I was just watching an old rerun of Law & Order, and the detective said that a suspect had an "arsenal registered in his name." Turns out he had five guns. An arsenal! Shoot, they should meet some of the people we know. One of my husband's buddies used his entire PCS weight allowance for ammunition. No joke. Five firearms is nothing.

Posted by: Sarah at 07:18 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 74 words, total size 1 kb.

The Girl sent me a depressing study called Still At Risk: What Students Don't Know, Even Now. Seventeen year olds were asked basic questions about history and literature; guess how they fared.

What I thought was quite interesting was that the questions the students did best on were the "I Have a Dream" speech and Uncle Tom's Cabin. So Black History Month is achieving its goals. But I think we need a White History Month to even things out, since only 74% of kids knew which century Columbus sailed to the New World and only 52% knew what the book 1984 was about (apparently 18% thought it was about time travel, backwards!) Kids don't know what JFK said in his speeches, but they know what MLK said.

My kids are going to have to read, at gunpoint if necessary.

Posted by: Sarah at 04:14 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 151 words, total size 1 kb.

1 My kids (except the 5 year old, who can identify Lincoln, Washington, Roosevelt (both), and the current President Bush know this stuff. Sonlight. Seriously. Even if you don't homeschool, the reading list is PRICELESS. All the books kids should read excepting Little House on the Prairie and Anne of Green Gables. And my girls and my boy love the list. Best thing we ever bought.

Posted by: airforcewife at February 29, 2008 07:00 AM (mIbWn)

2 Have you seen this... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juOQhTuzDQ0 My 7 AND 5 year olds knew the answer to that question. How sad. What makes me the most upset is that she thinks it's cute...shouldn't she be embarrassed?

Posted by: Angie at February 29, 2008 11:06 AM (BJEkk)

3 I was watching something about this on the news the other night. And while I think it's sad that kids today don't know a lot of the stuff that I still remember from school, one guy pointed out that kids today don't need to know this stuff - they can just google it if need be. Today, education is aimed more at analyzing reading material rather than memorizing dates and names. He had a point, I think. But then again, kids should have at least a vague idea about when the Civil War occured.

Posted by: Erin at March 01, 2008 01:43 PM (y67l2)

4 Ronin loves learning about history and the presidents (especially the ones who have been assasinated--it's his obsession with death). Have you ever watched the cartoon Time Warp Trio? It's kind of fun

Posted by: Kate at March 03, 2008 01:10 PM (JIGe1)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

My husband and I both want a boy. We want a boy really badly. We always have imagined ourselves with a son. And so we laugh that when we finally, finally get pregnant again someday, we will probably definitely have a girl. Such has been our humbling experience with conception woes.

But no matter how much I'd like to have a boy, now that we've worked so hard to have a baby, any baby, this article -- "Sexual Satisfaction: Abortion and your right to accurate sex selection" -- makes me sick. There are so many people out there who would give anything to have a baby, boy or girl, and others are aborting because some stick they peed on gave them pink instead of blue? Some dubiously accurate stick at that? And then they're suing the company because they had a girl instead of a boy.

People never cease to horrify me.

Posted by: Sarah at 05:34 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 164 words, total size 1 kb.

I just finished reading the book Assassination Vacation. I have never encountered a book that I so thoroughly loved and hated simultaneously.

Some of the negative reviews on Amazon say that Sarah Vowell's writing is self-absorbed. As a blogger, heh, I live self-absorbed. I assume that people are going to want to listen to my talk of knitted monkey toes and reproductive health. So that didn't bother me at all; I found her voice charming and her style to be engaging. I also loved learning about the Lincoln, Garfield, and McKinley assassinations. There were so many great tidbits in this book, and I came away knowing a lot more about the life and death of those three presidents. I also learned touching info like the fact that Ida McKinley sewed a picture of her dead husband into her knitting bag, a bag which is on display in the McKinley museum in Canton, Ohio. Now that I can relate to, that brought Ida McKinley to life for me.

I loved this book, save for the fact that Sarah Vowell has the worst case of Bush Derangement Syndrome I've seen in a long time. She can't talk about any of these assassinations without mentioning Guantanamo Bay, Rumsfeld, Abu Ghraib, etc. These tangential rants were a huge distraction in an otherwise charming book. And I mean a huge distraction. She starts out the book by sympathizing with the assassins themselves because she hates Bush so much, but quickly says that she doesn't want Bush assassinated because that would turn him into a saint. My lord. She also manages to claim that these three assassinated presidents pretty much got what was coming to them because they were Republicans. No word on JFK though.

I mean, seriously, what are you supposed to do when you come across the idea that the author feels sorry for Bill Brady but not for Ronald Reagan? Ouch.

