the levees in West Sacramento to catch a glimpse of this mother and calf cavorting in fresh water, but I understand the impulse and certainly, time permitting, the kids and I would have ridden our bikes 2 miles to get a peek.
The current commentary lines in our household/community on the whales are these:
1) On their names. The Sac Bee had a naming contest, but before they could complete it, Lt. Governor John Garamendi took it upon himself to name the whales "Delta" for the mom and "Dawn" for the calf. The Bee then decided to accept these names as an official act of state. It's nice that whale-naming falls within the Lt. Governor's limited jurisdiction. Apparently he has some experience in this area. Over a decade ago, when the last whale made its way from the San Francisco Bay up the river, John Garamendi was in the State Assembly representing a Delta district. At that time he made the bold decisive move to name that whale "Humphrey," thereby saving his constituents from the horror of a nameless whale in their midst.
I'm assuming (but am too lazy to check) that in running for his current office he had a whale-naming plank (or should I say plankton?) in his platform--he has now fulfilled that campaign promise (Note: I think his naming rights are limited to the Sacramento River; all LA River whales are to be named by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa; all Mendocino County Russian River whales are to be named by Cheech and Chong).
Not being Lt. Governor, I have no business in whale naming, but I still think the best monikers for these Humpback whales (known to marine biologists as the "cows of the sea") would be "Dumb and Dumber"--why the heck did they leave the sea and swim upstream in fresh water? Hel-lo!? You're whales?!
2) How the "scientists" "affect" the whales' behavior. Is it only me or are the reports on what the "whale experts" are going to try, completely ludicrous? It's obvious to me that these guys have no idea what they're doing. Their actions on getting the whales to head back out to sea so far have been about as purposeful and well-thought out as my brother in law's when he chased a bat in his house around for an hour and a half before beating it to death with a tennis racket.
Here are some of their "expert" activities:
a) "give the whales the weekend off" before intervening. Do whales observe weekends? Was it really the whales that needed a weekend off?
b) run tugboats by them and hope they'll follow--"here, whale, follow the tugboat, whale".
c) (today) start banging on pipes underwater hoping that it will send them downstream (apparently my two year old nephew IM'd them this suggestion).
Could someone at least please call Sea World and send one of those cute trainer girls in a wet suit up? Maybe that could get some action (out of the scientist if not the whales).
3) On why the whales came inland in the first place--my son N (who was sick all last week as the whales made their journey inland) had a theory as to why they chose to come up:
"They heard I was sick and they came to see me and make me feel better. When they found out I was well, they turned around."
This statement would of course be adorable in a 5 year old--in a 12 year old, it's, well, it's even more adorable. Unfortunately, his explanation only holds water through Sunday when, yes, N's health and the whales both turned around and headed out to sea (okay, the health didn't head out to sea but you get the idea). By yesterday, however, the whales had done another 180 and were apparently seen shopping for beach chairs and towels at Ikea in West Sac. My daughter E has a cold today, maybe that's why they're staying.
Don't get me wrong, I wish "Delta" and "Dawn" well, and do very much hope they make it safely back to sea. It's the humans that seem to be swimming in circles--bang on the pipes, maybe it'll help.
The current commentary lines in our household/community on the whales are these:
1) On their names. The Sac Bee had a naming contest, but before they could complete it, Lt. Governor John Garamendi took it upon himself to name the whales "Delta" for the mom and "Dawn" for the calf. The Bee then decided to accept these names as an official act of state. It's nice that whale-naming falls within the Lt. Governor's limited jurisdiction. Apparently he has some experience in this area. Over a decade ago, when the last whale made its way from the San Francisco Bay up the river, John Garamendi was in the State Assembly representing a Delta district. At that time he made the bold decisive move to name that whale "Humphrey," thereby saving his constituents from the horror of a nameless whale in their midst.
I'm assuming (but am too lazy to check) that in running for his current office he had a whale-naming plank (or should I say plankton?) in his platform--he has now fulfilled that campaign promise (Note: I think his naming rights are limited to the Sacramento River; all LA River whales are to be named by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa; all Mendocino County Russian River whales are to be named by Cheech and Chong).
Not being Lt. Governor, I have no business in whale naming, but I still think the best monikers for these Humpback whales (known to marine biologists as the "cows of the sea") would be "Dumb and Dumber"--why the heck did they leave the sea and swim upstream in fresh water? Hel-lo!? You're whales?!
2) How the "scientists" "affect" the whales' behavior. Is it only me or are the reports on what the "whale experts" are going to try, completely ludicrous? It's obvious to me that these guys have no idea what they're doing. Their actions on getting the whales to head back out to sea so far have been about as purposeful and well-thought out as my brother in law's when he chased a bat in his house around for an hour and a half before beating it to death with a tennis racket.
Here are some of their "expert" activities:
a) "give the whales the weekend off" before intervening. Do whales observe weekends? Was it really the whales that needed a weekend off?
b) run tugboats by them and hope they'll follow--"here, whale, follow the tugboat, whale".
c) (today) start banging on pipes underwater hoping that it will send them downstream (apparently my two year old nephew IM'd them this suggestion).
Could someone at least please call Sea World and send one of those cute trainer girls in a wet suit up? Maybe that could get some action (out of the scientist if not the whales).
3) On why the whales came inland in the first place--my son N (who was sick all last week as the whales made their journey inland) had a theory as to why they chose to come up:
"They heard I was sick and they came to see me and make me feel better. When they found out I was well, they turned around."
This statement would of course be adorable in a 5 year old--in a 12 year old, it's, well, it's even more adorable. Unfortunately, his explanation only holds water through Sunday when, yes, N's health and the whales both turned around and headed out to sea (okay, the health didn't head out to sea but you get the idea). By yesterday, however, the whales had done another 180 and were apparently seen shopping for beach chairs and towels at Ikea in West Sac. My daughter E has a cold today, maybe that's why they're staying.
Don't get me wrong, I wish "Delta" and "Dawn" well, and do very much hope they make it safely back to sea. It's the humans that seem to be swimming in circles--bang on the pipes, maybe it'll help.
Friday, May 11, 2007
Four Snouts Up for An Unreasonable Man
(:)(:)(:)(:) for An Unreasonable Man seen tonight. I found this to be a balanced overview of Ralph's career, showing what made him who he is, with lots of air time for his critics.
Clearly the world is crying out for a great Nader date movie. Bill and I and the other Sacramento couple who used to work for Ralph Nader's Public Citizen, Nancy Drabble and John Sims, represented roughly 25% of the crowd at the film's opening night this evening at our huge beautiful old-fashioned Crest Theater downtown.
We couldn't stick around to compare notes with the Drabble/Sims, but we liked the film. However I can't begin to pretend to be objective about whether it's a good movie. For me this was closer to watching home movies than a documentary--Bill and I no doubt annoyed the people around us by keeping up a running whispered commentary,
"oh my God, is that Bob Fellmuth in the 60's?"
"Which one?"
"That one?"
"No. That's not Fellmuth."
"I can't believe that's what Ridgeway looks like. The number of times he's interviewed me over the phone, I never saw him in person."
"Oh my god, is Gene Karpinsky gonna tell is 'there's the hard core and then there's the spouse core' Ralph quote again?"
"He is!"
"he's telling it again"
"Jesus Christ, is that Joan Claybrook or Abby Hoffman?"
"Ralph and Joan are still having the same argument about air bags they had 30 years ago"
"Where's Russell Mokiber and JR? How could they have a movie about Ralph without Mokiber and JR?"
"Shit, they're not going to let Harvey talk about Proposition 103! Oh god, they are."
And so forth. So no. I'm not objective. But listen. The one thing I wish they'd done differently, is explained more about the Clinton administration, and what it did to Ralph's policies. I really think that every Democrat who hates Ralph for running for President in 2000 and 2004 would understand at least the 2000 race if they really knew what Clinton did to turn back the clock on food safety, auto safety, worker safety, the environment. If people understood that Clinton worked with a Democratic Congress to undo laws enacted primarily with the help of Ralph Nader, that Republican Presidents since Reagan had tried unsuccessfully to get the Democrats to repeal, they'd know why Ralph ran.
But hey, it's quite possible that no one but me cares. I still love and respect Ralph Nader and always will. And I'll defend him with my last breath. As this film shows, he's human. But he's also the ultimate citizen, and the ultimate American. He loves this country's promise of Democracy and its legal system, and he has tested both like no one else. And while he may be slightly Messianic, he's far from megalomaniacal--his fights have never ever been about Ralph, they've been about the future of this country.
Clearly the world is crying out for a great Nader date movie. Bill and I and the other Sacramento couple who used to work for Ralph Nader's Public Citizen, Nancy Drabble and John Sims, represented roughly 25% of the crowd at the film's opening night this evening at our huge beautiful old-fashioned Crest Theater downtown.
We couldn't stick around to compare notes with the Drabble/Sims, but we liked the film. However I can't begin to pretend to be objective about whether it's a good movie. For me this was closer to watching home movies than a documentary--Bill and I no doubt annoyed the people around us by keeping up a running whispered commentary,
"oh my God, is that Bob Fellmuth in the 60's?"
"Which one?"
"That one?"
"No. That's not Fellmuth."
"I can't believe that's what Ridgeway looks like. The number of times he's interviewed me over the phone, I never saw him in person."
"Oh my god, is Gene Karpinsky gonna tell is 'there's the hard core and then there's the spouse core' Ralph quote again?"
"He is!"
"he's telling it again"
"Jesus Christ, is that Joan Claybrook or Abby Hoffman?"
"Ralph and Joan are still having the same argument about air bags they had 30 years ago"
"Where's Russell Mokiber and JR? How could they have a movie about Ralph without Mokiber and JR?"
"Shit, they're not going to let Harvey talk about Proposition 103! Oh god, they are."
And so forth. So no. I'm not objective. But listen. The one thing I wish they'd done differently, is explained more about the Clinton administration, and what it did to Ralph's policies. I really think that every Democrat who hates Ralph for running for President in 2000 and 2004 would understand at least the 2000 race if they really knew what Clinton did to turn back the clock on food safety, auto safety, worker safety, the environment. If people understood that Clinton worked with a Democratic Congress to undo laws enacted primarily with the help of Ralph Nader, that Republican Presidents since Reagan had tried unsuccessfully to get the Democrats to repeal, they'd know why Ralph ran.
But hey, it's quite possible that no one but me cares. I still love and respect Ralph Nader and always will. And I'll defend him with my last breath. As this film shows, he's human. But he's also the ultimate citizen, and the ultimate American. He loves this country's promise of Democracy and its legal system, and he has tested both like no one else. And while he may be slightly Messianic, he's far from megalomaniacal--his fights have never ever been about Ralph, they've been about the future of this country.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
The 2 or 3 Habits of a Semi-Effective Snichols
Perhaps this is obvious, but the more I plan my days and my weeks, the better they go. Granted, unlike 99% of the people reading this blog, absent planning, my week includes huge blocks of unscheduled time--thank you, God, I am so lucky.
I engage in 3 levels of planning, monthly, weekly and daily.
1) Once a month I look over the whole month, block out all the regular appointments in my life--things that happen every single week. I also look ahead a few months at what is in the hopper--check out deadlines for things and schedule backwards from them.
2) Once a week, usually Sunday night, I get out my planner and block the week. If the monthly planner did its job, this is easier, because I have left time for the things I always need to do. So, every day I schedule time, literally schedule, for prayer, meditation, reading, writing, exercise, studying, and housecleaning. This usually takes up a total of about 3 hours a day. Then I schedule time for board and volunteer responsibilities, job hunting and errands or what I call do it now. This usually adds another 2-3 hours to the day. And that's my kids' school day right there. I sometimes have 2 to 3 hours left over in a week where I will schedule the luxury of a hair cut or lunch with a friend. Usually after school and evenings are taken up with kids or church activities, but sometimes, as now, the kids are at swim team for large blocks of time and I can get something accomplished or have some fun during that period.
A word on exercise: the exercise really doesn't happen unless I write down when it's happening and what it is, e.g., running, biking, swimming, or Tae Bo. If I just say exercise then I have to figure that out daily and that can be tricky.
3) Daily. Every morning I look over the schedule and make sure it's realistic. In implementing it, and adjusting it, I use Steven Covey's guides as my priority, 1st) urgent and important (e.g. making a speech that I agreed to make), 2nd) non-urgent and important (prayer and meditation, planning, setting a future appointment), 3rd) urgent and unimportant (dropping off something at the dry cleaners, 4) non-urgent and unimportant (most emails).
A word about email. For me, for this strategy to succeed, it is crucial that I delay looking at emails for as long as possible, it is a giant time sink. After I've finished all the important stuff, I can look at emails. This is particular difficult when one of the urgent things is sending out an email. I can be tempted to check my email and often fall into that trap. I am trying to discipline myself into getting in, sending the email, only opening the emails that obviously pertain to the urgent and important activities of the day and getting out. Deferring random email checking to a period of time in which I can quickly respond to emails.
This is also important because if I open an email and read it when I have time to respond, my chances of responding later become sharply diminished so it really is a losing proposition.
I engage in 3 levels of planning, monthly, weekly and daily.
