Apt. 11D

I got cookie AND cake!

NORM!! Norman...

Check out my blog profile on Normblog.

Disclaimer: Some questions were answered after downing a couple of pints of Bass.

Is Ann Coulter Worth a Post?

I actually read that Time article on Ann Coulter that everyone's going bananas about today.

15 minutes that I'll never have back.

James Wolcott had a good post on it today. Talk Left has a blog round up on the article.

I'm really not sure that this topic is worth a post. Coulter seems like an incredible light weight to me. A bore, actually. I'm not sure that anyone takes her seriously, but maybe I don't travel in those circles.

The Time article wasn't very complementary of her, so I'm not sure what the liberal bloggers are complaining about. The article makes her out to be a huckster. Or is it a huckstress? I'm not sure. Anyway, Time magazine isn't worth getting all hot and bothered over. I only read it, because I was stuck in a doctor's office today. I had a choice of the Coulter article or Highlights magazine. Hmm. Maybe I should have read Goofus and Gallant.

Catholics, Federalism, and Bullies at the Playground

Looks like Steve and I have strep throat. That's probably what Ian's been whining about for two weeks. Oh, well. Missed that one. Like I said, I'm a bad mother.

So, we've got a new pope. He apparently is no trail-blazing progressive, but it's hard to tell because his previous position was The Whip-cracker. Whatever. We'll wait to see what he does.

A bone to pick with some fellow bloggers.

When I was a kid and someone from the playground picked on my sister, I got all puffed up, defensive, and combative. Non-compatible DNA stains could not pick on my sister, because picking on her was MY job, not to be shared with outsiders.

I have to say that I'm dismayed at the anti-Catholic crap that I've seen in some of blogs. I just don't get why non-Catholics give a crap about the church's position on women clergy, abortion, or birth control. Nobody is dragging you up the aisle to receive Christ's life blood.

If other Catholics don't like it, they have a few options. Get their ashes and palms, and become "cafeteria Catholics" picking and choosing the doctrine they wish to follow. (Guilty) They can also write letters to their Bishops. If that does no good (probably won't), well, there's always the Unitarians.

What I find most distasteful is the liberal blogs that bash religious types. Where's the diversity, people? Oh, diversity is only for the approved groups. No interest in being tolerant to the religious types. It's like someone passed around an "Okay to Bash" list and put religious people way up on top. Face it, people. We live in a diverse country. That's what makes it more interesting than countries like Sweden or Denmark. If you want to more than lip service to your call for diversity, you have to embrace every last one. Pucker up and kiss an evangelical.

Don't fear diversity. Instead whip out the Federalist Papers and flip to #10. Don't have it handy? Well, let me sum up.

In #10, Madison worries about the future of the fledgling democracy. Never actually practiced before, democracies were theorized to be volitile and likely to dissolve into demagogery. In particular was the worry over factions, minority groups that worked to surpress the rights of a majority. What protections could be put into place that would frustration those factions from destroying the newfound freedom? He proposed two solutions. One is a large diverse country, such as the new country, where there would be too many interests for one large one to form. The other was federalism, the system of states with a strong central government. Federalism would divide up interests making it highly unlikely for a faction to take charge of the national government. If it took control of one state, then the problem would be localized.

In the blogosphere, several liberals and certain pro-gay rights conservatives have held out federalism as the last hope for liberalism during the Republican era. Perhaps pockets of the country can support their cause, if not the whole country. But they propose this solution with a heavy heart.

Don't fear. Federalism good. Federalism good.

Some corners of liberal academia have always embraced federalism. Some explain that the states have often been the sources for very liberal, innovative policy. David Osborne calls them "laboratories of democracy". Others look at the expanded options for participation that federalism offers. It's much easy to protest and lobby at the state level than at the national level.

David Brooks has an op-ed in today's Times that is going to drive the chick bloggers bananas. Haven't had a chance to surf yet, so if you send me some links, I would appreciate it. He writes that Roe v. Wade should never have happened. Abortion laws should have been determined by state legislatures. I'm not sure if it should have been the state or national legislature, but it should not have been court battle. Brooks is right -- Roe v. Wade could be responsible for eliminated the filibuster. Like Brooks, I feel that this is a huge mistake; the filibuster is an important protection for minorities in the Senate. Unlike Brooks, I think that it's impossible to overrule Roe v. Wade and made into law instead; Roe is here to stay.