The book could've been the perfect story of one woman's obsession with following in the footsteps of slain presidents, visiting the historical sites and marveling at the relics. Instead she turns a perfectly good book into a dated rant about the Iraq war. She made her own book irrelevant by forever linking it to 2004. It's her right to ruin her book like that, but dang. Does anyone really want to hear her liken Teddy Roosevelt to Paul Wolfowitz? Or compare Dr. Mudd's prison sentence to Gitmo? Sheesh, give it a rest.

So I don't know what I think of this book. I loved the pages where she managed to restrict her thoughts to the 19th century. But when she wandered, boy howdy did she wander. Blech.

Posted by: Sarah at 05:55 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 451 words, total size 3 kb.

I had a black roommate in college who would not walk across campus alone for fear of being lynched. One time I invited her and her boyfriend to a party, and afterwards she raved about how nice and accepting my friends were. She said she was surprised she felt so welcomed among the white kids, as if she expected the record to skip and the whole room to stop and stare when she walked in. I said that it really wasn't that big of a deal to the people I know. And that's when she revealed that the converse was not true: "There's no way I could take you to one of my parties because the black students simply would not accept you." Nice.

I knew an Eastern European foreign exchange student who thought he identified with black American culture more than white American culture, so he wanted to hang out with the black students. The first time he tried to go to a black party, they rudely asked him to leave. You have to admire his persistence though; he continued to attend their parties for weeks, being ostracized each time. Finally, a girl who was in one of his classes came up to him at his fifth or sixth party and asked him why in the heck he kept coming back when it was obvious he didn't belong. After many weeks of "proving himself," he finally made some headway, and the black students would say hello on campus and talk to him as if he were a friend.

I know these are just anecdotes, but my experience on a very predominantly white campus was that the black students self-segregated and imagined that they were being oppressed. No one even noticed when my roommate showed up at our "white" party. It was no big deal for me to include her, but she'd be going out on a major limb to bring me into her world. That's not the white students' fault; that's the black students' fault for closing themselves off.

I was reminded of these experiences when I read about Michelle Obama's thesis on race relations (via LGF).

"My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my 'blackness' than ever before," the future Mrs. Obama wrote in her thesis introduction. "I have found that at Princeton, no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my white professors and classmates try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as if I really don't belong. Regardless of the circumstances underwhich I interact with whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be black first and a student second."

I can't speak for Princeton in the 80s, but this was certainly not the case at my school in 1999. And I wonder if my old roommate ever learned to relax around people, all people of all colors, and just be herself. I hope to goodness she doesn't still think she's going to get lynched.

This part of Peggy Noonan's editorial stuck with me too:

Michelle Obama seems keenly aware of her struggles, of what it took to rise so high as a black woman in a white country. Fair enough. But I have wondered if it is hard for young African-Americans of her generation, having been drilled in America's sad racial history, having been told about it every day of their lives, to fully apprehend the struggles of others. I wonder if she knows that some people look at her and think "Man, she got it all." Intelligent, strong, tall, beautiful, Princeton, Harvard, black at a time when America was trying to make up for its sins and be helpful, and from a working-class family with two functioning parents who made sure she got to school.

If Michelle Obama doesn't realize that she made it, that her life is not one "on the periphery," well, that's a damn shame. But it's not white people's fault.

Posted by: Sarah at 04:51 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 671 words, total size 4 kb.

From the comments section of a Dr. Helen post:

I think the problem is that young men come to the realization that they are not really needed. Boys grow up instinctively wanting to be heroes, but the irony is that successive generations of male heroics have made the world safe enough that women no longer need heroes in their lives; they want "partners." It comes out sounding more like a business proposition, and a rather bland one at that.

My husband is the man of the house. He lifts the heavy things, handles the money, deals with car maintenance, watches baseball, and drinks beer. He also goes to war. He doesn't cry and he doesn't complain about having to work so hard. He is my hero, and I chose him because he is a man's man. I most certainly do need heroes like him in my life.

Sorry, but reading Dr. Helen's columns and comments is a depressing activity. I felt the need to defend my husband after all that reading.

Posted by: Sarah at 04:35 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 181 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Hmm.... they must not meet many people in the military, huh? I consider my husband to be my hero, too.

Posted by: Ann M. at February 23, 2008 07:17 AM (HFUBt)

2 As you may or may not remember, I married my husband after I was convinced that, if a nuclear bomb went off and we had to live in an abandoned house or cave with our food, that he could kill anyone trying to kill me or take the food without a qualm. Hmm, no partner here, either, baby! I will survive! (He's also pretty good with the tool set and managing mutual funds, so he's the total package. And military! We're lucky women, ladies.)