1) Once a month I look over the whole month, block out all the regular appointments in my life--things that happen every single week. I also look ahead a few months at what is in the hopper--check out deadlines for things and schedule backwards from them.
2) Once a week, usually Sunday night, I get out my planner and block the week. If the monthly planner did its job, this is easier, because I have left time for the things I always need to do. So, every day I schedule time, literally schedule, for prayer, meditation, reading, writing, exercise, studying, and housecleaning. This usually takes up a total of about 3 hours a day. Then I schedule time for board and volunteer responsibilities, job hunting and errands or what I call do it now. This usually adds another 2-3 hours to the day. And that's my kids' school day right there. I sometimes have 2 to 3 hours left over in a week where I will schedule the luxury of a hair cut or lunch with a friend. Usually after school and evenings are taken up with kids or church activities, but sometimes, as now, the kids are at swim team for large blocks of time and I can get something accomplished or have some fun during that period.
A word on exercise: the exercise really doesn't happen unless I write down when it's happening and what it is, e.g., running, biking, swimming, or Tae Bo. If I just say exercise then I have to figure that out daily and that can be tricky.
3) Daily. Every morning I look over the schedule and make sure it's realistic. In implementing it, and adjusting it, I use Steven Covey's guides as my priority, 1st) urgent and important (e.g. making a speech that I agreed to make), 2nd) non-urgent and important (prayer and meditation, planning, setting a future appointment), 3rd) urgent and unimportant (dropping off something at the dry cleaners, 4) non-urgent and unimportant (most emails).
A word about email. For me, for this strategy to succeed, it is crucial that I delay looking at emails for as long as possible, it is a giant time sink. After I've finished all the important stuff, I can look at emails. This is particular difficult when one of the urgent things is sending out an email. I can be tempted to check my email and often fall into that trap. I am trying to discipline myself into getting in, sending the email, only opening the emails that obviously pertain to the urgent and important activities of the day and getting out. Deferring random email checking to a period of time in which I can quickly respond to emails.
This is also important because if I open an email and read it when I have time to respond, my chances of responding later become sharply diminished so it really is a losing proposition.
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
Fear & Loving in Disneyland
Last Friday, my son and I journeyed to Disneyland to watch his sister's 5th grade class receive a big award (for their project to create habitat for endangered burrowing owls, to learn more about it go to their save the burrowing owls website) with lots of hullabaloo. For me, the wildest ride of the day was the Big Corporate Rollercoaster of Love ride--my own strange conflicted relationship with Disney.
In the days before the trip, the ride began:
Down the rollercoaster dipped as I saw the "Environmentality" hats they handed to each of the 30 some kids--shaped and colored exactly like army hats, creating an army of Disney aficionados.
Up I flew as the kids ran to embrace a live Jiminy Cricket who came to their school in Sacramento to give the award--the kids were so thrilled and honored!
Once inside the park, down I rushed as several Bush administration officials shared the stage with the 10 and 11 year olds--"how dare they posture as pro-environment!" I even went so far as to ineffectively heckle this fish and game guy who said "it is with great pleasure that we will turn stewardship of the environment over to [a new generation]...," while I suggested "the Democrats" loud enough to annoy my son and a couple of proud fellow parents.
My ride climaxed as two obviously professional actors (Gladys and Dwight) dressed as owls "interrupted" the ceremony and proceeded to sing a hilarious and perfect medley of bird songs backed up by the girl group with chick yellow feathered hair, "the Peeps" (get it? Gladys, Dwight and the Peeps?). Tears actually came to my eyes at Disney going to the trouble of creating this whole production just for these children (putting aside the thought of Shakespearean actors being paid to dress up as owls).
Down down down I came as I looked at the PR hacks in the back handing out paper to the cameras and reporters, desperately using our children to create a "pro-environment" image even as they had given each kid Jiminy Cricket lunch boxes almost certainly made by 13 year old girls in China and laden with lead (according to recent reports).
But up I came for the final enjoyment of the ride as their (liberal) teacher Mitch Carnie, right in front of Sleeping Beauty's Castle, asked the crowd to remember John Lennon's lyrics and "imagine" what it would be like if every child in California did a project like this that genuinely improved the environment before they graduated 6th grade.
And from there, I kept enjoying it as my son and I continued on real rides, seeing the improvements to Pirates of the Caribbean, Space Mountain, and other face lifts to the park--we love Disney's California Adventure. And having a fabulous meal with friends at the Blue Bayou restaurant (the New Orleans-style "outdoor at night" atmosphere that the Pirates of the Caribbean ride takes you right by), something I've always wanted to do.
So in the final analysis, even though I mistrust the Disney corporation, I love Disneyland, Disney movies and Disney production values--my recommendation, just enjoy the ride.
In the days before the trip, the ride began:
Down the rollercoaster dipped as I saw the "Environmentality" hats they handed to each of the 30 some kids--shaped and colored exactly like army hats, creating an army of Disney aficionados.
Up I flew as the kids ran to embrace a live Jiminy Cricket who came to their school in Sacramento to give the award--the kids were so thrilled and honored!
Once inside the park, down I rushed as several Bush administration officials shared the stage with the 10 and 11 year olds--"how dare they posture as pro-environment!" I even went so far as to ineffectively heckle this fish and game guy who said "it is with great pleasure that we will turn stewardship of the environment over to [a new generation]...," while I suggested "the Democrats" loud enough to annoy my son and a couple of proud fellow parents.
My ride climaxed as two obviously professional actors (Gladys and Dwight) dressed as owls "interrupted" the ceremony and proceeded to sing a hilarious and perfect medley of bird songs backed up by the girl group with chick yellow feathered hair, "the Peeps" (get it? Gladys, Dwight and the Peeps?). Tears actually came to my eyes at Disney going to the trouble of creating this whole production just for these children (putting aside the thought of Shakespearean actors being paid to dress up as owls).
Down down down I came as I looked at the PR hacks in the back handing out paper to the cameras and reporters, desperately using our children to create a "pro-environment" image even as they had given each kid Jiminy Cricket lunch boxes almost certainly made by 13 year old girls in China and laden with lead (according to recent reports).
But up I came for the final enjoyment of the ride as their (liberal) teacher Mitch Carnie, right in front of Sleeping Beauty's Castle, asked the crowd to remember John Lennon's lyrics and "imagine" what it would be like if every child in California did a project like this that genuinely improved the environment before they graduated 6th grade.
And from there, I kept enjoying it as my son and I continued on real rides, seeing the improvements to Pirates of the Caribbean, Space Mountain, and other face lifts to the park--we love Disney's California Adventure. And having a fabulous meal with friends at the Blue Bayou restaurant (the New Orleans-style "outdoor at night" atmosphere that the Pirates of the Caribbean ride takes you right by), something I've always wanted to do.
So in the final analysis, even though I mistrust the Disney corporation, I love Disneyland, Disney movies and Disney production values--my recommendation, just enjoy the ride.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Big money developers win as County Supervisors prepare backroom deal to stop
Housing activists are protesting a meeting of the Sacramento County Supervisors this morning to try to blow up this deal.
After adopting an award winning program to ensure affordable housing for lower income Sacramento families in 2004, lobbyists for big money developers sued the County. Despite a judge’s ruling that the developer suit is without merit, County Supervisors have agreed to settle the suit and concede affordable homes to developer interests.
“This program is not broken, why is the County trying to fix it in a backroom deal? Why are they going back on their compact with us?” asks Mike Camino, lower income resident.
“By making this backroom deal, affordable homes are taken away from working families to put money in the pocket of big developers.” Ethan Evans, Sacramento Housing Alliance.
After adopting an award winning program to ensure affordable housing for lower income Sacramento families in 2004, lobbyists for big money developers sued the County. Despite a judge’s ruling that the developer suit is without merit, County Supervisors have agreed to settle the suit and concede affordable homes to developer interests.
“This program is not broken, why is the County trying to fix it in a backroom deal? Why are they going back on their compact with us?” asks Mike Camino, lower income resident.
“By making this backroom deal, affordable homes are taken away from working families to put money in the pocket of big developers.” Ethan Evans, Sacramento Housing Alliance.
Monday, May 07, 2007
Thinking Like Doolittle
Yikes, I'm thinking like John Doolittle. Today's Sacramento Bee reports (Republican congressman) Doolittle believes that the FBI raid on his house last month was timed to bolster Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee. The Bee is so appropriately anti-Doolittle that they make the claim sound paranoid and desperate.
But Doolittle has got to be right. When it went down, I thought the same thing. The timing was just too cute. On the very day that Gonzales is scheduled to be raked over the Judiciary Committee coals for politically motivated actions of the Justice Department, the FBI just happens to raid a high profile Republican Congressman's house in California early enough in the morning and with enough press coordination to make the morning papers in the east?
C'mon, it has Karl Rove written all over it--desperate play at distraction. Of course it didn't work, Gonzales still got reamed and people noticed it. And of course Doolittle's attempt to change the subject is equally desperate. It seems clear in recent weeks that his reign of terror is coming to an end.
I picture Rove the week of the Gonzales testimony pulling from a hat he carries around with him the names of people he's willing to take down to save the President. That week, it came up Doolittle. And they say Democrats eat their young...
But Doolittle has got to be right. When it went down, I thought the same thing. The timing was just too cute. On the very day that Gonzales is scheduled to be raked over the Judiciary Committee coals for politically motivated actions of the Justice Department, the FBI just happens to raid a high profile Republican Congressman's house in California early enough in the morning and with enough press coordination to make the morning papers in the east?
C'mon, it has Karl Rove written all over it--desperate play at distraction. Of course it didn't work, Gonzales still got reamed and people noticed it. And of course Doolittle's attempt to change the subject is equally desperate. It seems clear in recent weeks that his reign of terror is coming to an end.
I picture Rove the week of the Gonzales testimony pulling from a hat he carries around with him the names of people he's willing to take down to save the President. That week, it came up Doolittle. And they say Democrats eat their young...
Thursday, May 03, 2007
James Saxon on the Suspense behind Clean Money
I participated by listening to the live stream of the Appropriations Committee over the internet. It's like before horror films there was radio! It was full of all the same "suspense" but with baited breath, you get to imagine all the scenes without seeing the smiles, winks, nods, and of course the lobbyists pouring in money (but even with strong disclosure laws, few ever really see that.).
I wish I could have been there nonetheless to voice my support for AB 583 to save the world from the unfair influence of money in our democratic system! It's our government's own "global warming".
So it was very heartening to learn the weight that Mr. Leno has to wield in bringing this bill out of suspense.
The chairperson was clearly very positive and excited about AB 583. And seemed to suggest that it would be continuing to have a life (I guess as far as he can help). So I'm betting we'll be seeing more of AB 583, Clean Money, Fairer Elections, Full Public Financing of Elections really soon. It's time has come for sure.
Hopefully along with Nunez, Leno, and Hancock, maybe Governor Schwarzenegger can also join in, giving the bill the momentum it needs to get to his desk and into law!
I wish I could have been there nonetheless to voice my support for AB 583 to save the world from the unfair influence of money in our democratic system! It's our government's own "global warming".
So it was very heartening to learn the weight that Mr. Leno has to wield in bringing this bill out of suspense.
The chairperson was clearly very positive and excited about AB 583. And seemed to suggest that it would be continuing to have a life (I guess as far as he can help). So I'm betting we'll be seeing more of AB 583, Clean Money, Fairer Elections, Full Public Financing of Elections really soon. It's time has come for sure.
Hopefully along with Nunez, Leno, and Hancock, maybe Governor Schwarzenegger can also join in, giving the bill the momentum it needs to get to his desk and into law!
James Saxon on the Suspense behind Clean Money
I participated by listening to the live stream of the Appropriations Committee over the internet. It's like before horror films there was radio! It was full of all the same "suspense" but with baited breath, you get to imagine all the scenes without seeing the smiles, winks, nods, and of course the lobbyists pouring in money (but even with strong disclosure laws, few ever really see that.).
I wish I could have been there nonetheless to voice my support for AB 583 to save the world from the unfair influence of money in our democratic system! It's our government's own "global warming".
So it was very heartening to learn the weight that Mr. Leno has to wield in bringing this bill out of suspense.
The chairperson was clearly very positive and excited about AB 583. And seemed to suggest that it would be continuing to have a life (I guess as far as he can help). So I'm betting we'll be seeing more of AB 583, Clean Money, Fairer Elections, Full Public Financing of Elections really soon. It's time has come for sure.
Hopefully along with Nunez, Leno, and Hancock, maybe Governor Schwarzenegger can also join in, giving the bill the momentum it needs to get to his desk and into law!
I wish I could have been there nonetheless to voice my support for AB 583 to save the world from the unfair influence of money in our democratic system! It's our government's own "global warming".
So it was very heartening to learn the weight that Mr. Leno has to wield in bringing this bill out of suspense.
The chairperson was clearly very positive and excited about AB 583. And seemed to suggest that it would be continuing to have a life (I guess as far as he can help). So I'm betting we'll be seeing more of AB 583, Clean Money, Fairer Elections, Full Public Financing of Elections really soon. It's time has come for sure.
