I seem to have contracted a flu bug. I thought it was just passing through, but it has decided to make itself at home. Light to no posting this weekend, I think. Please avail yourselves of the many fine sites listed on your left. Thanks.
Some 88 percent of New Yorkers have come to work hung over, a survey found. Meanwhile, 17 percent have come to the office slightly intoxicated.
The survey was commissioned by Brandywine Cider Company, which markets a gelatin-based shot called a BuzzBomb.
The shots contain 30-proof cherry-flavored vodka mixed with caffeine and Vitamin B. The idea is that if you're one of the 5 percent of workers who have come to work sick after drinking, the chemical stimulant will offset the catatonia.
What a concept! I know several people who hide these little gems in their desk drawers.
How dare Fox not show my Simpsons reruns in order to air some unknown program called the "American League Championship Series!" How the hell am I supposed to clean my kitchen? This country is really going to hell.
Modeled after the Carnival of the Vanities, this weekly roundup is intended to be a "Best Of the Blogosphere" for posts covering business, economics, stocks, accounting, taxes, business law, and related topics.
More information and submission guidelines can be found here. Congratulations on your new venture, Rob and Jay. I hope it is a tremendous success.
A Scottish church is to run a course on the Gospel according to The Simpsons to try to boost congregations. Church leaders at Holburn West Church in Aberdeen say the adventures of Homer and his family are an ideal way to explore moral and religious dilemmas.
Each of the four meetings will cover a different episode with a group discussion of the main themes taking place after.
The Rev George Cowie, spokesman for the Presbytery in Aberdeen, said: "Despite its anarchic humour, The Simpsons is one of the few television programmes which portrays a modern family who attend church regularly.
Even I would be willing to go back to church to participate in these discussions, especially if they analyze the famed "Ina Gadda Da Vida" episode and interpret Homer's famous quote, "I like my beer cold, my TV loud and my homosexuals flaming."
Yes, I said it and I mean it. Hooray for Christopher Columbus! Hooray for any individual whose historical achievements provide at least some of the American people with a much-needed day of rest.
Personally, I never paid much attention to Columbus Day, or most other federal holidays. This isn't because I don't admire the individuals or events for which the holidays represent, but because (1) I pretty much naturally accept all proven contributions various persons have made to our country, and (2) most of these holidays don't provide me, personally, with one thing I covet greatly -- a bleeding day off of work.
However, on this particular day I celebrate with fervor the accomplishments of an Italian gentlemen named Cristoforo Columbo, popularly known to us all as Christopher Columbus. I celebrate this day first, because I'm Italian, but more significantly, because I am highly annoyed by the onslaught of anti-Columbus protests from that certain sector of the public who never fails to pop up at every turn intent on finding one thing or another wrong with American culture, so it can relish in its protest du jour in order to momentarily distract itself from its own innate but very obvious sense of guilt, lack of a true direction and personal unhappiness.
It appears Colorado is the national focal point of such anti-Columbus sentiment, with groups, including AIM and others, showing their dissatisfaction by holding public demonstrations and physically blocking Columbus Day parades. Despite the fact that Colorado was the first state to recognize Columbus Day as a legal holiday, circa 1905, certain factions have come full circle in this regard, considering Columbus no better than a Nazi war criminal and demanding that the name of the holiday be changed.
No rationally-minded individual would deny American citizens the right to protest anything they wish. However, it would be a lie and a crime to simply erase from history one of Western Civilization's most important explorers, Cristoforo Colombo, whose experiences led directly to the establishment of not just the United States, but of all the Americas -- North America, Central America, South America and the island nations lying therewith.
Because of Columbus' accomplishments, an entire race of people emerged -- namely, the Hispanics, a title Columbus himself coined when he named the Caribbean Island of Hispanolia. Do any of us want the Hispanic population to cease to exist? I hope the answer to this question is a resounding "NO." This is just one of several important examples why we cannot erase Columbus' accomplishments from the history books, simply because the dated manner of achieving such accomplishments may go against our modern social sensibilities.
No matter how ugly our national past -- and this includes barbaric treatment of women, blacks, native americans, and anyone else who lacked privilege, power or money -- what do we have if we do not have our collective history? Despite how flawed our nation remains, we can at least reflect upon our history and realize that we as a nation have made tremendous strides, socially and legally, to provide representation for all U.S. citizens. Considering the history of most other nations, this is a tremendous accomplishment which we have achieved in just a few hundred years. I challenge anyone to travel to other nations and have afforded to them the same caliber of freedom and respect we take for granted here.