Posted by: Oda Mae at February 23, 2008 08:04 AM (zqqb6)

3 Well, I handle the finances. and I have moved myself, so I'm darn sure that I know I can heavy lift if I NEED to. Like, if the world is ending or something and all that will save us is airforcewife moving that refrigerator ten feet on a dolly. But the point is that AFG does the heavy lifting here, too. And not because I'm some incapable, sheltered woman unable to care for myself, but because I like to watch him get all sweaty and have his muscles sticking out. And it makes my life a LOT easier that way. I LIKE cooking. I don't like diagnosing whatever's wrong with my minivan. I don't even like having a minivan. So the husband does that. He also puts my software on the computer, doctored my hurt toe this morning with his medic kit (very cool, that), and is teaching me krav maga. I know, I'm preaching to the choir here. But there is a reason that men evolved to do "manly" things. And I'm so darn glad that I have a manly husband! And with such a pushy, bossy wife, my husband has to be extra manly. Rowwrrrr!

Posted by: airforcewife at February 23, 2008 09:28 AM (mIbWn)

4 You know, I have to add that I really can't stand the people who hear how we've chosen to divide labor in my house and make comments about how I must be "held back" or something. Have these people never met me? Right. Spend an evening with AFG and AFW and then tell me I'm being kept down and marginalized. Psshw.

Posted by: airforcewife at February 23, 2008 09:31 AM (mIbWn)

5 Yes, when the shize hits the fan, I want Hubs there to perform all his heroics. I will say, however, that when the man runs the Dyson, empties the dishwasher, does some laundry or handles a child's needs...well, I find that pretty heroic too b/c it means that is one thing off my plate. Very sexy.

Posted by: Guard Wife at February 23, 2008 12:25 PM (BslEQ)

6 My dad often complains about the emasculation of men on most popular TV shows these days – they're portrayed as idiots living in the shadow of these powerful, all-knowing, longsuffering women, and it drives him crazy! He speculated one day as to whether that kind of mindset in society drives more young men to the military, so they can do more "manly" things (he spent 23 years in the Navy before the politics drove him out). It makes sense – my husband got tired of the rat race after being laid off for the third time in as many years and enlisted – and has never been happier with his job, even though he spends more time at a desk now than he used to as a computer tech. Unfortunately, he won't kill spiders for me anymore. It has something to do with me having my own shotgun and an orange belt in Shaolin Kempo, and his belief that any of his targets should be at 300 meters (feet?) or more . . . But he always opens my door for me and will do the dishes and vacuuming if I ask him to, so I guess I can let that slide. He's a manly-man to me, and I would NEVER do anything to let him forget it.

Posted by: deltasierra at February 24, 2008 07:11 PM (7uphd)

7 My name is Sig, and I fully endorse the preceding message. Sig

Posted by: Sig at February 25, 2008 06:24 AM (815Xj)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Along with registering my gripes with travel, I hereby register my gripes with Doing Stuff. Apparently a completely fulfilling life of staying in your cozy home watching movies that have been deposited in your mailbox is "uncool." We have to Go Somewhere and Do Stuff in order to be having A Good Time.

Lileks, of course:

But in the great middle expanse of your life, you not only want to spread out, you want to be left alone, and this is taking on the characteristic of an anti-social sentiment. You should be walking around the dense neighborhood window-shopping and eating at small fusion restaurants. You should be engaged. If you want to watch a quality foreign film, good, but you should not watch it home; you should walk down to the corner theater and see it in a room full of other people, and nevermind that the start time is inconvenient and you canÂ’t pause it to go pee and the fellow in the row behind you is aerating the atmosphere with tubercular sputum. This is how they do things in New York.

Apparently there's a movie theater in town where you can see a movie over dinner and drinks; you sit at tables and they serve you food while the movie is playing. Or something like that, I've never been. But another hip young couple here is always telling us that we should be Doing Things like going to this innovative movie theater, or schlepping to the big city to go out to dinner, or heading to the beach to surf, or doing yoga, or whatever else they do with all their free time. People look at us like we're freaks when we say we've never been to the big city that's an hour away, that we've never been to the beach, that we don't eat out in restaurants. Apparently we'd have "so much fun, and it'd be romantic too" spending fifty bucks for a dinner I can make at home. And what knitter wants to watch a movie whilst eating food? Movies were invented to help knitters feel less idle; I've gotten good enough that I can watch a movie with subtitles while knitting from a chart, but I still can't do much in the darkness of a movie theater. And certainly not with a plate of food in front of me.

Nevermind that we own French, Swedish, Korean, and Serbian movies and have animated discussions about Obama and deficit spending over our homecooked meals; life is not fulfilling unless you leave the house. The looks I get from people my age indicated that we're simply not cool if we don't Go Do Things.

Call me uncool then.

Posted by: Sarah at 09:53 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 456 words, total size 3 kb.

My husband saw Castro's face on Drudge this morning, adorned with the phrase "The End," and got super-excited for cake. Sadly, there is no baking yet for Castro. But just you wait.