Hopefully along with Nunez, Leno, and Hancock, maybe Governor Schwarzenegger can also join in, giving the bill the momentum it needs to get to his desk and into law!
Clean Elections: the suspense is killing me
If the California Appropriations Committees were a summer movie, it’d be a blockbuster. After all, they’ve got all the right ingredients: suspense, mass murders, graveyards. Unfortunately for me, I’ve never liked horror films—I can’t stand the suspense.
Today the California Assembly Appropriations Committee moved AB 583, the Clean Money and Fair Elections Act by Assemblymember Loni Hancock (D-Berkeley) to the “suspense file,” leading me to wonder whether, once again, the suspense will kill me before we have public financing of elections in California. What rule, concept or decorum is actually “suspended,” I’ve long since forgotten. What I do know is that the suspense is not whether a bill will go “to suspense,” the suspense is whether it comes off.
And off it should come. As Susan Lerner, Executive Director of the California Clean Money Campaign, the sponsor of AB 583, said today, “the issue is no longer how can we afford to pay for it, but how can we afford not to pay for it?” Indeed, it is long overdue to inject clean public financing into California elections. However, this bill, coming as it does on the heels of (losing) Proposition 89 on last year’s ballot, faces a tough challenge in the legislature, even though it contains only parts of that initiative.
Sacramento insiders know that virtually every bill worth passing (i.e., every bill with a price tag) moves to “suspense” in Appropriations. The legitimate rationale used to be that bills that would cost the taxpayers over a certain amount of money per year would all be considered together. This process would ensure that California could afford the legislation it passed.
I have no quarrel with the theory behind considering these bills in tandem. I do take issue with the extreme secrecy with which these decisions are made. I’ve never understood why the handling of the suspense calendar isn’t a violation of the Brown Act (California open meeting law).
What it boils down to is that a handful of legislators can prevent the most important legislation in the state from moving forward without explaining their reasons or having to vote in public.
Here’s how it works: all the Assemblymembers and Senators who have their bills “on suspense” in the Appropriations Committee are forced to submit a secret (closely guarded) ranking of all their bills in order of priority.
It’s the Sophie’s Choice of legislators—“if only (sob) one of my (sob) bills gets to (sob) live, I guess it will have to be (sob) this one.” This ranking is then reviewed by a small cadre consisting of (if memory serves) the Appropriations Chair, the leader of the house, in private consultation with other members of the Appropriations committee, who decide which bills will come “off suspense” and therefore be granted an actual vote in committee.
Every year these “graveyard” committees bury scores of important (and less important) bills by having them never come off “suspense.”
Last year’s version of AB 583 came off suspense in a new form: without operative language and passed “in concept” off the Assembly floor and into the Senate where it fizzled out in the Senate Elections Committee despite the strong support of then chair now Secretary of State Debra Bowen.
The bill today was supported by over 20 activists and spoken well of by several legislators, including Assemblymember Fiona Ma (D-San Francisco) who asked to be added as a co-author.
The Chair of the Assembly Elections Committee Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) also spoke highly of the bill, having been a leading co-author for years. He hailed author Loni Hancock as more than an author, as the leader of a movement.
Despite my misgivings about the process, if the fate of this bill has to be decided in secret, I’m thrilled it’s in the hands of the capable and trustworthy Mark Leno, in consultation with Speaker Fabian Nunez, who has also been a strong supporter in the past.
Nunez, Leno and Hancock have the power to give this movie a happy ending if they put their heads together behind the scenes and bring to the screen a real version of this bill, with enforcement provisions and the necessary funding source off “suspense” for the vote the public deserves. When will California have real campaign reform? The suspense is killing us.
Today the California Assembly Appropriations Committee moved AB 583, the Clean Money and Fair Elections Act by Assemblymember Loni Hancock (D-Berkeley) to the “suspense file,” leading me to wonder whether, once again, the suspense will kill me before we have public financing of elections in California. What rule, concept or decorum is actually “suspended,” I’ve long since forgotten. What I do know is that the suspense is not whether a bill will go “to suspense,” the suspense is whether it comes off.
And off it should come. As Susan Lerner, Executive Director of the California Clean Money Campaign, the sponsor of AB 583, said today, “the issue is no longer how can we afford to pay for it, but how can we afford not to pay for it?” Indeed, it is long overdue to inject clean public financing into California elections. However, this bill, coming as it does on the heels of (losing) Proposition 89 on last year’s ballot, faces a tough challenge in the legislature, even though it contains only parts of that initiative.
Sacramento insiders know that virtually every bill worth passing (i.e., every bill with a price tag) moves to “suspense” in Appropriations. The legitimate rationale used to be that bills that would cost the taxpayers over a certain amount of money per year would all be considered together. This process would ensure that California could afford the legislation it passed.
I have no quarrel with the theory behind considering these bills in tandem. I do take issue with the extreme secrecy with which these decisions are made. I’ve never understood why the handling of the suspense calendar isn’t a violation of the Brown Act (California open meeting law).
What it boils down to is that a handful of legislators can prevent the most important legislation in the state from moving forward without explaining their reasons or having to vote in public.
Here’s how it works: all the Assemblymembers and Senators who have their bills “on suspense” in the Appropriations Committee are forced to submit a secret (closely guarded) ranking of all their bills in order of priority.
It’s the Sophie’s Choice of legislators—“if only (sob) one of my (sob) bills gets to (sob) live, I guess it will have to be (sob) this one.” This ranking is then reviewed by a small cadre consisting of (if memory serves) the Appropriations Chair, the leader of the house, in private consultation with other members of the Appropriations committee, who decide which bills will come “off suspense” and therefore be granted an actual vote in committee.
Every year these “graveyard” committees bury scores of important (and less important) bills by having them never come off “suspense.”
Last year’s version of AB 583 came off suspense in a new form: without operative language and passed “in concept” off the Assembly floor and into the Senate where it fizzled out in the Senate Elections Committee despite the strong support of then chair now Secretary of State Debra Bowen.
The bill today was supported by over 20 activists and spoken well of by several legislators, including Assemblymember Fiona Ma (D-San Francisco) who asked to be added as a co-author.
The Chair of the Assembly Elections Committee Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) also spoke highly of the bill, having been a leading co-author for years. He hailed author Loni Hancock as more than an author, as the leader of a movement.
Despite my misgivings about the process, if the fate of this bill has to be decided in secret, I’m thrilled it’s in the hands of the capable and trustworthy Mark Leno, in consultation with Speaker Fabian Nunez, who has also been a strong supporter in the past.
Nunez, Leno and Hancock have the power to give this movie a happy ending if they put their heads together behind the scenes and bring to the screen a real version of this bill, with enforcement provisions and the necessary funding source off “suspense” for the vote the public deserves. When will California have real campaign reform? The suspense is killing us.
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
Mersmann on Kucinich
Sara,
I think it's time to vote your heart and soul and principles and come
back to Dennis. Kucinich has boldly introduced legislation calling
for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney and he is the only candidate
who has consistently voted against the Iraq war. Furthermore he is in
favor of single payer national health care. Sure he may look like a
geek, but he is the best the Dems have to offer. A long shot, sure;
but YOU, of all people, should know how powerful belief and intention
are in the world.
Look at his ten key issues:
Universal Health Care
International Cooperation: US out of Iraq, UN in
Jobs and Withdrawal from NAFTA and WTO
Repeal of the "Patriot Act"
Guaranteed Quality Education, Pre-K Through College
Full Social Security Benefits at Age 65
Right-to-Choose, Privacy and Civil Rights
Balance Between Workers and Corporations
Environmental Renewal and Clean Energy
Restored Rural Communities and Family Farms
See anything you don't like? See any other Dem who comes close?
Kucinich 2008 In Your Heart You Know He's Right.
Be Well,
Harry
Harry J. Mersmann, Ph.D.
Professor of Sociology
I think it's time to vote your heart and soul and principles and come
back to Dennis. Kucinich has boldly introduced legislation calling
for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney and he is the only candidate
who has consistently voted against the Iraq war. Furthermore he is in
favor of single payer national health care. Sure he may look like a
geek, but he is the best the Dems have to offer. A long shot, sure;
but YOU, of all people, should know how powerful belief and intention
are in the world.
Look at his ten key issues:
Universal Health Care
International Cooperation: US out of Iraq, UN in
Jobs and Withdrawal from NAFTA and WTO
Repeal of the "Patriot Act"
Guaranteed Quality Education, Pre-K Through College
Full Social Security Benefits at Age 65
Right-to-Choose, Privacy and Civil Rights
Balance Between Workers and Corporations
Environmental Renewal and Clean Energy
Restored Rural Communities and Family Farms
See anything you don't like? See any other Dem who comes close?
Kucinich 2008 In Your Heart You Know He's Right.
Be Well,
Harry
Harry J. Mersmann, Ph.D.
Professor of Sociology
More on Edwards
In the self-referential world of blogging, I feel the need to link above to the California Progress Report, which has put my post here from yesterday up as their post for today--so this week I'm one day ahead of the best blog on California politics ;)
More importantly, everyone who has responded to my post yesterday has said that they're for Edwards too. Of course, this is probably self-selecting. My Obama-supporting friends may just be lying low--still, this is their chance to make their pitch to me. No one so far, in my limited circles, has made the case for Hillary (although I know that some female legislators I respect, such as state Senator Sheila Kuehl, are high on her).
And, according to yesterday's California Progress Report, Edwards gave a helluva speech Sunday which converted some of the crowd.
My radical New York Times and Nation-reading, social studies teaching friend Sandra Childs in Portland, Oregon reports that Obama gave a very pro Israel speech to the Israeli lobby and speaks well of Edwards work on poverty in the last few years.
So, keep the information and opinions coming folks, the election's only 10 months away :).
More importantly, everyone who has responded to my post yesterday has said that they're for Edwards too. Of course, this is probably self-selecting. My Obama-supporting friends may just be lying low--still, this is their chance to make their pitch to me. No one so far, in my limited circles, has made the case for Hillary (although I know that some female legislators I respect, such as state Senator Sheila Kuehl, are high on her).
And, according to yesterday's California Progress Report, Edwards gave a helluva speech Sunday which converted some of the crowd.
My radical New York Times and Nation-reading, social studies teaching friend Sandra Childs in Portland, Oregon reports that Obama gave a very pro Israel speech to the Israeli lobby and speaks well of Edwards work on poverty in the last few years.
So, keep the information and opinions coming folks, the election's only 10 months away :).
Monday, April 30, 2007
Uninformed Musings on the Dem Presidential Primary
With the Democratic Convention just wrapping up in San Diego and John Edwards' face plastered in the Sacramento Bee this morning, my thoughts turn to the Democratic presidential primary. Here are my badly uninformed thoughts so far:
First, as most of you know by now I am badly frightened by Hillary Clinton being the frontrunner (as measured by polls and fundraising). In an election which currently promises to favor the Democratic candidate, nothing could galvanize the right like having Hillary to campaign against. And how am I to be enthusiastic about her? Yes. I recognize and appreciate that a woman is a strong viable candidate in this race--that is progress. But she has been wrong on the war, she has been a dealmaker/Republican accommodationist in the Senate, and I don't trust her. I don't believe she has any strongly held beliefs from which she governs. I think she's power hungry.
Second, Obama. Many of my friends and colleagues are completely ga-ga for Obama. I can see why, he's charismatic, he's leftwing, he's been consistently anti-war, he's got dark skin (some argue we can't call him "black" or even "African-American" because he's not descended from the enslaved people of West Africa), he's fresh and a relative outsider. All intriguing and exciting, but he is so new that I don't have a sense of his record, his commitment or, perhaps mostly importantly, his ability to campaign effectively for national office (we know Hillary can)--his election to the U.S. Senate was a cakewalk.
Then there's John Edwards, for whom, truth be told, if the primary were held today I'd vote. Why? Because I have met him (I've met Hillary too, but...). I have seen him speak. I have watched his career closely. I like him. I trust him. I believe him. I like plaintiff's lawyers. Do I agree with every position he's ever taken? No. Was I blown away by him in person? No. In fact, after meeting him I voted for Dennis Kucinich in the California primary last go round, largely because it was a walk for Kerry already and I thought I should just vote my conscience. But I think he's strong on the stump, has the courage of his convictions, has a way to connect with middle-Americans, and would be a good commander in chief.
As I learn more about Obama, have a chance to see him speak more, I may well gravitate towards him. I am wary of early and heady support for particular presidential candidates--mindful of the Deaniacs last time around (I knew a fair amount about Howard Dean and couldn't see how they could like him so much).
I'm willing to be educated. And of course I haven't even mentioned Bill Richardson, Joe Biden (whom I've always loved), (liberal insurance company guy) Chris Dodd or the possibilities of Kerry or Gore getting into it late. What do you think?
First, as most of you know by now I am badly frightened by Hillary Clinton being the frontrunner (as measured by polls and fundraising). In an election which currently promises to favor the Democratic candidate, nothing could galvanize the right like having Hillary to campaign against. And how am I to be enthusiastic about her? Yes. I recognize and appreciate that a woman is a strong viable candidate in this race--that is progress. But she has been wrong on the war, she has been a dealmaker/Republican accommodationist in the Senate, and I don't trust her. I don't believe she has any strongly held beliefs from which she governs. I think she's power hungry.