There are so many news articles circulating at this moment, and so many groups speaking out, denegrating Columbus and the results of his actions. The points they make are no doubt valid. However, these groups choose to ignore many significant contributions made by this European explorer. Particularly, in an era where men were ruled by their birth status, and there was very little opportunity to rise above one's "station," Christopher Columbus became a respected confidante of the monarchs of Spain, solely because of his own hard work as a seaman, learned accomplishments as an historian and scientist, and confidence in the existence of a world beyond Europe -- quite radical for his day. Second, because Columbus was intelligent and perceptive enough to draw upon scientific and geographical knowledge recorded throughout history by various civilizations, he was able to formulate his own unique theories regarding the size of the earth and the movement of ocean currents, which allowed him to successfully navigate great distances, through unchartered waters, with minimal risk to human life, to undiscovered lands.
In an era which was still largely feudal, where society consisted of little more than nobles and the peasants who served them, and where no doubt many people still believed dragons lay beyond the horizon, Columbus was an intelligent, self-educated, forward-thinking individual who combined available knowledge with his own natural instincts and ideas to achieve a tremendous, historical accomplishment -- the discovery, exploration and recordation of lands previously unknown to the whole of Europe and Asia.
Of course he was no saint. He was a man of his times, like everyone else, pursuing not only his own wishes, but the wishes of the monarchs who controlled his destiny. However, when we study his accomplishments in their historical context, how can we honestly say this man has no place in American and world history? Do we all hate Columbus so much, and despise his accomplishments so much, that we would give up our rights as North American, Central American, or South American citizens to return to Europe? If that's the case, I certainly don't see any "Back to Europe" cruise vessels packed and ready to go.
Why can't there be more than one holiday reflecting the discovery of America -- one celebrating the nautical and historical achievements of Columbus and another venerating the significant struggle of Native Americans? Personally, I was always taught that Native Americans were strong enough, individual enough, and comfortable enough with their own cultural heritage, to be beyond the need for any federal recognition of their status. But, apparently, this is not so. Just like everyone else, it seems, they have fallen into that trap of needing a national holiday to make them feel better about their own existence, even though they claim they don't want any part of American society beyond equal rights and lucrative casino earnings. This is fine. It's America after all. By all means establish Native American Day and, for that matter, any other holiday honoring any other beleagured minority group. "American Woman's Day" comes in mind for me.
Either way, I just don't see the need to completely extinguish Columbus Day, if people would just stop being so damned overly-sensitive to the reality of world history, which we cannot retract, but can only use as a tool for self-evaluation, cultural awareness, and societal evolution.
Because (despite the fact that we are grown adults in a free society) we cannot be trusted to make our own decisions regarding our personal health and well-being, our employers have decided to stick their noses into our lives and take the responsibility into their own hands:
Across the country, companies, states and schools are taking more aggressive — if perhaps passive-aggressive — measures to get an increasingly overweight society to move more and eat less. The new methods go beyond putting gyms in office buildings or teaching children (or adults) the virtues of broccoli.
Sprint planned its 200-acre world headquarters with an eye to fitness. It banned cars, forcing employees to park in garages on the far side of a road ringing the campus and walk between buildings as much as a half-mile apart. It put in hydraulic — that is, slow — elevators and wide, windowed staircases to encourage people to walk rather than ride between floors.
Hooray for American workers! In addition to being forced to walk half a mile through rain, wind, blistering heat or freezing cold, they will never again be able to run an errand during lunch, and it will take them even longer to get to and from work. I sure hope they took into consideration disabled or ill employees for whom this forced exercise would be unhealthy or impossible. I also hope these companies have an extremely casual dress code in place, because I don't anticipate many women being ecstatic about having to walk long distances and climb flights of stairs while wearing short skirts and high heels.
Some companies are going even further by pimping drugs to their overweight employees. States the article, "Union Pacific Railroad has begun offering some employees the latest prescription weight-loss drugs as part of a study to determine how best to get its workers to slim down. " Isn't providing employees with prescription medication a bit risky, and shouldn't singling out overweight workers and offering them drugs be considered discrimination? I think I'd break down and cry if my boss came up to me and said, "Say Vicky, you look like you can use a little help getting rid of those thunder thighs. Here, pop a few of these."
I know most Americans could benefit from increased exercise and I'm sure these companies are interested in their employees' health almost as much as they're interested in saving money and increasing productivity. But let the increase in exercise be voluntary, not mandatory. Build a fitness center or provide employees with gym memberships and let them go if and when they want. Perhaps they'll return to this concept once lawsuits start being filed by workers who had bad reactions to the drugs, twisted an ankle, or suffered cardiac arrest while trudging into work.