Past delicious cakes include:
Saddam's broken neck
Zarqawi in smithereens
Milosevic burns in hell
Bush wins and Arafat croaks
Saddam being dragged from that nasty hole
Uday and Qsay get what's coming to 'em (before I blogged)

Posted by: Sarah at 06:24 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 77 words, total size 1 kb.

From an interview with Tyler Cowen:

My colleague and co-blogger Alex Tabarrok makes an interesting point. If you knew your life were much shorter you would travel to those places you always wanted to see. If you knew your life were to be much longer you would have more time to travel; again you would travel more. So, are you trying to tell me that your expected lifespan is just at that length where you shouldn't travel more? I don't buy it.

In case I haven't solidified my weirdo credentials enough on this blog, I will add more fuel to the fire: I don't really like to travel, and I'm not convinced I'd do more of it if my life were shorter or longer.

Maybe I'm just traveled out; I have been a lot of places. Or maybe I don't like the opportunity costs; I seemed just fine with travel when my parents or my college scholarship were footing the bill. I traveled the world on someone else's dime with nary a peep. But now that it's my money where my mouth is, it's suddenly not so important. I am sure that if we ever have kids, it will become more important to us, to help them see the world. It might be worth the cost then. But for now, we are oh-so-content to spend free moments in our own house.

There's no place like home, right?

I've also never been able to let go of something Paul Theroux said, that "travel is an expensive kind of laziness." You take pictures of stuff you know nothing about, just so you can show other people that you've been somewhere cool. And then speak with authority about the place. God, I hate the authority in travelers' voices. Spending the weekend in Venice does not mean you understand Italians or their way of life. I lived with a Swedish family for two and a half months, and all I can really say is that I understand that particular Swedish family. I don't delude myself that I now grok what it is to be Swedish.

I also know that one bad experience (or conversely, one good one) can change the way you feel about an entire country. I hated every aspect about living in France, but I'm self-aware enough to know that I lived a series of unfortunate events that molded my opinion. If I'd lived somewhere else with different people, like my distant relatives, I might view the entire country differently, and I probably would've continued my French career path. My bad experiences in France contributed enormously to who I am today: I discovered anti-Americanism and spent months defending my country to prejudiced Europeans. The irony is that I wouldn't be as American as I am today if I hadn't spent time in other countries, arguing why the United States is not the Great Satan.

The thing about this "expensive kind of laziness" is that travel is emotional while educating yourself is dry. My feelings about France are gut not brain, and quite separate from any knowledge I gained in my ten years of French study. My husband has never been to Iran, but I'd wager he knows more about Iranian history than many Iranians do. Because he reads books and learns facts. Sure, he doesn't have the glossy tourist photos to prove he knows Iran, but ask him about the Iranian Revolution and he starts a hundred years ago with names and dates. That's more valuable than a picture of us smiling in Tehran ever could be.

All in all, I think travel is overrated as a means of learning about the world. If you want to go see some place that you've studied and explored intellectually, I think that's fabulous. The most rewarding trips I took in Europe were to see things I'd studied: my visit to see the Iceman and my quest through the streets of Paris to find where Jean-Paul Marat was killed. But a picture of me in front of the Sphinx is no substitute for reading a book.

And I guess I'd rather read the books in the comfort of my own home than travel somewhere to get the photo taken.

Posted by: Sarah at 05:28 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 706 words, total size 4 kb.

1 I travel for a different reason: I want to get first hand knowledge of a place. I don't delude myself that I "know" the place after being there. However I think after being on the ground, and walking the streets of a place, you have a far better idea of how well the average person is doing in a certain country than expert economists could glean from statistics. You also can feel the effects of history on the current situation. So, yes, reading a history book may give you a better idea of what happened to a place before you get there, but there is nothing like going there to actual witness first-hand what the results of this was. Traveling to a place is more than taking the tourist pictures (I know many backpackers who never take a camera with them.) It's about experiencing the culture, talking to locals, trying local foods, reading a local newspaper, watching local news, going to a local sports event. I agree with you that there are many people who travel with the "been there, done that, got the t-shirt and picture" mentality. But I think you are comparing apples and oranges when you say a picture of you in front of the Sphinx is no substitute for a book. I would say that a picture of me in front of the Eiffel Tower is no substitute for reading about the French resistance, but reading about the French resistance pales in comparison to hearing about it first hand from a former resistance fighter. I think a soldier who was deployed to Iraq for a year might not know all the history, but he probably has a better feel for the local culture and customs than someone reading a book on Iraqi culture, and he probably has learned some local history that wouldn't be so easily found in history books.