Second, Obama. Many of my friends and colleagues are completely ga-ga for Obama. I can see why, he's charismatic, he's leftwing, he's been consistently anti-war, he's got dark skin (some argue we can't call him "black" or even "African-American" because he's not descended from the enslaved people of West Africa), he's fresh and a relative outsider. All intriguing and exciting, but he is so new that I don't have a sense of his record, his commitment or, perhaps mostly importantly, his ability to campaign effectively for national office (we know Hillary can)--his election to the U.S. Senate was a cakewalk.
Then there's John Edwards, for whom, truth be told, if the primary were held today I'd vote. Why? Because I have met him (I've met Hillary too, but...). I have seen him speak. I have watched his career closely. I like him. I trust him. I believe him. I like plaintiff's lawyers. Do I agree with every position he's ever taken? No. Was I blown away by him in person? No. In fact, after meeting him I voted for Dennis Kucinich in the California primary last go round, largely because it was a walk for Kerry already and I thought I should just vote my conscience. But I think he's strong on the stump, has the courage of his convictions, has a way to connect with middle-Americans, and would be a good commander in chief.
As I learn more about Obama, have a chance to see him speak more, I may well gravitate towards him. I am wary of early and heady support for particular presidential candidates--mindful of the Deaniacs last time around (I knew a fair amount about Howard Dean and couldn't see how they could like him so much).
I'm willing to be educated. And of course I haven't even mentioned Bill Richardson, Joe Biden (whom I've always loved), (liberal insurance company guy) Chris Dodd or the possibilities of Kerry or Gore getting into it late. What do you think?
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Round I to the Democrats in Congress
Probably a function of distance from Washington, but I'm impressed with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid's maneuvers on Iraq this week. By using Bush's certain veto to create strong party discipline and send a $124 billion military spending bill to Bush laden with a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, the Democrats have put the Republicans in a tight position:
If Republicans vote against the package, they are simultaneously:
a) undermining the troops by refusing to support new spending for all the things the troops need to keep them out of harms way--thereby jeopardizing them with their base;
b) going on record as opposing a sensible timetable for withdrawal from Iraq thereby leaving them vulnerable with swing voters who oppose the war.
By supporting the package (which almost none of the Republicans did), they:
a) "undermine the troops" by bringing them home (something I've never understood but elements of the Republican base are rabid about);
b) undermine the President (see above).
Pelosi no doubt used her liberal San Francisco bona fides with the left wing of the Democratic party, coupled with MoveOn support for this strategy, to bring most of them along to vote for huge war spending, despite the pressure from some peacenik quarters not to do so.
As deplorable as a $124 billion war infusion is, the knowledge of a certain veto by Bush allows most Democrats to participate in this brilliant strategy protected from the possibility of genuinely having helped fund the war.
After the veto is a different story of course, all bets are off and the party factions will probably scatter to their respective corners. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.
If Republicans vote against the package, they are simultaneously:
a) undermining the troops by refusing to support new spending for all the things the troops need to keep them out of harms way--thereby jeopardizing them with their base;
b) going on record as opposing a sensible timetable for withdrawal from Iraq thereby leaving them vulnerable with swing voters who oppose the war.
By supporting the package (which almost none of the Republicans did), they:
a) "undermine the troops" by bringing them home (something I've never understood but elements of the Republican base are rabid about);
b) undermine the President (see above).
Pelosi no doubt used her liberal San Francisco bona fides with the left wing of the Democratic party, coupled with MoveOn support for this strategy, to bring most of them along to vote for huge war spending, despite the pressure from some peacenik quarters not to do so.
As deplorable as a $124 billion war infusion is, the knowledge of a certain veto by Bush allows most Democrats to participate in this brilliant strategy protected from the possibility of genuinely having helped fund the war.
After the veto is a different story of course, all bets are off and the party factions will probably scatter to their respective corners. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
4 Snouts Up for Blue Door at Berkeley Rep
(:)(:)(:)(:) for Blue Door at the Berkeley Repertory Theatre. A few hours before I discovered new high quality professional theater right here in Sacramento, I reserved seats for last Saturday's performance of Blue Door written by Tanya Barfield and directed by Delroy Lindo.
I liked it very much--the two-man play is well-acted, well-staged (a beautiful yet spare set) and covers an important subject matter in a way which is accessible, occasionally funny and not at all didactic.
I don't like to recount plotlines, so here's the official Berkeley blurb:
Not surprisingly, the subject matter attracted a slightly more diverse audience than the typical white over 50 throng--"is that Loni Hancock*?" "No, that's Loni Hancock."
*Berkeley assemblymember Loni Hancock looks just like 50% of the Berkeley Rep season ticket holders.
I liked it very much--the two-man play is well-acted, well-staged (a beautiful yet spare set) and covers an important subject matter in a way which is accessible, occasionally funny and not at all didactic.
I don't like to recount plotlines, so here's the official Berkeley blurb:
When he refuses to attend the Million Man March, an African-American professor finds his personal and professional lives thrown into turmoil. Unable to sleep in the bed abandoned by his [sara's note: white] wife, Lewis is visited by his ancestors—men who fought to be free, to vote, to obtain justice. Two exceptional actors embody three generations in this powerful new play from a promising young writer. Blue Door is a searing examination of family and identity that will resonate with anyone who has ever struggled to live with—or escape—the past.
Not surprisingly, the subject matter attracted a slightly more diverse audience than the typical white over 50 throng--"is that Loni Hancock*?" "No, that's Loni Hancock."
*Berkeley assemblymember Loni Hancock looks just like 50% of the Berkeley Rep season ticket holders.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Bush, Virginia Tech and the Freedom to Bear Arms
Musings:
Playing catch-up on the news here but did anyone else but me (and an Australian newspaper) notice that President Bush's first comment on the shooting at Virginia Tech included this statement, "The president believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed. Certainly, bringing a gun into a school dormitory and shooting ... is against the law and something someone should be held accountable for."
Why was this necessary? Has it gotten to the point where the NRA has such dominance that Republicans are unable to offer sincere condolences to the victims of a tragedy without pandering to this interest group?
Why wasn't there more fallout from this statement? Has everything the President says been rendered that irrelevant.
Playing catch-up on the news here but did anyone else but me (and an Australian newspaper) notice that President Bush's first comment on the shooting at Virginia Tech included this statement, "The president believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed. Certainly, bringing a gun into a school dormitory and shooting ... is against the law and something someone should be held accountable for."
Why was this necessary? Has it gotten to the point where the NRA has such dominance that Republicans are unable to offer sincere condolences to the victims of a tragedy without pandering to this interest group?
Why wasn't there more fallout from this statement? Has everything the President says been rendered that irrelevant.
Monday, April 23, 2007
Four Snouts up for Three Days of Rain and the Capital Stage
(:)(:)(:)(:) for Three Days of Rain at the Capital Stage in Old Sacramento now playing through May 13th. This play is the first I've seen from a relatively new professional theater company in Sacramento, the first such new ambition in years, now in its second season. If this play is any indication, the company is an answer to my prayers.
Currently housed in the modest theater on the Delta King, the limits of the space are obvious. Yet, in Three Days of Rain by Richard Greenberg, the production house has chosen to stage a darkly funny one set play with only 3 actors (playing 6 parts, by clever design)--perfect for the space.
The play itself is well-written, playing with familiar themes of family legacy, secrets, and assumptions--definitely influenced by the plays of Sam Shepard, but lighter, and New Yorky.
The play was well-staged and well acted with an exceptionally strong performance by Johnathon Rhys Williams. Williams and the other male actor Gillen Morrison easily outshadow the only non-Equity actor, Megan Smith playing the role Julia Roberts starred in on Broadway (who, while famous, has never displayed any but surface level acting ability in any vehicle I'm aware of).
Gillen Morrison's choices in the second act work but were a bit too close to Russell Crowe's interpretation of John Forbes Nash in A Beautiful Mind for my taste.
Still, the whole experience is delicious compared to almost anything I've seen at the B street Theater (exception: Copenhagen a few years back). And the season ticket prices for next year are wickely low--$55 for 5 plays (normal price is $22 a ticket). I'd encourage all Sacramentens to run not walk to this production and future ones. Important to support local theater.
Currently housed in the modest theater on the Delta King, the limits of the space are obvious. Yet, in Three Days of Rain by Richard Greenberg, the production house has chosen to stage a darkly funny one set play with only 3 actors (playing 6 parts, by clever design)--perfect for the space.
The play itself is well-written, playing with familiar themes of family legacy, secrets, and assumptions--definitely influenced by the plays of Sam Shepard, but lighter, and New Yorky.
The play was well-staged and well acted with an exceptionally strong performance by Johnathon Rhys Williams. Williams and the other male actor Gillen Morrison easily outshadow the only non-Equity actor, Megan Smith playing the role Julia Roberts starred in on Broadway (who, while famous, has never displayed any but surface level acting ability in any vehicle I'm aware of).
Gillen Morrison's choices in the second act work but were a bit too close to Russell Crowe's interpretation of John Forbes Nash in A Beautiful Mind for my taste.
Still, the whole experience is delicious compared to almost anything I've seen at the B street Theater (exception: Copenhagen a few years back). And the season ticket prices for next year are wickely low--$55 for 5 plays (normal price is $22 a ticket). I'd encourage all Sacramentens to run not walk to this production and future ones. Important to support local theater.
Thursday, March 08, 2007
Is it just me or is carbon offsetting dumb?
The past few weeks we're having to read how Governor Arnold is "off-setting" his travels (new term "off-jet-setting?") by paying someone in Northern California to plant more trees at a rate of $10 per ton of carbon monoxide produced or something.
Is it just me, or this an idea whose time has dumb? Maybe I should be more upset at people who jet around the world for their convenience, but I know I'd do it in a heartbeat if I had the time and money. However, it's clear that such travel patterns eat up a tremendous amount of fossil fuel and generate a corresponding amount of pollution.
Even so, is there any way in which paying people to plant trees even begins to truly "offset" this pollution? And doesn't this whole notion just increase the idea that rich people get to consume as much of the world's resources as they want (now they just need to be even richer to do it?)?
My husband (Bill Magavern of the Sierra Club) has pointed out to me that if Arnold really wants to do something about pollution he could recant his endorsement/creation/obsession of the hummer--or at least stop driving one. Maybe that would off-set my nausea.
Is it just me, or this an idea whose time has dumb? Maybe I should be more upset at people who jet around the world for their convenience, but I know I'd do it in a heartbeat if I had the time and money. However, it's clear that such travel patterns eat up a tremendous amount of fossil fuel and generate a corresponding amount of pollution.
Even so, is there any way in which paying people to plant trees even begins to truly "offset" this pollution? And doesn't this whole notion just increase the idea that rich people get to consume as much of the world's resources as they want (now they just need to be even richer to do it?)?
My husband (Bill Magavern of the Sierra Club) has pointed out to me that if Arnold really wants to do something about pollution he could recant his endorsement/creation/obsession of the hummer--or at least stop driving one. Maybe that would off-set my nausea.
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
When Mom and Dad are lawyers--PJ Day Raises Policy Questions
Our 10 year old daughter EM yesterday: so um I didn't wear my pajamas to school on Friday, but other kids did, and Mr. C***** did because we thought it was pajama day and last month there was a lollipop day and we think there is a violation of the Brown Act.
Mom and Dad: what??
EM (looking at us like we're dense): Weren't you listening? I'm concerned because Pajama Day at my school may violate the Brown Act--you know the California Public Meetings Law?
Dad: Yes. We know what the Brown Act is.
EM: Well you didn't act like you did.
... (we tend not to respond to such accusations from her)
EM: So, C*** in my class is the school treasurer. And he was at every meeting of the student
council and it was decided at the last student council meeting that last Friday would be Pajama Day. And so he announced it to our class, and a lot of kids wore their jammies and so did Mr. C****** and it turned out it wasn't Pajama Day and no other kids or teachers had pajamas!
So this means that either there was a meeting that C*** wasn't invited to at which time the date of Pajama Day was changed, or there was a failure to post the agenda or adequately advertise the meeting--both of which are violations of the Brown Act--so we're protesting and writing letters. Do you think that this was a violation of the Brown Act?
Bill (cautiously): well, it sounds like you've got a good case, my only question would be whether your school Student Council is considered one of the public bodies whose meetings are subject to the Brown Act.
EM (looking at us incredulously again): Well, we don't know if it's subject to the Brown Act, but we think that even if they don't have to follow this law, they should.
Whereupon Mom and Dad launch into a brief exigesis on the difference between the spirit and the letter of the law with some fascinating examples of situations where people argued both. During which time EM seemed largely to be reading her Kids Almanac and not listening.
Stay tuned...
Mom and Dad: what??
EM (looking at us like we're dense): Weren't you listening? I'm concerned because Pajama Day at my school may violate the Brown Act--you know the California Public Meetings Law?
Dad: Yes. We know what the Brown Act is.
EM: Well you didn't act like you did.