This is not Japan where workers are forced to perform calisthenics while standing under their nation's flag listening to patriotic music. This is good old fat and happy America. My employers pay me to work, not to live up to their perception of what is healthy for me. It's my big fat American ass, and if I want to sit on it for eight straight hours and eat the fried pie I have hidden in my desk drawer, I should have the right to do so.
If this is true, it's very wrong and very unhelpful:
US soldiers driving bulldozers, with jazz blaring from loudspeakers, have uprooted ancient groves of date palms as well as orange and lemon trees in central Iraq as part of a new policy of collective punishment of farmers who do not give information about guerrillas attacking US troops.
...
Farmers say that 50 families lost their livelihoods, but a petition addressed to the coalition forces in Dhuluaya pleading in erratic English for compensation, lists only 32 people. The petition says: "Tens of poor families depend completely on earning their life on these orchards and now they became very poor and have nothing and waiting for hunger and death."
The children of one woman who owned some fruit trees lay down in front of a bulldozer but were dragged away, according to eyewitnesses who did not want to give their names. They said that one American soldier broke down and cried during the operation. When a reporter from the newspaper Iraq Today attempted to take a photograph of the bulldozers at work a soldier grabbed his camera and tried to smash it. The same paper quotes Lt Col Springman, a US commander in the region, as saying: "We asked the farmers several times to stop the attacks, or to tell us who was responsible, but the farmers didn't tell us."
That should generate some good will. Read the full article here.
His name is Elton John, and he showed up at Andre Agassi's Eighth Annual Grand Slam for Children charitable event held at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas last weekend, which featured a star-studded lineup of performers, including himself and Dennis Miller. Elton made it very clear onstage that he disapproved of Dennis Miller's performance:
The comedian apparently offended the Rocket Man when he launched into a distinctly pro-Bush routine. Miller, who has been mentioned as a possible Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in California, was bashing Democrats when he spouted some verbal venom at Howard Dean's presidential candidacy.
"He's [Al] Gore Lite," Miller said during Saturday's benefit for the Andre Agassi Charitable Foundation's "Grand Slam for Children" benefit at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas.
Elton sat down at the piano, but before he began to play, shot back: "This night is about charity - not washing your dirty political laundry. I love America, but if you want to know why the world hates America, I can give you two words: Dennis Miller."
Meow! Ssssss!.
What on earth does "charity" have to do with this? From all appearances, the attendees were wealthy, sophisticated individuals who donated large sums of money, first to help a worthwhile cause, and second to watch seasoned performers do what they do best. What Elton John does best is sing and play piano. What Dennis Miller does best is rant scathingly about politics and current events. Fans of each pay large sums of money to watch them perform their craft, and I doubt this event's attendees would have wanted it any differently.
I guess one good thing came out of this. We can now, as a nation, put our ongoing debate of "why do they hate us" to rest. It's not because we're richer than the rest of the world, or more powerful that the rest of the world, or that our citizens live more freely and more comfortably than the rest of the world, or even that the rest of the world thinks we're arrogant and boorish. No, the real answer is: because Elton John says it's Dennis Miller's fault. Thank you Elton, for solving this serious and complex problem for us.
Why would this man angrily exclaim that the world hates America when he's standing on an American stage in front of an American audience in a country to which he owes much of his success? Perhaps he was just venting, because he knows in his heart or hearts that the REAL reason the world hates us is not because of one very intelligent, informed, amusing and successful comedian. It's because of this.
Put your claws away, Elton. There's a saucer of milk waiting for you in England.
I knew there was a reason I gave up demon rum, other than the fact that Rum and TaB was my first ever drunk (sad but true) and, when I started to get sick, my idiot friends put me to sleep on an underfilled waterbed.
TAMPA, Fla. -- A convicted child molester was beaten unconscious by one of his past victims while they shared the same jail holding cell, authorities said.
Kevin Kinder was being held at Orient Road Jail on Thursday when he was recognized by a 22-year-old man who was 11 when he and three other boys were abused by Kinder. Kinder is serving 60 years in state prison on a probation violation after serving six years for the abuse. He was in Tampa for a hearing on a technicality in his sentence.
The former victim, being held on a probation violation, jumped on Kinder, punched him repeatedly and knocked him unconscious, said the former victim's lawyer, Ricky Escobar of Tampa.
Their paperwork didn't have any red flags pointing out their history, so the two men inadvertently were placed in the same cell with about 65 other inmates.
The guy is damn lucky those 65 other inmates didn't join in.
Since Matthew has reminded me that it was one year ago today I decided to begin wasting precious life hours each day writing less intellligent and less funny posts than most other bloggers, I've decided to something nice for myself. So here it is, my moment of Zen:
Worship At The Altar Of Jon Stewart
Sigh. How I love this man. He makes me laugh out loud for one-half hour straight five days a week, and I appreciate that greatly. I also love Paul Reiser, but I can't find any really flattering photos of him.