But it is interesting to think about. What would happen if the states completely took over abortion laws? Okay, forget Louisiana. But I'm not sure that you would a huge difference accross the country. Some states would have a few more regulations than others, but I'm not convinced that the red/blue dicotomy would happen to abortion laws. In fact, I think it would strengthen abortion legislation, since it was locally decided by elected representatives.

God, I'm sick. What the hell am i doing blogging?

Skittish Horses

I'm in the throws of reading Seabiscuit. I'm not the nibble-at-a-book-in-the-evening type. I'm the ignore-the-children-the-lasagna-is-burning-shove-off-because-I'm-reading type. So, I'm not much mood for a long post, because I'm ready to flop on the bed and finish the book.

I'm learning about the training of horses. A good rider and trainer can look in eye of the beast and see hidden strength and deep wisdom. They know when to use the whip and when to feed them a carrot. They know when the horses need to go at full gallop and when then need to hold back. They know that some horses are confident and others need to have their self-confidence bolstered. Some horses just don't like dirt kicked in their faces.

Jonah burst into tears yesterday when I shouted out the backdoor that it was time for dinner. Yes, it was a bummer, but it shouldn't have resulted in all out bawling. Something was up. Steve and I talked about it after they went to sleep. Maybe he's fighting off a cold. Maybe he's been feeling neglected, because all our energy has been focused on helping Ian learn to talk. Of course, the kid can't just tell us what's wrong; he probably doesn't even know what's bugging himself. We have to look into his eyes and guess. Perhaps some time without his high maintenance brother over the weekend will do the trick.

It's even more complicated with Ian, because he can't talk at all. He's often frustrated. When I picked him up from school today, he was in his teacher's arms sobbing. His teacher said that he was trying to tell her something, but didn't know what. What's wrong, Ian? He was making the sign for drinking. Do you want something to drink? OK, let's get some water. The water calmed him down, but it was only later that I figured out what he was saying. He was actually making the sign for hot. Last week, we had a candle in a cupcake for him, because it was his birthday. He wanted to blow out the candles again. Poor kid. I hope he learns to talk soon.

I'm off to finish my book, because I could sure use some pointers with reading the eyes of small children. My track record is pretty lousy of late.

Spreadin' Da Love

Michael Berube writes a lovely essay about he underestimated his son.

Harry has returned from a blog slumber and writes about Rufus Wainwright.

David Brooks has an op-ed today that fits in well with the on-going blog conversation about the influence of pop culture on the kids. Despite the violent video games and slutty pop princesses, American kids are straighter than they used to be. The reality is that we have a generation of kids who have seen the ravages of divorce, who are more likely to respect and listen to their parents and their ministers, who are worried about sexually transmitted diseases and who don't want to mess up their careers.

I'm reading Seabiscuit: An American Legend (Special Illustrated Collector's Edition), which fantastic. One quote:

Charles Howard had the feel of a gigantic onrushing machine. You had to either climb on or leap out of the way. He would sweep into a room, working a cigarette in his fingers, and people would trail him like a pilot fish. They couldn't help themselves. Fifty-eight years old in 1935, Howard was a tall, glowing man in a big suit and a very big Buick. But it wasn't his physicla bearing that did it. He lived on a California ranch so huge that a man could take a wrong trun on it and be lost forever, but it wasn't his circumstances either. Nor was it that he spoke loud or long; the surprise of the man was his understatement, the quiet and kindly intimacy of his acquaintance. What drew peopel to him was something intangible, an air about him. There was a certain inevitability to Charles Howard, an urgency radiating from him that made people believe that the world was always going to bend to his wishes.

A Wrong Turn

The things I rant on about on my blog, I also rant on about in real life. I've written here or maybe in the comments on another blog that I believe that academics should do a better job of bringing their work to mainstream audiences. Tim Burke often writes about the importance of academics as public intellectuals, and I'm with him on that. I've been meaning to practice what I preach and try to write things for mainstream press. Mostly political stuff, but it would also be fun to write stuff on television or parenting or the Yankees.

The problem is that academics have no clue how to get published in non-scholarly journals. The procedures for getting accepted are completely different. Writing styles are night and day. Each profession sets up their own barriers to success, and it's difficult to just jump into something new.