... (we tend not to respond to such accusations from her)
EM: So, C*** in my class is the school treasurer. And he was at every meeting of the student
council and it was decided at the last student council meeting that last Friday would be Pajama Day. And so he announced it to our class, and a lot of kids wore their jammies and so did Mr. C****** and it turned out it wasn't Pajama Day and no other kids or teachers had pajamas!
So this means that either there was a meeting that C*** wasn't invited to at which time the date of Pajama Day was changed, or there was a failure to post the agenda or adequately advertise the meeting--both of which are violations of the Brown Act--so we're protesting and writing letters. Do you think that this was a violation of the Brown Act?
Bill (cautiously): well, it sounds like you've got a good case, my only question would be whether your school Student Council is considered one of the public bodies whose meetings are subject to the Brown Act.
EM (looking at us incredulously again): Well, we don't know if it's subject to the Brown Act, but we think that even if they don't have to follow this law, they should.
Whereupon Mom and Dad launch into a brief exigesis on the difference between the spirit and the letter of the law with some fascinating examples of situations where people argued both. During which time EM seemed largely to be reading her Kids Almanac and not listening.
Stay tuned...
Monday, March 05, 2007
Four Snouts up for the Pillowman at Berkeley Rep
(:)(:)(:)(:) for The Pillowman by Martin McDonagh which just closed (sob) at the Berkeley Repertory Theatre.
Oh. My. God.
Where has McDonagh been on all my life? After dropping out of school at 16 and lying around watching television and drinking beer for 20 years, this amazing young (London working class) Irish playwright cranked out 7 plays in one year--five of which have been produced to critical acclaim in the London West End and Broadway.
I absolutely loved this play, but, as the usher who tore my ticket warned, it's not for sissies. This alternately cruel, hilarious and tragic "something-esque" piece defies categorization. Many of the audience members hated it. Several left at intermission.
Admittedly, it's hard to take the vivid descriptions of cruelty, dismemberment and horror to children--fortunately, it's supposed to be. However, the clever patter, smooth direction, brilliant writing and acting of this production allowed this viewer to simultaneously be horrified, drawn in, concerned and yet strangely distant from the material.
For me it helped a lot that the playwright cleverly frames the narrative so as to cast doubt on whether several of the horrors are real or only imagined--and you don't have to see most of them, just hear about them.
I for one, can't wait to see/read more McDonagh. The only other playwright that he reminds me of a bit is my erstwhile college friend Gordon Dahlquist--I played a violent lesbian pirate in his play Dangercave many years ago, but that's a different post.
Oh. My. God.
Where has McDonagh been on all my life? After dropping out of school at 16 and lying around watching television and drinking beer for 20 years, this amazing young (London working class) Irish playwright cranked out 7 plays in one year--five of which have been produced to critical acclaim in the London West End and Broadway.
I absolutely loved this play, but, as the usher who tore my ticket warned, it's not for sissies. This alternately cruel, hilarious and tragic "something-esque" piece defies categorization. Many of the audience members hated it. Several left at intermission.
Admittedly, it's hard to take the vivid descriptions of cruelty, dismemberment and horror to children--fortunately, it's supposed to be. However, the clever patter, smooth direction, brilliant writing and acting of this production allowed this viewer to simultaneously be horrified, drawn in, concerned and yet strangely distant from the material.
For me it helped a lot that the playwright cleverly frames the narrative so as to cast doubt on whether several of the horrors are real or only imagined--and you don't have to see most of them, just hear about them.
I for one, can't wait to see/read more McDonagh. The only other playwright that he reminds me of a bit is my erstwhile college friend Gordon Dahlquist--I played a violent lesbian pirate in his play Dangercave many years ago, but that's a different post.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Believing in a Safe World
I'm interested in a return to a belief that the world is safe. When you talk with people about child-rearing, one of the fondest memories is of unfettered play in childhood--walking to and from school without an adult, playing with the kids in the neighborhood until mom called you home for dinner.
But today's middle class parents keep their children under close supervision. They are dropped off and picked up from school sometimes until their senior year. Their orbits are very small for the first 13-14 years of life. Many kids are not allowed to even run down the block to a friend's house without an adult for fear of being snatched.
My experience is that it's a safe world. I have never been snatched and no one I know has ever been snatched, except by a noncustodial parent. Yet the news would have us believe that there are predators around every corner. That we are bad parents if we let our children have freedom of movement. That it is criminally negligent to let your child play in the neighborhood outside of the watchful eye of an adult.
I have these questions:
More on this later.
But today's middle class parents keep their children under close supervision. They are dropped off and picked up from school sometimes until their senior year. Their orbits are very small for the first 13-14 years of life. Many kids are not allowed to even run down the block to a friend's house without an adult for fear of being snatched.
My experience is that it's a safe world. I have never been snatched and no one I know has ever been snatched, except by a noncustodial parent. Yet the news would have us believe that there are predators around every corner. That we are bad parents if we let our children have freedom of movement. That it is criminally negligent to let your child play in the neighborhood outside of the watchful eye of an adult.
I have these questions:
- Is it really a less safe world?
- At what point does our own experience get to contradict what we're being fed by the media?
- If we have a nostalgia for another time, why don't we re-create it?
- How does a generation of children raised in a culture of fear govern?
Monday, February 19, 2007
Four Snouts up for Bridge to Teribithia
(:)(:)(:)(:) for Bridge to Teribithia the new Disney flic playing everywhere. I loved this movie. I really did. Of course, part of this is a function of low expectations. I hadn't read the book. And it's a kids film and it's Disney. But the reviews have been mostly positive, so I was hopeful. It wasn't like I was going to see Norbit (the thought of which just terrifies me).
Bridge to Teribithia is about two remarkable 6th graders who create a kingdom that shimmers in the ambiguity between imaginary and real.
Part of my enjoyment is that I took 3 remarkable 6th and 5th graders to see the film. I loved watching them watch it. The movie is perfect for this age group because the story line lives on the edge between "reality" and "imagination." Between the cruel social world of school and escapism of after school play. That edge is the true realm of my 6th grader, who spends his days at school battling the cruel tyrant of the lunch room and his afternoons battling mythical creatures in novels, video games and with his friends.
The story has complexity and depth, more than you'd expect. It's uncomfortably, tragically sad in parts and silly and sweet and in others. I'd recommend it for anyone except children under 8 or 9, depending upon emotional maturity.
Bridge to Teribithia is about two remarkable 6th graders who create a kingdom that shimmers in the ambiguity between imaginary and real.
Part of my enjoyment is that I took 3 remarkable 6th and 5th graders to see the film. I loved watching them watch it. The movie is perfect for this age group because the story line lives on the edge between "reality" and "imagination." Between the cruel social world of school and escapism of after school play. That edge is the true realm of my 6th grader, who spends his days at school battling the cruel tyrant of the lunch room and his afternoons battling mythical creatures in novels, video games and with his friends.
The story has complexity and depth, more than you'd expect. It's uncomfortably, tragically sad in parts and silly and sweet and in others. I'd recommend it for anyone except children under 8 or 9, depending upon emotional maturity.
Saturday, February 17, 2007
My California Day
8:00am Rise, dress, brush teeth, quickly revise flyer for Unconditional Love movie night
8:30 Drive to and attend personal recovery meeting, don't hand out flyer because may be precluded by recovery tradition
10:20am Return home and make calls to neighbors in my intentional community
11:30am Eat lunch of fresh organic greens with tuna, organic apple and organic peanut butter
12:30pm Pray and meditate in park
12:45pm Random Senagalese man asks for help in park, tell him he'll have to wait until I'm through meditating. He sits down next to me and says, "I will meditate with you."
1:00pm After meditating with him, help Senagalese man fill out job application for busboy position--he would rather sell drums
1:30pm Run 3 miles in park
2:00pm Take hot tub with sick child
2:30pm Review recovery literature with sick child's head on lap
3:00pm Head toward natural food co-op to pick up wheat and dairy free necessities, make phone calls on cell
3:05pm Abrupt U-turn into free "psychic fair"
3:15pm Receive free aura cleansing
3:30pm Receive partial psychic reading
4:00pm Sit in car and make notes from psychic reading, make cell calls to people to tell them to come down to the free psychic fair
5:30pm Return home from natural foods co-op, make wheat and dairy free dinner, with vegan option
6:45pm Eat dinner with family--quiz well child on spelling words
7:30pm Clean kitchen wearing ipod and headlamp
8:20pm Clean intentional community Common House wearing ipod only--if only I had brought the headlamp!
9:15pm Kiss children goodnight
9:30pm Watch HBO netflix DVD episode of Six Feet Under with husband...
11:30pm Download old gospel music to itunes and burn to disk for New Thought Gospel Choir Director
11:50pm Blog about it
8:30 Drive to and attend personal recovery meeting, don't hand out flyer because may be precluded by recovery tradition
10:20am Return home and make calls to neighbors in my intentional community
11:30am Eat lunch of fresh organic greens with tuna, organic apple and organic peanut butter
12:30pm Pray and meditate in park
12:45pm Random Senagalese man asks for help in park, tell him he'll have to wait until I'm through meditating. He sits down next to me and says, "I will meditate with you."
1:00pm After meditating with him, help Senagalese man fill out job application for busboy position--he would rather sell drums
1:30pm Run 3 miles in park
2:00pm Take hot tub with sick child
2:30pm Review recovery literature with sick child's head on lap
3:00pm Head toward natural food co-op to pick up wheat and dairy free necessities, make phone calls on cell
3:05pm Abrupt U-turn into free "psychic fair"
3:15pm Receive free aura cleansing
3:30pm Receive partial psychic reading
4:00pm Sit in car and make notes from psychic reading, make cell calls to people to tell them to come down to the free psychic fair
5:30pm Return home from natural foods co-op, make wheat and dairy free dinner, with vegan option
6:45pm Eat dinner with family--quiz well child on spelling words
7:30pm Clean kitchen wearing ipod and headlamp
8:20pm Clean intentional community Common House wearing ipod only--if only I had brought the headlamp!
9:15pm Kiss children goodnight
9:30pm Watch HBO netflix DVD episode of Six Feet Under with husband...
11:30pm Download old gospel music to itunes and burn to disk for New Thought Gospel Choir Director
11:50pm Blog about it
Friday, February 16, 2007
Term-inator II
(say this in a movie announcer voice):
they terrified you last summer when they teamed up to
terminate real campaign finance reform. Now they're back at it again--Term-inator II: term limits extended.
Okay, Sara, speak English--it's this: it made news today that the Chamber of Commerce, California Teachers Association and Sacramento Democratic political consultant Gale Kaufman
have created "an unholy alliance" to extend term limits for state legislators.
Trouble is, no one reported that this alliance is not new. As recently as 3 months ago, the exact same players (with the exception of Schwarzenegger strategist Matthew Dowd), CTA, Chamber of Commerce and Kaufman put their heads and their budgets together to defeat Proposition 89, the measure on the California ballot that would have given the bums' rush to political corruption in this state by creating publically funded elections.
It's powerful to couple the friendly face of teachers with big business money and GOTV know-how and they intend to do it again.
I happen to think that term limits should be extended. Not so members of the legislature can keep their jobs, so voters have a chance to elect legislators capable of passing complex legislation.
What brings this alliance together in both instances is the need to protect entrenched power. Maybe they can use that rallying cry to name their committee. You know, "paid for by Sweet Innocent Teachers To Protect Entrenched Power" or, just Term-inator II
they terrified you last summer when they teamed up to
terminate real campaign finance reform. Now they're back at it again--Term-inator II: term limits extended.
Okay, Sara, speak English--it's this: it made news today that the Chamber of Commerce, California Teachers Association and Sacramento Democratic political consultant Gale Kaufman
have created "an unholy alliance" to extend term limits for state legislators.
Trouble is, no one reported that this alliance is not new. As recently as 3 months ago, the exact same players (with the exception of Schwarzenegger strategist Matthew Dowd), CTA, Chamber of Commerce and Kaufman put their heads and their budgets together to defeat Proposition 89, the measure on the California ballot that would have given the bums' rush to political corruption in this state by creating publically funded elections.
It's powerful to couple the friendly face of teachers with big business money and GOTV know-how and they intend to do it again.
I happen to think that term limits should be extended. Not so members of the legislature can keep their jobs, so voters have a chance to elect legislators capable of passing complex legislation.
What brings this alliance together in both instances is the need to protect entrenched power. Maybe they can use that rallying cry to name their committee. You know, "paid for by Sweet Innocent Teachers To Protect Entrenched Power" or, just Term-inator II
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Hair on DVD: Flawed Movie with Amazing Scenes & Score
(:)(:)(:) for the movie Hair on DVD, directed by Milos Forman and starring John Savage and Treat Williams (yum).
(:)(:)(:)(:)(:) for the music, and the scene of Black Boys, White Boys.
This is one of those movies that clearly strove for excellence and missed the mark, but contains some dynamite screen moments that are a shame to miss. Director Milos Forman attempted to make the most of the transition from a relatively low budget groundbreaking Broadway hit to the silver screen.