It appears I have a thing for handsome, talented, intelligent, Jewish comedians with dark hair and sharp features.
Don't worry, Matthew, I love you too. You're also handsome, talented, intelligent, dark with sharp features, you're a bonafide real fake Jew, and believe me, you're quite a comedian!!
Vicky's obviously busy making my home life better, so I thought I'd throw this post in as a place for people to tell her how much they love her on this, her special day!
Update!! What are the odds? The Bloviator arose from the primordial ooze a year ago today.
Those who know me know that I'm not a very big meat eater, and I have strong sympathy for those poor little factory-farmed creatures. However, as marriage is apparently one big constant compromise, I decided to cook chicken for my husband this evening. Unfortunately the chicken I bought did not have the thighs already separated from the legs, so in addition to having to wash the slimey thing and cut off the disgusting fat, I also had to saw two thigh quarters in half with our chef's knife, which used to be just a bit dull but is now ruined. I almost puked, and messaged Matt that I was never cooking chicken again.
He promptly sent me a link to a page on The Phobia Clinic's website which addresses the problem of Chicken Phobia. I thought it was a joke, but it's apparently real. According to The Phobia Clinic, alektorophobia is "a persistent, abnormal, and irrational fear of chickens" from which millions of people needlessly suffer each year.
For anyone earning a living or at school, the financial toll of this phobia is incalculable. Living with fear means you can never concentrate fully and give your best. Lost opportunities. Poor performance or grades. Promotions that pass you by. Chicken Phobia will likely cost you tens, even hundreds of thousands of dollars over the course of your lifetime –– let alone the cost to your health and quality of life.
Eerr ... uumm ... okay.
First, I gather this site is referring to live chickens and not disgusting dead ones, and I don't have a "fear" of chickens, I merely want to gag when I have to clean and cook their poor little dead carcasses. Therefore, The Phobia Clinic cannot help me unless it's experts can hypnotize my husband and turn him into a vegetarian.
Second, I just don't see how being afraid of chickens can ruin the quality of one's life and cost one "hundreds of thousands of dollars." How often do people in this country encounter live chickens as part of their daily routines? How often do our business or school associates force us to face live chickens who cluck madly and chase us around pecking at our ankles?
Don't buy it folks! Chicken therapy is nothing but a scam to take your money. However, many of us may suffer from one of the other more legitimate phobias on the list, for which The Phobia Clinic's certified staff of professionals will still be willing to bilk you.
To add insult to an already distressing condition, most fear of erection therapies take months or years and sometimes even require the patient to be exposed repeatedly to an erect penis over and over again. We believe this is totally unnecessary, and can even make matters worse, now that fear of erection can be eliminated with just 24 hours of commitment by the phobic individual.
Errr ... uuumm ... okay.
If you are living with Fear of Erection, what is the real cost to your health, your career or school, and to your family life? Avoiding the issue indefinitely would mean resigning yourself to living in fear – missing out on priceless life experiences big and small – living a life that is just a shadow of what it will be when the problem is gone.
"Missing out on priceless life experiences big and small?" Eerr ... ummm ... okay.
For anyone earning a living or at school, the financial toll of this phobia is incalculable. Living with fear means you can never concentrate fully and give your best. Lost opportunities. Poor performance or grades. Promotions that pass you by. Fear of Erection will likely cost you tens, even hundreds of thousands of dollars over the course of your lifetime –– let alone the cost to your health and quality of life.
Hmmm. The loss of life experiences for chicken loathers is exactly the same as those for erect penis loathers. Coincidence? Perhaps, but as I refuse to sully the fine reputation of this site by speculating on the therapeutic benefits of choking chickens, I'll leave it up to you, gentle reader, to decide.
I wonder how big a pay-off the South African postal service had to give certain goverment officials to pass the new Post Office Amendent Bill:
It gives the post office and its subsidiaries - Speed Services and XPS - the sole right to transport parcels that weigh under 1kg and leaves no room for any other delivery services to apply for a license to do so.
This means that it would be illegal for pharmacies, for example, to deliver medicine to house-bound patients, or for a romantic to order flowers to be sent to a loved one. Nor can you get a pizza delivered to your house unless your order weighs more than 1kg.
This would effectively shut down small-scale delivery services and would create thousands of retrenchments.
Good thing the Postal Service isn't allowed to have a monopoly in this country. Life without pizza and flowers just wouldn't be worth living.
