In a very W.-esque assertion of "Trust Us: Father Knows Best," the McCain campaign -- or is it the RNC machine? I can't tell the difference anymore -- insists that it is not our place, we citizens of the democracy that He Puts First, to ask questions about Mrs. Palin's background and record. Somehow we're supposed to interview her for the position of second-in-command, but without probing into what she's been up to the last six years.
It's as if, because McCain assures us she was vetted for the choice -- even that is debatable -- we should just take it, shut up, and enjoy her turn as snarky celebrity venomist of the moment.
But it keeps coming up in conversation in my life, so I'm collecting links I liked or mentioned here:
** On the topic of what is "fair" to discuss about Palin, we have a rumination in the Washington Post about what GOP attack dogs would say was "fair" if it were Hillary Clinton in her shoes. We remember the '90s (not to mention her campaign this year), yes we do.
** Frank Rich, per usual, loaded his weekender with helpful background links on Palin, the double-talk of the campaign to deflect inquiries about her, and the "process" McCain used to choose her (the Party reactionaries simply wouldn't accept a pro-choicer from their self-appointed "maverick");
** Amusingly, a woman from the town of then-5,700 Palin mayored wrote a letter to friends that has now been shared everywhere, detailing one resident's view of what our would-be second-in-command's actions and policies are, versus what she said on the stump. NPR had a fun interview with the woman, bewildered that her dial-up email to old college friends now has her fielding calls from around the world.
** I'd been waiting on a piece like this: interviews with parents of children with special-needs on their reaction to her pandering to them in her speech. You now have an "advocate in the White House," she pledged. In the days that followed, of course, her spokespeople would not divulge what this advocacy would entail. Leveraging the stress and emotions of parents of the disabled may be one of the lowest forms of pandering; if she were to get into office and not back that up with tangible efforts on their behalf, she'd be earning a volcano of bad karma. Interesting that helping people like this is an example of the kind of community support -- pooling our resources to help disadvantaged people who could just as well be us, had fate been different -- that Obama pushes for but Palin otherwise dismisses.
** More in the realm of reality-turned-upside-down from Bob Herbert. And my favorite, from Paul Krugman -- who typically focuses on the economic side of things -- on the bizarre Orwellian juxtaposition of the RNC convention rich men rallying their base by channeling resentment toward the fabled "elites." Ah, it's rich.
I have some hope that Obama is our last chance at reversing the direction of politics to focus on something somewhat substantive. The challenge, as always, is turning substantive policy discussion into words that are not drowned out by knee-jerk, cynical appeals to patriotism, fear and controversy (his opposing party's specialty). He's even clarified and admitted regret over past statements in introspective ways that will surely be turned against him. If he were up against a candidate that had more fervent support from the GOP base, I doubt it would work. Even now, I fear it won't. But it's worth a shot.
And after days of tiptoeing around Palin, Obama even took his first direct swipe at the Alaska governor: “I know the governor of Alaska has been, you know, saying she is change,” Obama said at a town hall here. “But when you [have] been taking all these earmarks when it is convenient and then suddenly you are the champion anti-earmark person. That is not change, come on.
I mean, words mean something. You can’t just make stuff up.”
Oh yes you can. From Swift Boating to "I said no thanks to the Bridge to Nowhere," they do it all the time.
I have been chided by a long-distance follower to update or finish this spring's deck/sunroom story. I never updated the in-construction photos with "after" photos, even though we've been enjoying the addition all summer.
So here are the updated pics (they're on a new page) ... Now that I think of it, I guess I don't have a finished outside photo. Ack, that's just as well; we seem to have reached a decision-by-exhaustion to leave the landscaping and touch-ups for later ... or "next year" ... or something.
Actually, there is talk of window treatments, about which I am unenthusiastic. It makes sense in the end, but really I enjoy the room for its openness. When there's nothing to look at or take in through the windows, I go elsewhere anyway. So maybe, in true legislative style, I will try to tie a Landscaping amendment to the Treat Our Windows Now bill (known as the "T.O.W.N. USA" bill) that's currently awaiting a vote. That amendment would effectively sabotage the bill's passage until at least the next term.
Problem is, I'm the minority party here. I don't have the gavel, or a committee chairmanship. All I have is access to the intelligence data on window treatments. But the other side has access to the funds. And she knows people. If her party wants window treatments, she can make it happen with one phone call.
This summer, driving through ... somewhere between here and Appalachia, I was at a fast-food restaurant and ordered a drink with my meal. Accustomed to the time-saving DIY setup of fast-food fountain soda now, I just said "and a medium soda."
The cashier asked something that I didn't understand or hear right, so I had to ask her to repeat herself. Twice. Between the first and second repetition, a flush of mild embarrassment washed over me: "Wait, where are we and what do they call carbonated sugar drink here?" I thought. "What word did I use?"
Turns out it was just her accent. She just asked "What kind?" because at this burger joint they actually fill the cup for you (and keep refills closely regulated behind the counter).
But it reminded me of a map and study I saw, which is now replicated here, showing the regional differences in how we call pop, soda, sodie, coke, etc. I remember seeing an explanation/theory once about why we're an island of "soda" surrounded by "pop" and "coke," but I can't find it now.
I love, too, that this is the single-most reader-submitted map to that strange-maps site. We take our soda seriously, man.
As you may have noticed, the site has changed. Sampa, the free-site host, did a version 2 of some sort.
Despite an FAQ that made it sound like allowing one's site to go through v.2 surgery would be okay, there were several flexibilities that surprisingly disappeared with the click of a button. (e.g. I cannot believe sidebars like this one are even narrower than before.)
And I'm told -- miraculously! -- that the conversion cannot be undone. Truth be told, I'm actually quite pissed. But free is free. Sampa has otherwise been good to me.
So I need to sort through site "features" to see how I can make do. Except that I don't have the time at the moment, in the middle of graduate classes and Lighthousehockey.com. (btw, I've removed that Lighthouse RSS feed so that you're not clogged with random Islanders hockey gibberish).
But I promise to touch up the accessories when I get a chance, and return to irregularly scheduled blogging.
Subscribe to this Site
, and enjoy her turn as snarky celebrity venomist of the moment.
February, 2008