Trouble is, he did it at the just the wrong time: 1979, after the anthems to drugs, free love, racial equality, clean air and anti Vietnam War message had lost their shock power and long before nostalgia for the 60's/70's set in. 1979 was also during that 2 decade stretch when every live action movie musical flopped, long before Chicago revived the possibility.
Still, the movie is beautifully filmed and the score is in my judgment better interpreted (at least for modern audiences) than the Broadway recording, with stronger talent, harder rock sounds and driving beats in some key numbers, and just stronger dramatic choices.
A perfect example is "Easy to be Hard"--which is performed with consequence in this movie by a pregnant churchgoing middle class girl, abandoned by her hippy boyfriend, as a heart-wrenching inquiry into the hypocrisy of the left:
But the single best number in the movie, and one of my very favorite scenes in any movie ever, is "Black Boys, White Boys" in which Forman chose to cut back and forth between formidable teams of black and white women singing in Central Park while ogling passing boys and an all male (black and white) draft board singing about how they love "black boys" and then "white boys" while inspecting nude recruits reporting for duty. It is hilarious, musical, sexy and perfectly edited.
Okay, enough about Hair--if you get a chance to see it, you're lucky, it doesn't sit on many video shelves.
(:)(:)(:)(:)(:) for the music, and the scene of Black Boys, White Boys.
This is one of those movies that clearly strove for excellence and missed the mark, but contains some dynamite screen moments that are a shame to miss. Director Milos Forman attempted to make the most of the transition from a relatively low budget groundbreaking Broadway hit to the silver screen.
Trouble is, he did it at the just the wrong time: 1979, after the anthems to drugs, free love, racial equality, clean air and anti Vietnam War message had lost their shock power and long before nostalgia for the 60's/70's set in. 1979 was also during that 2 decade stretch when every live action movie musical flopped, long before Chicago revived the possibility.
Still, the movie is beautifully filmed and the score is in my judgment better interpreted (at least for modern audiences) than the Broadway recording, with stronger talent, harder rock sounds and driving beats in some key numbers, and just stronger dramatic choices.
A perfect example is "Easy to be Hard"--which is performed with consequence in this movie by a pregnant churchgoing middle class girl, abandoned by her hippy boyfriend, as a heart-wrenching inquiry into the hypocrisy of the left:
"Easy to be hard. Easy to say no. Especially people who care about strangers, who say they care about social injustice, do you only care about the bleeding crowd, how about a needy friend, I need a friend. "
But the single best number in the movie, and one of my very favorite scenes in any movie ever, is "Black Boys, White Boys" in which Forman chose to cut back and forth between formidable teams of black and white women singing in Central Park while ogling passing boys and an all male (black and white) draft board singing about how they love "black boys" and then "white boys" while inspecting nude recruits reporting for duty. It is hilarious, musical, sexy and perfectly edited.
Okay, enough about Hair--if you get a chance to see it, you're lucky, it doesn't sit on many video shelves.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Make Mine Vanilla
Food bugaboo of the week:
You see it everywhere now, vanilla milk, vanilla yogurt, vanilla creme, but not many people know that vanilla is the new codeword for sugar. In fact, if you scan the ingredient list on a "vanilla" item, there's a decent chance you won't find "vanilla" listed as an ingredient, but it's a lock that you'll find sugar (aka corn syrup, cane syrup, cane juice, rice syrup--sorry, it's all sugar).
My particular favorite is soy "milk." Regular soy milk is already loaded with sugar. Many health conscious people, who wouldn't dream of putting chocolate milk on their cereal or feeding it to young children buy vanilla soy milk, which has almost as much sugar as chocolate milk.
...and if it says "very vanilla," do not pass go, go directly to diabetic coma.
You see it everywhere now, vanilla milk, vanilla yogurt, vanilla creme, but not many people know that vanilla is the new codeword for sugar. In fact, if you scan the ingredient list on a "vanilla" item, there's a decent chance you won't find "vanilla" listed as an ingredient, but it's a lock that you'll find sugar (aka corn syrup, cane syrup, cane juice, rice syrup--sorry, it's all sugar).
My particular favorite is soy "milk." Regular soy milk is already loaded with sugar. Many health conscious people, who wouldn't dream of putting chocolate milk on their cereal or feeding it to young children buy vanilla soy milk, which has almost as much sugar as chocolate milk.
...and if it says "very vanilla," do not pass go, go directly to diabetic coma.
Friday, February 09, 2007
Four Snouts up for Quinceanera
(:)(:)(:)(:) out of a possible five snouts up for Quinceanera on DVD. This bittersweet film captured my heart by depicting a small but completely unexplored subject for mainstream America, the latin American rite of passage for girls on their 15th birthday.
By weaving together the difficulities in a 14 year old girl's life with the realities of gentrification in Echo Parque, Los Angeles, this movie gives us a peak into a tender, bittersweet, but credible situation. The casting was sublime, especially the role of Tio Tomas--our heroine Magdalena's great great uncle with whom she comes to live as her Quinceanera celebration approaches--he absolutely is the old guy who for years has sold everyone in the neighborhood some delicious concoction from thermoses in a shopping cart.
See this movie: it's sweet, it's got drama, sex, ambiguity, and humerously unusual culture clashes.
Some cynics will lament the happy ending, or question whether the ending can really be so happy when it embraces a Hummer Limo? I say si, si, a mi me gusto La Quinceanera!
By weaving together the difficulities in a 14 year old girl's life with the realities of gentrification in Echo Parque, Los Angeles, this movie gives us a peak into a tender, bittersweet, but credible situation. The casting was sublime, especially the role of Tio Tomas--our heroine Magdalena's great great uncle with whom she comes to live as her Quinceanera celebration approaches--he absolutely is the old guy who for years has sold everyone in the neighborhood some delicious concoction from thermoses in a shopping cart.
See this movie: it's sweet, it's got drama, sex, ambiguity, and humerously unusual culture clashes.
Some cynics will lament the happy ending, or question whether the ending can really be so happy when it embraces a Hummer Limo? I say si, si, a mi me gusto La Quinceanera!
Thursday, February 08, 2007
Political Consultants Need to Be Reigned In
With it now looking likely that there will be a February presidential primary next year in California (adding a third election to the regular June primary and November general election), our political consultants are beginning the mad feeding frenzy for the cash laid out in any new round of ballot initiatives.
Yes, for some reason our Constitution allows ballot initiatives every time there's an election. These animals called political consultants are completely unregulated and make big money off every dollar contributed to any campaign in the state.
What does the public get in return? In the couple of months before elections: vast amounts of negative television and radio ads in our eyes and ears and voluminous manipulative direct mail pieces in our mail boxes--especially pernicious are the misleading slate mail pieces that endorse all your favorite electeds linking them to the wrong position on a given initiative or two.
And in the slow times? Mystifying full page ads "thanking" Governor Schwarzenegger for his support.
Enough. It's time to regulate these political parasites. I'd suggest taxing political consultants as a great funding source for public financing of elections if it didn't ensure that every political consultant in the state dropped everything to defeat that idea.
Sigh. I gotta go. I have an urgent email to respond to from Ahamed Ahamed--apparently he's got a sick brother and needs my help with a banking matter...
Yes, for some reason our Constitution allows ballot initiatives every time there's an election. These animals called political consultants are completely unregulated and make big money off every dollar contributed to any campaign in the state.
What does the public get in return? In the couple of months before elections: vast amounts of negative television and radio ads in our eyes and ears and voluminous manipulative direct mail pieces in our mail boxes--especially pernicious are the misleading slate mail pieces that endorse all your favorite electeds linking them to the wrong position on a given initiative or two.
And in the slow times? Mystifying full page ads "thanking" Governor Schwarzenegger for his support.
Enough. It's time to regulate these political parasites. I'd suggest taxing political consultants as a great funding source for public financing of elections if it didn't ensure that every political consultant in the state dropped everything to defeat that idea.
Sigh. I gotta go. I have an urgent email to respond to from Ahamed Ahamed--apparently he's got a sick brother and needs my help with a banking matter...
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
All Republicans are saying...
is give General Petreaus a chance. Can't you just picture them holding hands and swaying together?
What they aren't saying, mind you, is support our President. The Republicans in Congress who still support the escalation, are rallying around the new and supposedly highly respected general.
BTW, whenever I think of people holding hands and swaying I can't help but flash to the Brady Bunch's cover of "American Pie"--grinning broadly and belting it out as only the BB's can "and as I saw him on the stage, my hands were clenched in fists of rage..."
What they aren't saying, mind you, is support our President. The Republicans in Congress who still support the escalation, are rallying around the new and supposedly highly respected general.
BTW, whenever I think of people holding hands and swaying I can't help but flash to the Brady Bunch's cover of "American Pie"--grinning broadly and belting it out as only the BB's can "and as I saw him on the stage, my hands were clenched in fists of rage..."
Sunday, February 04, 2007
Diana & Cynthia's Excellent Venture
I am now well acquainted with the Ultimate Hair and Nail Salon at 23rd and J Street in Sacramento. It's owned by Diana, who runs it with her sister, Cynthia. Diana and Cynthia were born in Vietnam, moved to Seattle as teenagers with their families. They put themselves through college and set out to create success for themselves.
Diana moved to Sacramento first, got married, had a baby and bought the Ultimate Hair and Nail Salon, a run down looking business which had operated for some 40 years in what's now a trendy section of Sacramento. She spruced it up a little, not a lot, rented back a station to a haircutter from the old establishment and started pulling in clients.
"It was hard at first," says Diana. "I got a lot of clients and I needed assistance. I hired several people but they say they'd come, and then not come. They were not reliable. They would call in sick. Sometimes not call in at all. I kept asking Cindy, when you gonna move from Seattle? She say maybe next year. Finally, it next year, she came. There's nothing like family, it is so great that she's here."
Diana and Cindy live near each other. They're both married, both have children. Their husbands both work for larger corporations in far flung suburbs. One of them, I forget which, lives with their parents. The parents cook for all of them every night and watch the children while they're away at work.
They are Buddhists, but they always have a Christmas tree. As Cindy put it, "Christmas not really religious. Christmas is about being American. We want to be American, so we have a Christmas tree."
They like me a lot because they can talk me into anything,
"Sara, how about you have an eyebrow wax before your hair cut?" okay
"How about you have a facial?" okay
"How about you bring your daughter in for pedicure?" okay
I pretty much do whatever they tell me to do.
And they do a great job at everything. They keep their appointments. They do great nails, great hair. They charge very little. They never complain. They never run anyone down. They appear to love their work and they resist my efforts to speculate as to the ages of the clients who have been coming to their station renter for 40 plus years ("They good clients. Longtime clients.")
I wouldn't be surprised if I'm coming to Cindy and Diana when I'm 85 too.
Diana moved to Sacramento first, got married, had a baby and bought the Ultimate Hair and Nail Salon, a run down looking business which had operated for some 40 years in what's now a trendy section of Sacramento. She spruced it up a little, not a lot, rented back a station to a haircutter from the old establishment and started pulling in clients.
"It was hard at first," says Diana. "I got a lot of clients and I needed assistance. I hired several people but they say they'd come, and then not come. They were not reliable. They would call in sick. Sometimes not call in at all. I kept asking Cindy, when you gonna move from Seattle? She say maybe next year. Finally, it next year, she came. There's nothing like family, it is so great that she's here."
Diana and Cindy live near each other. They're both married, both have children. Their husbands both work for larger corporations in far flung suburbs. One of them, I forget which, lives with their parents. The parents cook for all of them every night and watch the children while they're away at work.
They are Buddhists, but they always have a Christmas tree. As Cindy put it, "Christmas not really religious. Christmas is about being American. We want to be American, so we have a Christmas tree."
They like me a lot because they can talk me into anything,
"Sara, how about you have an eyebrow wax before your hair cut?" okay
"How about you have a facial?" okay
"How about you bring your daughter in for pedicure?" okay
I pretty much do whatever they tell me to do.
And they do a great job at everything. They keep their appointments. They do great nails, great hair. They charge very little. They never complain. They never run anyone down. They appear to love their work and they resist my efforts to speculate as to the ages of the clients who have been coming to their station renter for 40 plus years ("They good clients. Longtime clients.")
I wouldn't be surprised if I'm coming to Cindy and Diana when I'm 85 too.
Saturday, February 03, 2007
800,000 Privileged Youths Enlist To Fight In Iraq
This is just way too funny--plus mentions my alma mater:
Friday, February 02, 2007
Five Snouts Up for "Groundhog Day" 17 years later
(:)(:)(:)(:)(:) out of a possible five snouts for Groundhog Day the 1993 movie starring Bill Murray and Andie MacDowell. Tonight my kids and I started a new tradition of watching it annually on February 2nd--important because in other respects our Groundhog Day observance went lacking (groundhog is only safe for O blood types to eat and I've discovered I'm an A).
An amazing 17 years after it was made, the movie endures. My 10 and 12 year old love it for its BillMurray silliness and mulitiple suicide attempts--"play the part where he runs off the cliff with the groundhog again!" I love it for its profound spiritual lesson: what do you do when every day is pretty much the same?
Stage one: eat, smoke, drink and fuck everything in sight.