Sir Elton John has been signed up to help write a musical drama series for American television. His string of hits will provide the soundtrack for the soap opera-style show, which has been described as a murder mystery with a power struggle and grand love story.
Gag! What cretin cooked up the idea to combine the most embarrassing elements of entertainment into one production? Why, Shaun Cassidy, of course, who is the show's producer and describes the production as "a soap opera with the emphasis on the opera." I have an uneasy feeling that, given the general public's taste in entertainment, this show will be a hit.
Someone please wake me when the nightmare is over.
Advice to Britney from myself, who unfortunately knows all too well exactly what it takes to NOT be considered a sex symbol: Stop trying to be so damn coy! If you want to be a sex symbol, as your actions blatantly prove, just admit it and be proud. If you don't want to be, then keep your damn clothes on and quit frenching Madonna.
If there is only one reason why separation of church and state should be vigorously enforced, this is it:
To commemorate the fifth anniversary of gay college student Matthew Shepard's gruesome death, the Rev. Fred Phelps wants to erect what he calls an "absolutely beautiful" monument in Shepard's hometown of Casper, Wyo.
About 6 feet tall and 3 1/2 feet wide, Phelps' monument would bear a brass plaque reading: "Matthew Shepard entered Hell October 12, 1998, at age 21 in defiance of God's solemn warning: 'Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind; it is abomination.' Leviticus 18:22."
His legal justification for erecting this monstrosity is a recent court ruling that "governments that allow statements like the Ten Commandments to be posted on public property must permit all other messages, too." Unfortunately, a Ten Commandments monument has been allowed to stand in the Casper City Park since 1965.
Phelps' plan to erect his monument to intolerance is so unbelievably vile, that the organization who donated the Ten Commandments statute actually asked for its return. Can you imagine what it would take to cause Roy Moore and his followers to ask for the return of their Alabama commandments monument? If Phelps can cause that kind of reconsideration in the hearts of the religious, he must be pure evil.
______________________________
When I look at the beaming smile on the sweet face of this little Muslim child playing with her new doll, Razanne (the Islamic world's answer to Barbie) I understand why she would love the doll so, as Razanne was created specifically to give Muslim girls, who have few avenues of self-expression, an image with which they can personally identify within the parameters of their religious culture. Quotes Ammar Saadah, the male Muslim creator of Razanne:
"The main message we try to put forward through the doll is that what matters is what's inside you, not how you look," said Saadeh, who set up NoorArt Inc. with his wife and a few other investors.
"It doesn't matter if you're tall or short, thin or fat, beautiful or not, the real beauty seen by God and fellow Muslims is what's in your soul."
"It doesn't matter what you look like" is an excellent message to relay in order to bolster self-esteem in a child. Too bad that, in the context of Islam and the Razanne doll, it isn't really true.
It certainly does matter what you look like, as it is particularly because Razanne looks like a female that she's obligated to be shrouded from head to toe. Never mind. It's the pleasant euphemism that counts, apparently, and not the unpleasant reality behind it.
Still, the concept of Razanne intrigues me greatly. I should collect several, in case they go the way of Mattel's Pregnant Midge. The collection of Razanne dolls and accessories is for sale on this website.
It's easy to see why Praying Razanne is so popular, as you can't even see her arms, and she comes complete with a Qu'ran and special prayer undergarments. Sold separately: map directing Razanne to the "women's only" entrance of the mosque.
My personal favorite is In and Out Razanne, which comes with a "two-piece fashion set for wear inside and outside the home." Allah forbid that devout Muslim girls shouldn't understand that beauty, fashion and any expression of personality are acceptable only behind closed doors. Just assure, Razanne, that there aren't any non-relative males visiting your household at the time, or you will be in grave danger of becoming Honor-Killing Razanne which, Allah be praised, is what you deserve for disgracing your family in so despicable a manner.
Inspired by the strong demand for Honor-Killing Razanne, a new series of dolls will be available in time for the first fasting day of Ramadan. The Polygamous Razanne playset comes complete with domineering husband and three other wives. However, Sharia Law Razanne is predicted to be the overwhelming favorite, with three punishment options available: Forcible Rape, Death By Stoning and Death By Flogging. Illegitimate child and rapist who denied any wrongdoing and was promptly pardoned included with each set. Instruments of torture and enraged male onlookers sold separately.
How fortunate that all my little girl's brain had to contend with was the Growing Up Skipper doll, you know, Barbie's little sister who got taller and developed breasts when you rotated her arm. Now that's what I call a role model, although I'm still waiting to grow in either direction.
Several days ago I read an article reporting on a statement made by Dr. Laura Schlessinger, that it is a wife's duty -- euphemistically labeled her "loving obligation" -- to satisfy her husband's alleged unending sexual needs by, in no uncertain terms, "putting out" on demand. (In other words, a wife is obligated to screw, whereas a single woman can still be a fickle bitch).