Posted by: CaliValleyGirl at February 18, 2008 06:52 AM (U2RJu)

2 CVG -- I think we disagree on this...but I also think we are discussing two different types of travel. Yes, there are people who go to a place alone, learn the language, eat the food, live the life. I would never talk smack about someone like Rory Stewart. But I think Rory Stewarts are few and far between. Most people travel with their family or in groups, and when they do, it's not the same thing as Rory Stewart's walk across Afghanistan. For example, I went to Spain with a Canadian and a Mexican. We went to museums and "saw Spain," but all the while we were chatting with each other in English about crap that had nothing to do with Spain. We didn't hang out with and talk to locals or anything "enlightened" like that -- we even ate at McDonalds once -- and mostly we just walked around and took lots of pictures. OK, so I "saw" Spain, but a picture of me on a Spanish beach is the same as a picture of me on a Florida beach. And if I go there with friends or with my husband, then my memories of vacation are of conversations with people that I could've been talking to at home. Rarely are people actually out in the culture, talking to "resistance fighters." And it's not just about other countries. When we went to D.C., we raced to find the lunar module. I wanted to see the thing I had read about and learned about. But other people think it's worthwhile to go places like Chicago or Myrtle Beach, just to be in places worth talking about. "We walked around shopping and like went to bars and experienced Chicago nightlife, man"...that concept has zero appeal for me whatsoever. As for Iraq...perhaps. But there are plenty of soldiers who go to Iraq, drive their HETs during the day, play Nintendo and watch DVDs in their cormexes at night, and don't really take the time (or don't really care) to learn about Iraqi people or customs. I would say that there are book-learned people out there who do know more about Iraq than some soldiers do. Also I disagree that walking around and seeing how people live is more valuable than an economist's perspective. I have in mind a recent website I saw about what people around the globe eat in a week. I might think Ecuador's offerings seem paltry, but only someone with an economist's perspective can know for sure how lifestyle matches earnings, etc. And remember that "poor" Americans live at the standard of living of average Europeans, but I doubt many Europeans would agree that they'd be better off as poor Americans. But anyway, I'm opinionated about this topic

Posted by: Sarah at February 18, 2008 07:46 AM (TWet1)

3 Also, I need to point out to CVG that you does not have the attitude about travel that I dislike. You lived in both France and Germany for extended periods of time, and you try to approach as close to Rory Stewart-hood in your travels as you can. Your family is super-cosmopolitan, so you're not exactly the Tourist Bumpkin that grates on my nerves. That said, I still insist that travel to is not a substitute for knowledge of. Rory Stewart (to beat a dead horse) went to Afghanistan to enhance his already-deep knowledge of the country, to grok it in fullness. I think that's what travel should be about. Instead I think many people see it as a checklist, to tick off countries as they visit them so they can feel cultured and intelligent.

Posted by: Sarah at February 18, 2008 08:09 AM (TWet1)

4 I think I might be coming at this from a different place, too. I love to travel, but my travel is not a week or ten days here or there - it is going to live somewhere else for a year or more. And part of the reason that I love it is because I no longer feel like anywhere is "home" to me. I don't want to stay anywhere, I don't feel comfortable with the thought that I might live somewhere and never move again. I don't like anywhere enough for that. I think I'm really jaded in that respect. So, I do lots of reading and researching before and during the time we move somewhere, and then I back that up with actually going to the places we've read about. It brings me so much closer to the things I've read about. I love meeting all sorts of different people who do and believe and live different sorts of ways. I'm lucky that I meet new people very easily. I love the memories in each and every thing that decorates our house - not just things that I've bought at Sears or far more likely with my taste) World Market. Everything on our walls or on our mantel reminds us of something we've done, or some special time we had somewhere. And I love the fact that every time I take my kids somewhere, the realize how lucky they are to have what they have, eat what they eat, know what they know, and see what they see. Some people collect stamps, some people collect guitars, we collect memories. And our moving around and traveling is a big part of creating those memories.

Posted by: airforcewife at February 18, 2008 08:12 AM (mIbWn)

5 I just realized that I almost come off as a jacka$$ in my comment...I need to write nicer... Anyhoo...when I was writing the thing about the soldiers in Iraq, I was like: man there are some who come back not knowing anything more than hot weather and dust. BUUUUUT, it irks me when some people read articles in the newspaper and think they know more about certain situations in Iraq than someone who has been there and seen things firsthand.

Posted by: CaliValleyGirl at February 18, 2008 09:50 AM (U2RJu)

6 CVG: Crappy AP articles in a paper, forgetaboutit. But Bernard Lewis books, then we might talk. I mean, my husband checks out the most dense, awful books on Afghanistan/Iraq/Iran out of the library -- stuff I wouldn't even want to read if you paid me -- and synthesizes all of it. He and his other buddy in his class were gently correcting an Iranian teacher on his Persian history. Shoot, I also bet Joern knows more about the Civil War than I do...