Stage two: try to manipulate the people around you into thinking you're a good person so that you can get what you want
Stage three: attempt suicide
Stage four: accept that now is the only moment you have so make it count--learn to play piano, speak and read French, master brain surgery, ice sculpture, and above all love every single person you meet beyond reason, without expectation, and with true humility.
Then and only then do you get to move on.
I fully expect to be watching and learning from this film in 2024.
An amazing 17 years after it was made, the movie endures. My 10 and 12 year old love it for its BillMurray silliness and mulitiple suicide attempts--"play the part where he runs off the cliff with the groundhog again!" I love it for its profound spiritual lesson: what do you do when every day is pretty much the same?
Stage one: eat, smoke, drink and fuck everything in sight.
Stage two: try to manipulate the people around you into thinking you're a good person so that you can get what you want
Stage three: attempt suicide
Stage four: accept that now is the only moment you have so make it count--learn to play piano, speak and read French, master brain surgery, ice sculpture, and above all love every single person you meet beyond reason, without expectation, and with true humility.
Then and only then do you get to move on.
I fully expect to be watching and learning from this film in 2024.
Thursday, February 01, 2007
I'll Miss Molly Ivins
There's no way I can do justice to Molly Ivins' passing. As a bold, large, sassy, hilarious woman who was one of the most insightful political commentators in the country, she was one of my heros. She was one of those people who just by being herself gave other people permission to be themselves.
She dubbed Bush "dubya" and "shrub," she wrote about the hilarious and horrible happenings on the floor of the Texas "lege."
Go out and buy one of her collections of columns and just savor every word.
She dubbed Bush "dubya" and "shrub," she wrote about the hilarious and horrible happenings on the floor of the Texas "lege."
Go out and buy one of her collections of columns and just savor every word.
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Should I join the movie bloggers?
I have been "discovered" in the blogosphere. That is to say, some program that sweeps around looking for movie bloggers has contacted me to ask me to join "movie bloggers.com" whereby my movie reviews would be co-posted on this site.
At first I was flattered--they like me, they really like me! Then I linked. The good news: the actual reviews posted there are not embarrassing company to keep. The bad news: the ads. 1 ad was for Venezuelan brides, another for bizarre sex aids, another for singletarians (unmarried Unitarians)--do I want to be associated with this?
Tonight, however, I notice that ads have changed to wireless surveillance cameras--an upgrade? Stay tuned...
At first I was flattered--they like me, they really like me! Then I linked. The good news: the actual reviews posted there are not embarrassing company to keep. The bad news: the ads. 1 ad was for Venezuelan brides, another for bizarre sex aids, another for singletarians (unmarried Unitarians)--do I want to be associated with this?
Tonight, however, I notice that ads have changed to wireless surveillance cameras--an upgrade? Stay tuned...
Monday, January 29, 2007
Come Down with Clown Syndrome
My insanely funny and successful friend Russ Haan is at it again. This time, he's trying to spread Clown Syndrome across the land.
Don't check out the website and watch the hilarious uTube videos. If you do, you'll find yourself, like I did, ordering a clown kit, planning to videotape a sequence of yourself in a clown costume, going about your business.
Next time Bill is in a photo op with Arnold, he's wearing the clown suit.
Ask yourself this: what will you do as a clown?
Don't check out the website and watch the hilarious uTube videos. If you do, you'll find yourself, like I did, ordering a clown kit, planning to videotape a sequence of yourself in a clown costume, going about your business.
Next time Bill is in a photo op with Arnold, he's wearing the clown suit.
Ask yourself this: what will you do as a clown?
Saturday, January 27, 2007
Four Snouts up for When the Stars Fall
(:)(:)(:)(:) out of a possible five snouts up for the travelling production of Lacandona or When the Stars Fall which I saw at Cal State Sacramento billed as children's theater. For the most part, this amazing performance art of dance, song and unparalleled computer-graphic scenery went straight over the heads of the fifth graders I was chaperoning.
This production is a road show from Mexico City--possibly coming to a city near you soon, look for it. If you're Katie Laris, don't just look for it, see it. The two performers dance, sing and interact with a series of moving opaque screens which have computer graphics projected on them. Sometimes the performers actually seem to move the things on the screen, throwing things to each other that dart across the screens, arranging the sometimes abstract, sometimes representational objects.
The story is an environmental theme following a trip with mother and daughter through the rain forest, to find out why the stars are falling. Our performance was bilingual, heavily accented English, all songs in Spanish. Some performances are Spanish only. It made me wonder, will constructed, painted sets one day be a thing of the past replaced only by holographic computer projections...
This production is a road show from Mexico City--possibly coming to a city near you soon, look for it. If you're Katie Laris, don't just look for it, see it. The two performers dance, sing and interact with a series of moving opaque screens which have computer graphics projected on them. Sometimes the performers actually seem to move the things on the screen, throwing things to each other that dart across the screens, arranging the sometimes abstract, sometimes representational objects.
The story is an environmental theme following a trip with mother and daughter through the rain forest, to find out why the stars are falling. Our performance was bilingual, heavily accented English, all songs in Spanish. Some performances are Spanish only. It made me wonder, will constructed, painted sets one day be a thing of the past replaced only by holographic computer projections...
Friday, January 26, 2007
Get real about the real estate market
Is it just me, or is ridiculous for people to talk about not selling because of the downturn in the real estate market? I'm talking about people who have owned property in California for years. This is just sillyness.
You don't hold on to your house, when you would otherwise want to sell it, because it's worth 2.8 times what you bought it for instead of 3 times what you bought it for.
I could understand holding off if you bought it for more than you could get for it, or if you bought it predominantly as an investment property and it's not worth your while to convert your investment, but if you bought it to live in and you've lived in it and it's more than doubled in value, in what sense is it a bad decision to sell it now?
The market could theoretically make your property quadruple in value too. Does that mean that you don't sell it at the peak of the market because it's only worth three times what you paid for it?
In 1992 we bought a beautiful row house 7 blocks from the U.S. Capitol for $222,000. In 1997, we sold it at a loss for $212,000 (which for us was the right decision because we needed to get our equity out and had enjoyed living there for 5 years prior to selling). Today, if the woman who bought the house from us for $212,000 in 1997 decided to sell she might only fetch $500,000 for it in the "slow" real estate market of Washington, DC, instead of the $600,000 she could have gotten last year; should she hold off?
Closely related, some of those who do put their houses on the market complain that the property doesn't sell. Why doesn't it sell? Because they they're asking too much for it. If they lowered the price, the homes would sell.
It never ceases to amaze me that people don't understand the fundamental principle of the real estate market: a property is only worth what people will pay for it, nothing more, nothing less. There is no independent concept of "what the property is worth."
You don't hold on to your house, when you would otherwise want to sell it, because it's worth 2.8 times what you bought it for instead of 3 times what you bought it for.
I could understand holding off if you bought it for more than you could get for it, or if you bought it predominantly as an investment property and it's not worth your while to convert your investment, but if you bought it to live in and you've lived in it and it's more than doubled in value, in what sense is it a bad decision to sell it now?
The market could theoretically make your property quadruple in value too. Does that mean that you don't sell it at the peak of the market because it's only worth three times what you paid for it?
In 1992 we bought a beautiful row house 7 blocks from the U.S. Capitol for $222,000. In 1997, we sold it at a loss for $212,000 (which for us was the right decision because we needed to get our equity out and had enjoyed living there for 5 years prior to selling). Today, if the woman who bought the house from us for $212,000 in 1997 decided to sell she might only fetch $500,000 for it in the "slow" real estate market of Washington, DC, instead of the $600,000 she could have gotten last year; should she hold off?
Closely related, some of those who do put their houses on the market complain that the property doesn't sell. Why doesn't it sell? Because they they're asking too much for it. If they lowered the price, the homes would sell.
It never ceases to amaze me that people don't understand the fundamental principle of the real estate market: a property is only worth what people will pay for it, nothing more, nothing less. There is no independent concept of "what the property is worth."
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
3 Snouts up for Curse of the Golden Flower
(:)(:)(:) out of a possible 5 snouts for Curse of the Golden Flower now playing in art houses everywhere.
This film like many directed by Zhang Yimou has everything you would want in a big Chinese epic: Chow Yun Fat, Gong Li, glorious color and costume, insanely improbable fight scenes, jealousy, plots and most of all incestuous royalty.
There is more personal intrigue and less fighting than some of these things, so that held my interest a bit. Also the sheer scale and color is visually arresting, if, like the fighting completely improbable and distracting. Mostly, though, I was bored by it and had trouble caring. If you're going to see it, see it on the big screen. Better yet, stay home and watch the Sopranos on DVD.
Sigh. Should I perhaps stop seeing movies?
This film like many directed by Zhang Yimou has everything you would want in a big Chinese epic: Chow Yun Fat, Gong Li, glorious color and costume, insanely improbable fight scenes, jealousy, plots and most of all incestuous royalty.
There is more personal intrigue and less fighting than some of these things, so that held my interest a bit. Also the sheer scale and color is visually arresting, if, like the fighting completely improbable and distracting. Mostly, though, I was bored by it and had trouble caring. If you're going to see it, see it on the big screen. Better yet, stay home and watch the Sopranos on DVD.
Sigh. Should I perhaps stop seeing movies?
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Three Snouts Up for Syriana on DVD
(:)(:)(:) out of a possible five snouts up for Syriana, executive produced by George Clooney. I was disappointed in this movie.
I expected a sort of freshness and honesty or something shocking or a sort of critical quality that was beyond what I had seen in other Hollywood international suspense movies--didn't get it.
I also expected a level of sophistication and complicated intrigue that went out of fashion a couple of decades ago. You know with the movies that you had to follow really closely to be able to know what was going on--also didn't get it.
What I got was a confusing, and largely not intriguing, set of interlocking plot lines, sprinkled with a heavy dose of didacticism. Rather than keeping me on my toes, no one was taking any chances that I wouldn't grok the interlocking interests of big business, oil, U.S. Government and middle east princes--thanks for the education, Clooney.
I'm sure there are people who learned things about the lengths to which the US government might go to protect American business interests, but I wasn't really one of them.
I'm sure there are people who cared whether the middle eastern princes lived or died, and who succeeded whom, but I wasn't really one of them.
I'm sure there are people who understood why we had to learn so much about the Clooney character's wife and son, the missing missle, Matt Damon's travails (not to mention the virginal pakistani boys) only to have all this information rendered largely if not completely irrelevent in the last few minutes of the film, but I wasn't one of them.
Because of my love for George Clooney, from his politics to the tilt of his head (my neighbor maintains that there is a national network of straight men that are "queer for Clooney"), and an inexplicable Matt Damon fetish, I am granting this DVD one more snout than it may deserve.
Otherwise, I might suggest that you wait for it to come out on toilet paper.
I expected a sort of freshness and honesty or something shocking or a sort of critical quality that was beyond what I had seen in other Hollywood international suspense movies--didn't get it.
I also expected a level of sophistication and complicated intrigue that went out of fashion a couple of decades ago. You know with the movies that you had to follow really closely to be able to know what was going on--also didn't get it.
What I got was a confusing, and largely not intriguing, set of interlocking plot lines, sprinkled with a heavy dose of didacticism. Rather than keeping me on my toes, no one was taking any chances that I wouldn't grok the interlocking interests of big business, oil, U.S. Government and middle east princes--thanks for the education, Clooney.
I'm sure there are people who learned things about the lengths to which the US government might go to protect American business interests, but I wasn't really one of them.
I'm sure there are people who cared whether the middle eastern princes lived or died, and who succeeded whom, but I wasn't really one of them.
I'm sure there are people who understood why we had to learn so much about the Clooney character's wife and son, the missing missle, Matt Damon's travails (not to mention the virginal pakistani boys) only to have all this information rendered largely if not completely irrelevent in the last few minutes of the film, but I wasn't one of them.
Because of my love for George Clooney, from his politics to the tilt of his head (my neighbor maintains that there is a national network of straight men that are "queer for Clooney"), and an inexplicable Matt Damon fetish, I am granting this DVD one more snout than it may deserve.
Otherwise, I might suggest that you wait for it to come out on toilet paper.
Sunday, January 21, 2007
3 Snouts Up for "Freedom Writers"
(:)(:)(:) out of a possible 5 snouts up for Freedom Writers starring Hilary Swank and directed by Richard LaGravanese playing in movie theaters everywhere now.
This is one of those films that is driven entirely by narrative--a great story to tell. It's well-acted and reasonably well-written. Beyond that, it has little to offer as a movie. It's predictable as hell. It seems to have had the budget of an ABC after school special (although Hilary Swank executive produced or I'm guessing it wouldn't have gotten made, and it obviously had a decent promotional budget).
Nonetheless, I am such a sucker for the spunky dedicated school teacher who takes a bunch of ne'er do well kids and inspires them story. And this story, being true, and being told in a way that genuinely makes you truly care about these kids, is really worth seeing.
I cried...several times...something I rarely do in movies (but often in weddings).
This is one of those films that is driven entirely by narrative--a great story to tell. It's well-acted and reasonably well-written. Beyond that, it has little to offer as a movie. It's predictable as hell. It seems to have had the budget of an ABC after school special (although Hilary Swank executive produced or I'm guessing it wouldn't have gotten made, and it obviously had a decent promotional budget).