What can one say about "Dr. Laura's" opinion, which opens a festering wound in male-female, husband-wife relations and throws society's cultural clock back a good hundred years or so? Should wives consider it their obligation to put out on demand? Should husbands desire their wives to do so? According to the article:
Schlessinger describes what she calls "loving obligation" - that is, a spouse's duty to do something whether or not he or she feels like it.
If husbands are expected to "go to work and earn money" and visit relatives they don't like, she argues, why can't their wives put out on demand?
She also describes other ways a woman can make her marriage flourish: by making her husband her No. 1 priority; by not nagging, nitpicking or whining ("Be honest, girls, this is what we do") and by seeing her husband for what he is: "a gift from God," and respecting him accordingly.
While I am aware of the need in marriage for both partners to fulfill obligations which may not make them happy (such is the definition of "compromise"), this woman's statement makes me cringe on many fronts.
First, it reduces the act of intimate lovemaking to just another necessary household chore which demeans the husband as much as the wife. Does a man acquiring, "by right," sex from his wife, who does not desire him at the moment, make him a fulfilled man, or simply a boor?
Second, it is not husbands only who "go to work and earn money," and "visit relatives they don't like." Regarding relatives-in-law, husbands are usually successful in dismissing themselves from conversation based on the airing of one or another ball game, whereas wives are responsible for smiling politely at her in-laws, openly praising the men of the family and cooking ar a certain level that will hopefully convince the female of his family that the wife is deserved of their precious son after all.
Third, fully fifty percent of all American women currently work, not necessarily because they choose to, but because either the fathers of their children deserted them, or their husbands are now incapable of "supporting a family" because of crippling changes in salary, benefits and retirement instituted by largely male-run employers, insurance companies and financial institutions. In a middle-class, two-income family with 3 kids and at least 2 cars, what would the average husband's reaction be if his wife decided to quit her job, thus slicing their income in half, in order to more fully perform her "loving obligations" as a traditional wife? I think he'd think she was nuts, and would rather have the money than the "perks."
If wives are largely expected to work as much as husbands WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY assuming most of the responsibility of raising a family, then what are the husbands' requisite "loving obligations" toward their wives? To remember to take the trash out every week? To actually get their dishes into the dishwasher instead of leaving them encrusted on the kitchen counter? To not leave their clothes in the exact place in the living room where they previously disrobed? To clean the bathrooms, scoop the litterboxes, and perform all other tasks "unbecoming" to a hard-working woman? To mow the lawn like clockwork and upkeep the outside environment so neighbors don't view the family in a disparaging light? To be able to do perform basic responsibilities traditionally considered "manly" and like balancing a checkbook, managing household finances, and planning sufficiently for retirement?
What if a woman, who earns as much or more than her husband, is unfortunate enough to be married to a man who is incapable of performing most or all of these obligations without either professional help or the consistent "nagging, nitpicking or whining" so reviled by Dr. Laura? Is this wife still obligated to "put out" whenever the non-performing husband demands? Or should the husband be "lovingly obligated" to satisfy the wife' every needs in order to make up for his failure as a husband and a person?
Despite the fact that Dr. Laura considers herself to be an expert on relationships and some sort of exemplary advice columnist to women, I believe she is nothing of the kind. She, in my opinion, is a narrow-minded throwback of an age that, while pleasant to think about, really no longer applies to many of today's families. Furthermore, she renders not helpful advice, but causes women who are less fortunate than herself to suffer guilt , insecurity, discomfort and a sense of failure that marriage often brings to women without a Ph.D., or a husband with a Ph.D. and a six-figure-income. Here is an excellent case in point:
A recent caller to Dr. Schlessinger's broadcast stated that she found being a stay-at-home mom unfulfilling because:
... it's not all enjoyable ... and I just don't seem to be able to do it well." She did say that being with the kids was fine, it was all the other stuff: housekeeping, shopping, cooking, and so forth – that were described as unrewarding and relentless and, well, just not enjoyable.
What sage advice did Dr. Laura give this caller? I don't know what she said on her radio broadcast, but here is what she wrote in a follow-up article:
Truth be told, whether coming from a man or a woman, this behavior is self-centered, and displays a character that knows little of honor, obligation and sacrifice. This is a mentality, rampant today, that speaks not of what "I can do for my family?" but only for "What will I get out of what I do for my family?"
So, in addition to not being constructively advised, this poor woman was ridiculed, dishonored and personally attacked in a haughty and unprofessional attempt to make her, and many others like her, feel guilty and useless for finding stressful, rote and demanding tasks difficult or unfulfilling.