Posted by: Sarah at February 18, 2008 10:12 AM (TWet1)

7 I don't really agree with you in regards to myself, but I can see your point. We spent 12 days in Hawaii last November and only for about two hours were we at the beach when we found Turtle Beach, checked out the turtles and then watched the sunset. We hiked, kayaked, ate, hiked some more, and visited the memorials. We also attended a Veteran's Day ceremony at Punchbowl. Not exactly a tourist attraction, but a ceremony I wouldn't have missed for the world. I am fascinated with WWII history and have recetly started researching Vietnam. The Veterans at Hale Koa were a wealth of information and loved sharing their stories. My husband and I were in heaven. We do have children, and we try to expose them to so many cultural things as well as travel. Granted my kids chose Washington DC over Disneyworld so they might not be "typical" kids. They might not remember that we went up in the Washington Monument other than for the pictures, but they were amazed that Washington wasn't buried there and then wanted to find out and visit where he was. Hopefully it will all have some effect on them down the road. I'm glad you know what you enjoy though, as there is no sense in partaking in something just because it is considered the "norm".

Posted by: Army Blogger Wife at February 18, 2008 03:28 PM (Y3JJK)

8 I don't like to travel much either. I find it to be a big headache and I always feel out of place anyway. All this moving around with the Army is bad enough, haha, who needs travel on top of that?

Posted by: Kasey at February 18, 2008 05:19 PM (tttDj)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I thought this concept was wild:

The notion of “ecoanxiety” has crept into the culture here. It was the subject of a recent cover story in San Francisco magazine that quotes a Berkeley mother so stressed out about the extravagance of her nightly baths that she started to reuse her daughter’s bath water.

My husband and I have ecoanxiety, but our eco- is for economics. I get so excited when I find balls of yarn on sale for a dollar, but I stress too because it's an extravagance I don't need. We could be saving that dollar. I wrestle with myself in stores all over town because even though we save plenty, there's no such thing as saving too much for the future. So I guess I understand the feeling, even if I don't understand tying oneself in knots over the environment.

Posted by: Sarah at 04:16 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 144 words, total size 1 kb.

The husband and I have been watching the show Sleeper Cell lately. I remember reading reviews when this show came out that it seemed too PC because the members of the terrorist cell were all white. But AirForceWife recommended the show, and I know she wouldn't give it her stamp of approval if it were too hokey or actually-America-is-the-bad-guy feeling.

We have watched several episodes so far, and I really like how nuanced the show is. It shows all the different types of Muslims: the "jihad means inner struggle, Islam is a religion of peace" type, the "jihad means killing every single American" type, the "we should kill soldiers in Iraq, not plot terror attacks on innocent Americans" type, the conflicted "others are hijacking my religion" type, and even the goofy white kid who becomes a Muslim to tick his mother off. Plus it shows white people who mean well but who just don't get how hard it is to be a non-psycho Muslim today. I think it's really well done; it lures you into feeling sorry for some of the characters, and then you have to shake yourself and remind yourself that they're murdering a-holes. It's complex, and I like that.

I give it my stamp of approval too.

Posted by: Sarah at 10:31 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 214 words, total size 1 kb.

My husband found a link: Homeless: Can you build a life from $25?: "In a test of the American Dream, Adam Shepard started life from scratch with the clothes on his back and twenty-five dollars. Ten months later, he had an apartment, a car, and a small savings."

I just love this. I thought Spurlock was full of baloney. Actually he was full of baloney, as he had his employer intentionally lower his wage to make his point.

Good for you, Adam Shepard.

Posted by: Sarah at 10:17 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 87 words, total size 1 kb.

Most bloggers talk about current events; I, on the other hand, like to discuss movies that are ten to sixty years old. That's how I make sure I'm not saying the same thing as everyone else. I talk about the outdated stuff.

At any rate, the husband and I watched the movie The Boondock Saints last night, and it got me thinking about vigilantism. Many of our modern heroes are actually vigilantes: Batman, Spiderman, Jack Bauer, Dexter. They right the wrongs that slip through our justice system.

But, I mean, why are there so many wrongs to right?

I re-read last night Bill Whittle's section of Responsibility dealing with prairie justice. He's right that if you read that section to someone from 1880's America, they wouldn't get it.

The idea of punishing the property owner while rewarding the thief would so violate their common sense, their keenly developed sense of responsibility, that they simply could not believe what they were hearing, and that is because for those people, cold, hard reality stalked them right outside their front door, and moronic inversions of cause and effect would quite simply get you killed. ThatÂ’s why it was called common senseÂ…it was the Minimum Daily Requirement of intelligence and logic that one needed to survive on a daily basis. Those who didnÂ’t have it were too stupid to live, and had been eaten by wolves or prairie dogs, depending on just how stupid they were.