Anyhow, my brother has heard me go about my writing plans quite a few times, and so, last week, he handed me the brochure for a writing and journalism conference being held in NYC. It was geared to helping freelancers become more successful. Sounded good. I signed up and picked up my badge at 8:00 on Saturday.

Pop Culture and Parenting

Please read the comments on my previous post. There's a good discussion going on about the difficulties in raising kids, how to shelter them from bad influences, whether TV is a bad influence, and what government should do about it.

I only have a quick post tonight, because I've been busy reading those comments. Also, I've been camped out in front of the tube for most of the evening watching Survivor and CSI.

Every week, CSI features another sexual fetish. There have been episodes on the weirdoes who like to dress up like stuffed animals and do it, chubby chasers, and regular run of the mill S&M. Tonight, one of the killers was enraged because steroids deflated his manhood. Highly amusing, but I bet this show really ticks off some people.

As I explained in the comments of the previous post, I am in the "if you don't like it, turn it off" camp on this one. There are lots of channels and lots of options. Something for everybody.

Perhaps it's easy for me to say, because my kids are little and still in awe of my strength and wisdom. I can also hold the remote control high over their heads and boot them out the backdoor.

I limit TV. It's on, because I need to get stuff done, but only during the allocated times. I limit TV not so much because I'm worried about the content. They're asleep way before CSI. I limit TV, because I have an old fashioned notion that kids should be out doing things. No matter how good the TV show, it's far better to be off investigating worms and throwing a ball. I want them to have the Kennedy-style vigor or "vigah."

(oh, getting way to tired to finish this post. I'll publish it anyway and add more tomorrow. Not good blogging practice, but screw it. need bed.)

Random Things That Caught My Eye

Andrea Dworkin died. A self described radical feminist, Dworkin's ideas were a bit too far out there for me. She wrote that heterosexual sex was abusive. She also was anti-pornography, which clashed with my hard-line free speech beliefs. When liberal ideas collide. Ampersand quotes a Guardian article which tries to graciously remember her.

Amy Sullivan and Matt Ygelsias are going head to head about whether Democrats should be critiquing pop culture. Sullivan maintains that the average voters don't think that Democrats get their concerns. Democrats can talk about the problems in pop culture without advocating censorship or shilling for the Christian Right.

As a father of a son with Downs syndrome, Michael Berube fights against the idea that liberals automatically advocate aborting fetuses with disabilities.

Hubby and I are still laughing about the Man Date article.

On Parks and Lawns

I abandoned the great biannual sorting of the clothes this afternoon. I left boxes half emptied and a pile of sweaters sagging against a wall. I plopped Ian in the stroller and went for a walk.

Taking the kids for walks is one of the joys of parenting. Sorting sweaters just sucks.

In the city, we would walk five blocks to Fort Tryon Park and watch the gardeners maintain the heather garden. It was spectacular. Originally designed by Frederick Law Olmstead and over looking the Hudson, it is one of the gems of the city. The winding paths go on for miles keeping me amused for many afternoons.

When we moved out to the suburbs last summer, we missed it terribly. We looked around for a substitute park, but we disappointed by poorly designed public spaces. The nearest place is just a circular path around a man-made circular pond. The plants are generic and sturdy. No slopes or twists. Just a flat circle.

We asked around. Where did people go to walk to see beautiful things and to march their children about? No one had an answer.

We're lucky enough to live in an old town with sidewalks, so I started walking around the surrounding streets with the child and stroller. Still disgruntled. Until I started looking at the lawns.

Each lawn was its own unique park. Some had orange woodchips and little tuffs of shrubs sticking through. Others had paved circular driveways with ornamental grass spilling out into the street. Some were very Martha with tasteful dwarf evergreens in alternating shades of green. One guy's house had a potted plant on a tree stump with a couple of faded American flags sticking out.

Each lawn reflected the personality of the homeowner. I have this theory that the owner's hair always bears a close resemblance to his shrubbery. Big bushes = hippy dude.

I had a great walk today studying the infinite variety of lawns and gardens in the four block circumference of our house. After a weekend of warm weather, the lawns were trimmed for the first time, and the tulips were coming up. Ian sat back in the stroller clutching a half deflated red ball. Marvelous day.