If, despite all of her open legs and open arms, Dr. Laura's husband decides (if he hasn't already done so) to cheat on her with a younger, less uptight woman with no children, and/or decides to fire all the servants and force Laura to quit her job and personally fulfill, without any outside help or guidance, all of her "loving obligations" of shopping, organizing, cooking, cleaning and waiting for her husband to return from the workday to demand sex, what sage advice would this woman offer the rest of us poor deprived wives?
After she drives sterling silver forks into her husband's eye sockets, it's a free-for-all, I guess.
I'm on my fourth childhood, apparently, but at least this time I made it through puberty:
My inner child is sixteen years old!
Life's not fair! It's never been fair, but while adults might just accept that, I know something's gotta change. And it's gonna change, just as soon as I become an adult and get some power of my own.
sort of oblong with little feeler things sticking out.
From the mouths of babes, as the saying goes. Thank you, darling man, for imparting that wisdom unto us.
I'm quite sure Raving A will be most thrilled to learn: Now that the question regarding the meaning of life has been so succinctly answered, he is no longer obligated to blog ...
The dream is over, R.A., God does exist, and He's a paramecium, with intact flagellum. How I love flagellum.
Pigs must be flying somewhere in this world, because I actually feel a bit sorry for Rush Limbaugh. This perplexes me, considering the sound of the man’s voice and the words emanating from his face have always given me a desire to venture into parking lots seeking my very own fix of blackmarket prescription pain meds. Yet, I feel sorry for this man at this particular moment because, in my opinion, he is coming under criticism too severe, for an incident too insignificant, by saboteurs too eager to attack any individual who dissents from their particular beliefs.
Regarding Limbaugh's highly-publicized statement about Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb, at first I didn’t understand why the media seized upon this passing commentary as its Morally Idignant Stand of the Week, but now I see all too well. They are clutching at this unfortunate event not to right some perceived social wrong, but to benefit their own selfish interests.
First, Limbaugh is an annoying ultra-conservative non-politically-correct white male, the consummate enemy of the modern American people and, as such, the perfect target.
Second, the people of this nation are so overcome with their own hidden prejudices and racial guilt, that they will jump at the easiest opportunity to scapegoat a person more unlikeable than, but equally as guilty as, themselves.
Third, and most important, and what the average person always fails to recognize, media trogs are so desperate to remain employed, get paid a bonus, and boost their own ratings and egos, that they gladly exploit any individual in his/her moment of weakness in order to SELL THE STORY, thereby gaining fifteen minutes of fame for themselves, accolades from their public, friends and family and short-term revenue for their employer. And, if they can manage to accomplish all this while passing themselves off as protectors of the American Dream and racial equality, all the better.
Okay, fine. But if Limbaugh must be the sports world's scapegoat, then what about writers such as Pete Prisco of cbs.sportsline.com who, as early as September 18, 2003, proclaimed McNabb to be “one of the "most overrated players" of the NFL?
McNabb was the choice as the most overrated player before his Stink at the Linc on Sunday. McNabb was awful in the Eagles' 31-10 loss to the Patriots, which dropped the Eagles to a surprising 0-2 heading into their bye week.
McNabb is still a good player, despite his pedestrian numbers from the first two games. He's just not a great one.
And that's why he earns the Most Overrated Player Award.
On most player ranking lists heading into the season, McNabb was ranked in the top 15-20 players. One had him as the third-best overall, and he is often considered one of the top three or four quarterbacks.
That's wrong and wrong.
McNabb has never been an accurate passer, doesn't seem comfortable in the pocket and has a tendency to make bad decisions. That is not how you earn high grades as a quarterback.
Prisco rendered his heartfelt opinion regarding McNabb's perceived value as a player. He was correct in doing so, first because it's his right as an American, and second because it's his job. Yet, he stated it's “wrong and wrong” for McNabb to be ranked in the top 20 players. Why, then, isn’t THIS guy being persecuted by the media?
ANSWER: Because he’s a nobody. His opinion doesn’t really matter, because he's not a Rush Limbaugh, not a notorious hate monger, pillar of the conservative right wing establishment and enemy of all that PC America stands for. Because Prisco is "just a guy," and Limbaugh has a notoriously bad rep, Prisco is free to express what Limbaugh is forbidden.
And what did Limbaugh express that was so horribly wrong? That, because blacks have been consistently underrepresented in the position of quarterback, there is now a desire to see them succeed in order to compensate for the Sport’s and the fans' close-mindedness of the past? What is so terribly wrong with that? Can anybody prove that Limbaugh told a lie? Don’t most of us want minorities to succeed in all fields, especially because they have historically been underrepresented and unrecognized? If a player has been called overrated by some, is it a crime for others to opine as to why this is so? Furthermore, did Limbaugh actually insult this man personally regarding his race?