Reality has receded far from the front porch in modern America, and in those isolated towers of law offices, bureaucracies and faculty lounges, all manners of thought inversions can grow and prosper. I recently heard of a woman who sued a car dealership. It seems her son had stolen a car from said dealership, gone on a joy ride -– drunk, of course -– and gotten himself killed. The woman claimed that if the dealership had maintained adequate security, her son would not have been able to steal the car and he’d be alive today.

This is madness.

What has happened in the last 100 years that has made us, as Whittle puts it, lose sight of "the difference between perpetrator and victim"? How did we get from Jack McCall to OJ Simpson?

We watch these vigilantes on TV and we cheer them on for doing the job that our police and courts cannot do. But isn't there something inherently awful about that? Why do criminals slip so easily through the cracks?

I think the best part of The Boondock Saints was the very end where they interview folks on the street for a documentary about the making of the movie (here on YouTube, at 2:30). The opinions were split on whether the brothers' vigilantism was moral or immoral. That end segment made the movie.

Prairie justice was harsh, but I'm not sure we're always better off these days. Sometimes I just want Dexter to go chop up some bad guys.

Posted by: Sarah at 08:43 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 495 words, total size 3 kb.

Of all of the emotions and thoughts that were running through my head that morning, the most overwhelming one was of helplessness. That feeling of helplessness has been difficult to reconcile because I knew I would have been safer with a proper means to defend myself.
       --Bradford Wiles, quoted by Glenn Reynolds

The other night when we were out walking Charlie, the neighborhood watch guy was out. He warned us that they were looking for two stray dogs, a pit bull and a rottweiler, who had been roaming the neighborhood. These dogs had already mauled and killed another dog, right in front of his owner on her front lawn. Animal control had been out and set a trap, but they weren't having any luck luring the dogs. He told us to be careful.

We just got back from a walk again today, and as we rounded a corner in the neighborhood, I spotted the rottweiler coming slowly from between two houses. We immediately turned, and I don't think the dog ever saw us. But it certainly was unnerving to walk the rest ofthe way home with our backs to where we'd last seen a dangerous dog. I couldn't help but wish we had some way to defend ourselves. I remembered reading Glenn Reynolds' article again the other day, and I felt Bradford Wiles' sense of helplessness.

And my husband is now uneasy that we're safe in our home while danger lurks outside. He's a sheepdog, and he feels awful about letting the wolf roam free. But we don't know anything about the legal ramifications of the situation; can one just go outside with a pistol and Atticus Finch a dangerous dog? Animal control has tried and failed to catch this dog, so the whole neighborhood is at his mercy.

I also worry about the many dogs in the neighborhood who are tied up outside. A vicious dog could come attack them in their own yards, and they'd be at a serious disadvantage if they're on a ten-foot leash.

And I worry about taking Charlie on another walk tomorrow.

Posted by: Sarah at 08:46 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 350 words, total size 2 kb.

MSNBC is always good for blog fodder.

Article #1: The best-kept secret to home-heating savings

Solar panels look bold on a rooftop, and a Toyota Prius looks hip in the driveway. Geothermal heating and cooling has none of that sex appeal, yet perhaps unlike the others, it can clearly save you money -- and a lot of it.

"The problem is that we don't have some big, fancy piece of equipment outside," says John Kelly, head of a Washington trade group for geothermal companies.

This is just too rich. You know there are people out there who are dying to go green, but only if it's ostentatious. You mean geothermal is the way to go, but my friends and neighbors won't be able to tell I'm doing anything? Nevermind. What a riot -- it's good for the environment, but they're having a hard time marketing to ecotards who only want solutions that shout "Look at me, I'm saving the planet!"

Article #2: Smoky bar triggered fatal asthma attack

The secondary title on this one was "First case of secondhand smoke causing an immediate death, study says." You know they couldn't wait to print this one. A girl goes to work in a bar and dies from an asthma attack. Smokers killed someone! Smokers killed someone!

But she wasn't exactly winning any Healthy Teen awards:

Rosenman said the woman had asthma since age 2. Her asthma was poorly controlled. She had made four visits to her doctor in the year before her death for flare-ups, and had been treated in a hospital emergency department two to three times that year.

Although she had prescriptions for an assortment of drugs to prevent and treat asthma attacks, she was reported to only use them when she was having breathing difficulty.

On the evening of her death, she had no inhaler with her.

Maybe the headline should instead read that secondhand smoke triggered a totally unnecessary death. It's a shame that she didn't take her life-long asthma seriously enough to be properly prepared for an attack. That's not smoke's fault; she could've walked by a lady with massive perfume overload and had the same result. And don't work in a smoky bar if you have asthma, for heaven's sake. Smoking is gross, but this hysterical secondhand smoke nonsense is too much for me. And now we have some study that says that a teen with asthma just walked into a bar and straight-up died because of the smoke in the air. What a boon that will be for the End Smoking Everywhere types.