Nonetheless, I am such a sucker for the spunky dedicated school teacher who takes a bunch of ne'er do well kids and inspires them story. And this story, being true, and being told in a way that genuinely makes you truly care about these kids, is really worth seeing.
I cried...several times...something I rarely do in movies (but often in weddings).
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Mundane prediction
Someday when newspapers and newsprint are obsolete, someone will manufacture wrapping paper made to look like retro newspaper wrapping paper.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Unclear on the Concept
Well, my "raw" posting the other day occasioned a lot of concern. And while I am grateful for everyone's thoughts. I feel the need to explain. I intend to write on my blog at least 5 days a week, preferably every day. I never promised that the content wouldn't ever reflect my true feelings. So, on days that I'm feeling sad (and that's all it was, just sad, but in a raw, skin stripped off kind of sad), I'll write about it.
Today I'm not sad. Today I'm happy and my skin is on. I'm also still laughing over last night's daily show with phone-in guests: Leonard Nimoy and George Takei--hilarious!
Today I'm not sad. Today I'm happy and my skin is on. I'm also still laughing over last night's daily show with phone-in guests: Leonard Nimoy and George Takei--hilarious!
Saturday, January 13, 2007
A Reckoning Deferred?
Thanks to the many friends who called and emailed me love and concern after my raw posting yesterday--truly lovely to know that people out there care--I'm doing better today principally by looking at the many things for which I have to be grateful.
Nothing to distract from one's own misery like focussing on world affairs. One friend, Steve Engelmann, directed me to this commentary from the editors of Middle East Report in Middle East Report Online. It's better than anything I've read in terms of looking at the congressional Democrats' relatively weak reaction to Bush's outrageous troop increase proposal.
Nothing to distract from one's own misery like focussing on world affairs. One friend, Steve Engelmann, directed me to this commentary from the editors of Middle East Report in Middle East Report Online. It's better than anything I've read in terms of looking at the congressional Democrats' relatively weak reaction to Bush's outrageous troop increase proposal.
Friday, January 12, 2007
No pain, no gain?
Today I am struggling, walking around without skin, raw nerve-endings exposed to the world. The good news is that this is what I signed up for. I have consciously called forth seeing myself clearly. Some days this is what it looks like. The bad news is this is what I signed up for--what could I have been thinking? When I will cease to struggle against the sides of the cocoon? When will my wings by fully formed? Does it really have to be this hard? Didn't someone once ask me, "would it be okay if life got easier?" Yes!!!!!!!!
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Dina's Diary--a breast cancer survivor
My friend Dina Howard survived a harrowing year of breast cancer last year. She documented much of it on sophisticated audio equipment borrowed from our local public radio station. The station ended up boiling it down to a powerful hour which they broadcast called "Dina's Diary."
You can hear it by clicking on the above link and clicking on Dina's face. I cannot believe the courage she had to record what was going on for her on some of her very worst days. I can barely function on my worst days and I'm not being poisoned, cut and burned.
You can hear it by clicking on the above link and clicking on Dina's face. I cannot believe the courage she had to record what was going on for her on some of her very worst days. I can barely function on my worst days and I'm not being poisoned, cut and burned.
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
Unconventional Mango
Today, at Whole Foods, I noticed a sign outside advertising "conventional mangos." I toyed with asking where they keep the unconventional mangos. Wouldn't that be frightening?
I already have enough trouble with mangos, their overly fragrant selves covered with an inedible skin to which my friend Katie is deadly allergic.
How the heck are you supposed to eat them anyway? Someone is always answering this question for me, snatching a mango out of our fruit bowl and deftly scoring it in such a way that it falls into a bowl in neat cubes ready to be consumed as mango sal-sa.
But when I work with mango, it starts with a crude peeling, followed by liberating random, unappealing chunks of slimey fruit and wasting half of it. Thankfully my kids slurp it up anyway, loving every morsel.
So I could never dare ask for an unconventional mango.
I'm this close already to being banned from various health food stores for walking up to managers and asking where they keep the bulk organic free range diet coke.
I already have enough trouble with mangos, their overly fragrant selves covered with an inedible skin to which my friend Katie is deadly allergic.
How the heck are you supposed to eat them anyway? Someone is always answering this question for me, snatching a mango out of our fruit bowl and deftly scoring it in such a way that it falls into a bowl in neat cubes ready to be consumed as mango sal-sa.
But when I work with mango, it starts with a crude peeling, followed by liberating random, unappealing chunks of slimey fruit and wasting half of it. Thankfully my kids slurp it up anyway, loving every morsel.
So I could never dare ask for an unconventional mango.
I'm this close already to being banned from various health food stores for walking up to managers and asking where they keep the bulk organic free range diet coke.
Monday, January 08, 2007
The Governor's got Weintraub all to himself
In yesterday's Sacramento Bee, Dan Weintraub got it right when he wrote "the Governor's got the political center all to himself." The piece pointed out important truths often forgotten in the California legislature, namely that while registered Republicans in California (i.e., real people) overwhelmingly support such issues as protecting the environment and raising the minimum wage, the corporately-funded Republicans in the legislature uniformly don't. Most Democrats stay to the left.
The Governor then, whose inaugural speech called for "post-partisanship," is alone among California state elected officials in staking out the territory of the political middle.
The only thing that makes it less lonely for him is Weintraub, who has slavishly clung to the idea of this Governor as a centrist even when the Governor himself temporarily strayed. In many respects, Weintraub has been the Governor's most steadfast supporter, putting Maria to shame.
The Governor then, whose inaugural speech called for "post-partisanship," is alone among California state elected officials in staking out the territory of the political middle.
The only thing that makes it less lonely for him is Weintraub, who has slavishly clung to the idea of this Governor as a centrist even when the Governor himself temporarily strayed. In many respects, Weintraub has been the Governor's most steadfast supporter, putting Maria to shame.
Sunday, January 07, 2007
One Snout Up for Troy on DVD
(:) out of a possible five snouts for Troy on DVD. For some reason something I read or heard made me think that this might actually be a good or at least enjoyable flick (I initially wrote "film" but that ain't it). So, despite having avoided His Pittness for years (as far as I'm concerned, it's all been downhill since the ass shots in Thelma & Louise), I gave it a try.
Troy has been backing up my Netflix queue since early December when Bill and I stomached an hour of it and then couldn't go further. I was all for mailing it back but thought that Bill might watch the rest. Tonight we read and answered our email while the rest of it played to the finish. To detail why it is bad would give it more than its due.
Troy's only possible redemption, and even this is a stretch, is as a college drinking game where you get to throw back a shot each time someone says something like "the name Achilles will live on through the ages," or "long after you are gone, the battle of Troy will live on." There's no question one would get good and drunk playing it, but would you ever get sloshed enough to enjoy the tedium of the endless battles and uninspiring love scenes it serves up?
Not possible. Long after the battle of Troy has been forgotten, the movie Troy will live on on the list of worst movies ever watched by Snichols.
Troy has been backing up my Netflix queue since early December when Bill and I stomached an hour of it and then couldn't go further. I was all for mailing it back but thought that Bill might watch the rest. Tonight we read and answered our email while the rest of it played to the finish. To detail why it is bad would give it more than its due.
Troy's only possible redemption, and even this is a stretch, is as a college drinking game where you get to throw back a shot each time someone says something like "the name Achilles will live on through the ages," or "long after you are gone, the battle of Troy will live on." There's no question one would get good and drunk playing it, but would you ever get sloshed enough to enjoy the tedium of the endless battles and uninspiring love scenes it serves up?
Not possible. Long after the battle of Troy has been forgotten, the movie Troy will live on on the list of worst movies ever watched by Snichols.
Saturday, January 06, 2007
Four Snouts up for The History Boys
I proudly join the North American Man Boy Love Association in giving (:)(:)(:)(:) out of a possible five snouts up for The History Boys, a film version of a successful British play.
The film, set in 1983 (with the soundtrack to prove it) focusses on an uncommonly bright and gorgeous group of working class boys who have aced their A levels and are madly prepping for their essay/interviews for top universities. Their odd brilliant teachers, who look as if they'd be more at home at the Hogwarts Academy of Witchcraft and Wizardry, work hard to teach the boys what they'll need to know to gain acceptance at Oxbridge.
The film is well-written, sweetly acted and entirely believable. If you're in the mood for a sweet and disarmingly homoerotic look at pedophilia, poetry and prose, Bob's your uncle (or, more accurately, Bob's your 12th grade history teacher), The History Boys is just the thing, innit?
Let's face it, NAMBLA would give it five snouts.
The film, set in 1983 (with the soundtrack to prove it) focusses on an uncommonly bright and gorgeous group of working class boys who have aced their A levels and are madly prepping for their essay/interviews for top universities. Their odd brilliant teachers, who look as if they'd be more at home at the Hogwarts Academy of Witchcraft and Wizardry, work hard to teach the boys what they'll need to know to gain acceptance at Oxbridge.
The film is well-written, sweetly acted and entirely believable. If you're in the mood for a sweet and disarmingly homoerotic look at pedophilia, poetry and prose, Bob's your uncle (or, more accurately, Bob's your 12th grade history teacher), The History Boys is just the thing, innit?
Let's face it, NAMBLA would give it five snouts.
Thursday, January 04, 2007
Three Snouts Up for Outsourced
(:)(:)(:) out of a possible five for the new movie Outsourced starring a promising Josh Hamilton (and delightful co-star Ayesha Dharker) and directed by John Jeffcoat of Seattle. The movie is about a man who is obliged to go to India to train his own replacement to manage a call center selling cheap Americana objects, in the process, blah blah blah blah. I saw it tonight at the opening night of the 2007 Palm Springs film festival.
It's entertaining, well-acted, visually fun and humorous, but it's an utterly predictable plot. Bill thinks the film may do very well precisely because it's formulaic yet set in India--somewhat ironic that the film clearly outsources most of its production efforts to get made. Despite the implication of the title and subject matter, the film has no real social message to convey.
I'd recommend it for a family-friendly fun film that feels as if you're being adventuresome by watching it, when you really aren't.
It's entertaining, well-acted, visually fun and humorous, but it's an utterly predictable plot. Bill thinks the film may do very well precisely because it's formulaic yet set in India--somewhat ironic that the film clearly outsources most of its production efforts to get made. Despite the implication of the title and subject matter, the film has no real social message to convey.
I'd recommend it for a family-friendly fun film that feels as if you're being adventuresome by watching it, when you really aren't.
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Oh to be easy in the harness
Driving with a decaf soy latte through the fuchsia orange sunrise of Palm Springs brought me this gem at my morning meeting:
"You have freedom when you're easy in the harness" said Robert Frost
This week I have felt uneasy in my harness. I have longed for different constraints, trying on imaginary yokes of different colors and styles. So for none of them have fit as well; I have chafed at their possibilities.
So today I'll stay in this harness and just be happy that I have a stable to which I can return and be fed.
"You have freedom when you're easy in the harness" said Robert Frost
This week I have felt uneasy in my harness. I have longed for different constraints, trying on imaginary yokes of different colors and styles. So for none of them have fit as well; I have chafed at their possibilities.
So today I'll stay in this harness and just be happy that I have a stable to which I can return and be fed.
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
Did we really need an additional federal holiday today?
Don't get me wrong, I revere Gerald Ford as much as the next person (I'm in Palm Springs now for crying out loud, what more can I do to show my respect?), but did we really need Congress to declare an additional random federal holiday today? I needed to go to the post office today is the main reason I noticed this, but here's the thing:
There wasn't a special federal holiday for Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon or Lyndon Johnson. Will there be one for Jimmy Carter, George I or Bill Clinton? Probably. Now that it's been done once, everyone will read this blog and clamor for it. Oh well.
There wasn't a special federal holiday for Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon or Lyndon Johnson. Will there be one for Jimmy Carter, George I or Bill Clinton? Probably. Now that it's been done once, everyone will read this blog and clamor for it. Oh well.
Monday, January 01, 2007
No resolutions for me
I realized the other day: another new year is upon me, and I don't have a big long list of improvements to resolve to implement. Why? Because every of day of my life is fucking new year's day.
I don't get it Sara, are bitter about this, or pleased? Are you bragging, or whining?
Answer: yes.
I am a pleasantly bitter whine, with just a hint of bragadocio.
Every day, for over a year and half, I have gotten up each morning and resolved to be open to what the world is coaching me to do. And then, and this is the hardest part, to do it.
This has meant starting every day by praying, meditating, writing, reading, exercising, and working diligently for thinner thighs. Then it's morning again and I start over.
So why should today be any different?
I don't get it Sara, are bitter about this, or pleased? Are you bragging, or whining?
Answer: yes.
I am a pleasantly bitter whine, with just a hint of bragadocio.
Every day, for over a year and half, I have gotten up each morning and resolved to be open to what the world is coaching me to do. And then, and this is the hardest part, to do it.
This has meant starting every day by praying, meditating, writing, reading, exercising, and working diligently for thinner thighs. Then it's morning again and I start over.
So why should today be any different?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)