Limbaugh is being singled out because he is an unpopular white right-wing conservative who put a political spin on an already existing issue. In all fairness, wouldn’t you expect a conservative political pundit to do just that? I know I'm not breaking any new ground when I ask this question: Why on earth did ESPN hire a middle-aged white male conservative political pundit who was probably never chosen to play dodge ball in grade school to co-host a national sports show anyway? Limbaugh causes controversy wherever he goes. It's his namesake and his money maker. Apparently ESPN wanted that controversy to boost ratings. They made a deliberate decision to hire him in order to achieve a certain goal. However, the minute the scheme backfired, ESPN fainted away in silence, no doubt in order to consult the public opinion polls to decide their next move.
Then there's Donovan McNabb. According to most accounts, McNabb is an easy-going, classy professional who handles criticism maturely and who takes personal responsibility for any flaws in his performance:
"I point the finger at myself," he said in the no-kidding quote of the year. "You know being the quarterback of this team, if the offense is out there, I'm the one who has to get everything going. I'm the one who has to be accurate with the ball; I have to be the one making the right checks, and make the right reads. I'll never lose confidence in myself. It's just the reality of the whole deal that I'm not playing well."
If McNabb can buck up under pressure from "legitimate" sports journalists and his own personal experience, then why can't he take the high road when faced with a two-sentence statement from the likes of Rush Limbaugh? Is McNabb guilty of playing the race card himself as, I perceive, everyone else involved in this scenario is, or is he just succumbing to media pressure to say the "right thing" Why can't a 6 foot 2 inch 230-pound man, who gets paid large sums of money to undergo physical attacks regularly and who faces intense media scrutiny at all times, and his fans, who no doubt consist mostly of less-than-politically correct males with prejudices of their own, just ...
LET IT GO?
ANSWER: They would have forgotten about it before breakfast had the media not hyped it so much, to stir up unnecessary emotions, in order to feed their own bank.
If rendering a heartfelt opinion about one of thousands of overpaid players in an an overrated venue is acceptable for some sportswriter named Prisco, then why isn't it acceptable for someone else named Limbaugh?
What's this?! We can't land one damn Krispy Kreme here in Northwest Arkansas, yet London gets their very own Krispy Kreme this very day, and at Harrods no less, despite the fact that the arrival has not been met by all British citizens with overwhelming joy:
"We don't need another company like Krispy Kreme pushing doughnuts at us. Changing our diets is key to tackling the problem of obesity but the availability of these foods just keeps increasing. We need the food industry to work with us and stop pushing the stuff we know is unhealthy," Neville Rigby, director of policy and public affairs at the International Obesity TaskForce, was quoted by the Financial Times as saying.
Fine, Mr. Health Nut. If you care not for Krispy Kreme, please continue on with your immensely healthy British diet of Bangers and Mash, Blood Sausage and Kidney Pie. Let us relieve you of the nutritional burden of fried doughnuts. After all, this is Arkansas. We fry twinkies, for pity's sake, not to mention we headquarter the largest corporation in this galaxy, Wal-Mart Corporation which, in turn, employees many thousands of overworked, overweight, stretch-pant-wearing, doughnut-consuming Americans.
If anyone deserves a Krispy Kreme, it's us, I should think.
Amazing how cooking a pot of (extraordinarly incredible, original recipe) chili and baking a (Duncan Hines) cake (sorry, I'm nobody's baking fool of a mother) can make a hard working man so incredibly happy and satisfied. Who knew? Goodness. Why the hell did I shun domesticity all of these years?
It's a short-lived phase, I agree, and it's bound to backfire on me at some point, but let's make the best of it while we can, why don't we? We've certainly never had this experience before, and we may never have it again.
MY WIFE MAKES PERFECT CHILI AND CaKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(AND SHE HAS PERFECT ......YOU KNOW)
See what I mean? *Sigh*
Me Good Wife. Me Cook Chili. Me have nice .... uuummnm .... you know ....
Gee. My day gets better. I'm about to meet Matt out and, of course, as a woman whose done nothing but cook and clean all day, I'm a bit self conscious about my appearance. His response?
"No matter what you look like, or the last time you've bathed (emphasis added), you still look good to me."
Perhaps it's a compliment. I just can't tell anymore. Considering everything, I'm off to eat as many tacos and drink as much wine as my abdomen will expand to allow.
As the famous saying goes, "Tomorrow is Another Day."