Posted by: Sarah at 04:12 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 435 words, total size 3 kb.

I felt an a-ha moment when I saw today that Crash made the list of Worst Oscars Ever. I guess I wasn't the only one who thought it was an overrated piece of garbage. And I disliked it for the same reasons that I disliked Brokeback Mountain: it was all agony and no hope. It was depressing for the sake of being depressing. I couldn't stomach a straight love story with that message.

And now I just spent twenty minutes looking for an old quote I read about Transformers so I could tie this blog post up with a pretty bow, but I can't find it so I am giving up. No poignant ending.

Posted by: Sarah at 08:02 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 122 words, total size 1 kb.

toothpastefordinner.com

Our cell phone contract is almost up, which means we're eligible for phone upgrades and such. We went in today to find out about fancy-pants phones like Blackberries. And the sales lady looked at us like we were the freaks for not wanting to pay $140 a month towards cell phones. Um, nope.

And if that weren't enough, we spent the rest of the day at the DMV.

Posted by: Sarah at 02:25 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 73 words, total size 1 kb.

The husband hated the last season of 24. I was not ready to let go just yet. But somehow, I think I might be able to stop watching now. Also, Butterfly Wife might need a new name for her hubs; seems Jack Bauer is going wuss on us.

On May 31, the show’s head writers went in for a meeting at the studio to present their first big idea: sending Jack to Africa. In various incarnations, Jack would begin the season digging ditches, building houses, tending to orphans, providing security for an embassy or escorting around a visiting dignitary. “One of the themes we discussed was penance, that Africa was a place Jack had gone to seek some kind of penance. Some sanctuary too, but also penance for things he’s done in his life,” Mr. Gordon says.

You know what would make 24 even better? They could feature a big gay pile to stop terrorism.

AirForceWife lent us Sleeper Cell; looks like we'll watch that instead. And I could use more Deadwood when they make it.

Posted by: Sarah at 04:08 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 192 words, total size 1 kb.

1 You gotta watch Sleeper Cell.

Posted by: Erin at February 04, 2008 05:07 AM (y67l2)

2 Mmmmm, Oded Fehr. Almost as good looking as Air Force Guy, but still falls short. You'll love it! I know you will!

Posted by: airforcewife at February 04, 2008 05:21 AM (mIbWn)

3 And now, thank-you-very-much, that you mentioned Deadwood I can't get that line about Nebraska *ahem* genitals out of my head. I hope I don't talk in my sleep. AFG will really be wondering what the heck is going on.

Posted by: airforcewife at February 04, 2008 07:20 AM (mIbWn)

4 I read that article. Seems like the lead writer just changed his mind as time went out. I don't think it makes Jack a pansy. I've never watched the show but Jack is still who he was. He's just realizing the truth. Sounds very American to me. Sounds like the writer has some big and interesting ideas. I want to watch this season.

Posted by: Will at February 04, 2008 08:29 PM (ZBuK9)

5 LOL - they got a hit show doing the most un-PC stuff they could write about. Then when it became popular they were freaked and didn't know what to do. I won't watch it again. Last year was the limit. I also understand that Janeane Garofalo (however you spell her name) will be joining the cast - oh HELL NO! I'm now watching the Sarah Connor Chronicles. Not great, but not bad.

Posted by: Teresa at February 05, 2008 02:00 PM (rVIv9)

6 Hmmmm.

Posted by: Butterfly Wife at February 05, 2008 06:12 PM (K0acE)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I loved this exchange between mom and teen about the Tom Petty halftime show.

We were surprised that they chose Tom Petty. Pleasantly surprised, but surprised nonetheless. I half expected 50 Cent to come out halfway through and start doing a rap version, followed by Marilyn Manson screeching "Mary Jane's Last Dance" with Faith Hill on backup or something. Looks like they've maybe given up on the "get artists from all different walks of life and make them sing a song together" idea. "Also, make one of them wear a sweat sock on their arm. That will appeal to the youngsters." Blech.

Posted by: Sarah at 03:53 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 114 words, total size 1 kb.

Mmm, only an hour left until I get to start eating foods that are terrible for me! We're having beefy cheese dip, basil-pesto cracker spread, and Paula Deen's version of pigs in a blanket. Oh yeah, and there's some football or something, whatever. We ate salad for lunch so we can gorge ourselves in front of the TV.

Also, I had a laugh today when CaliValleyGirl asked me how we pay such low taxes. Um, that's what happens when one of you has a job with an annual salary of $900. Knitting teacher doesn't exactly pay the bills.

Posted by: Sarah at 11:27 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 102 words, total size 1 kb.