Brainsplitter

Finally Legal

2009-11-10T14:20:00.003-05:00

I don't remember the first time we filed the paperwork. I just remember how I would have to cross my fingers a couple of times to ensure that the printer worked, the dutiful checking and re-checking of which documents we were supposed to print off and send, and the frustrations of having to stop into Walgreens a few times because we forgot to make an extra copy of this statement or that form.

I remember how tightly Mom clutched the money order as she made her way back to the car. She double-checked the amount with me at the teller window. "A thousand how much, moro?" "A thousand ten, Mom." I told her to wait just a moment. I punched the digits one more time on the calculator. "Yeah," I said, "a thousand ten. That should cover everything."

Mom asked me to write on the application because my handwriting is neater and she struggles a little bit with her spelling. I get home roughly twice a year, and each time I returned, we had to devote a free afternoon or an evening to the paperwork. We checked the forms one last time, sealed them up, then checked which distribution center we had to send the package. First, it was Texas; then, it was Illinois.

Whenever a big bulky envelope seemingly chewed up at the corners would come in, we sighed heavily. But before that, Mom swore up and down that if our money order came missing, we just had to sue somebody, even if we didn't know who jacked it. Someone was to blame. We were just following the steps, or so we thought. After the second or third return, the fight to make my stepdad a legal citizen seemed a rather lost cause. In our moments of deep frustration, we began to sympathize with people who sneak over the border illegally. Never mind the language barrier. Let it be said here, flat out and as plain as I can, this country talks a big game about taking the proper measures to become a legal citizen but consistently fails to smooth-line the process.

Even if we did things properly the first time, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service claims that, due to back-ups in the system, a correctly filed claim can take as long as twelve to eighteen months to resolve. In our case, we had trivial errors that were caught after two to three months had elapsed. We would correct the errors and re-submit, only to be told that the forms were now dated and that the ones we sent in were modified, thus necessitating another download, another day at the copy place, another day of sanity lost.

In the meantime, the sponsoring household member (usually the spouse) has the undue burden of supporting self, spouse, and children while the petitioning citizen has little to do at home. Citizenship is also very expensive, and it doesn't end at the thousand plus dollars of form-filing. We eventually wised up and got an immigration lawyer's assistance; that too cost several hundred dollars. But the real slap in the face was that those few extra hundred dollars resulted in majorly reduced turnaround time. Thus, citizenship is certainly no do-it-yourself process. It requires -- no, demands -- access to legal assistance from the very onset. For us, that meant periodic drives to Louisville and scheduling additional days off. My mother is among the high percentage of women occupying female-dominant service-sector job -- she works the early day shift in a child care facility -- and even at a boosted minimum-wage, a day's loss of work equals falling behind on a bill.

The lawyer got involved. He, through the grapevine, complimented my handwriting and said that I should become a lawyer. Mom laughed: "My baby," she said, "is gonna be a doctor." (You have to love her. She got it partially right, and she says that she brags on me anyway even though she doesn't exactly understand what I do. I hug her. I'll be a professor someday.)

Mom called me yesterday afternoon. She was on her way back home to attend a late dentist appointment, and she said that the interviews went fine. Dad's got a green card. Apparently, they have to file for it again in a couple of years because they haven't been married long enough, and they have to pay a few hundred dollars at that time. But he's good to go for now.

They exhausted all of their savings getting here a few years ago. He supported her while they lived abroad, and he sold off his possessions to fly back out here. Mom just wanted to get back home. She wanted her hometown and her family friends and her quiet life in her quiet town, and she beamed when they moved into their starter home. To do so would require her to exhaust her savings too, and like many American families, they live month to month, check to check, hoping that the car won't break down too soon or that the unforeseen can be held at bay just long enough. My dad is living the American dream -- of wishing for better opportunities and success while being grounded in a subsistence situation.

Still, I'm happy for them. It is an immense burden being lifted from their shoulders. Mom said that Dad might go back on the road for work for a while. California, perhaps? We shall see.

House Passes Health Care

2009-11-08T04:10:00.003-05:00

For what it's worth, only one Republican, Joseph Cao of Louisiana, voted in favor of health care reform. Reporters are comparing the spectacle on the House floor as that of rivaling the Yankee's recent win of the World Series.

Here's more from the Huffington Post.

Tucson Election Results

2009-11-04T03:22:00.002-05:00

The votes are counted. Only two of the city's 145 precincts have turned in their ballots, and the prospective results read as follows.

City Council Wards:
Three contentious races took place to occupy these positions. Democrat Karin Uhlich holds her incumbent position in Ward 3. After a heated contest in Ward 5, Democrat Richard Fimbres pulled a 53-46 win over challenger Shaun McClusky. Unfortunately, incumbent Nina Trasoff was edged out on the east side, losing to challenger Steve "Koz" Kozachik by less than two percent of the vote. While the early ballots only held a couple of hundred in his favor, today's polling shows nearly a 1,000 vote advantage.

Proposition 200:
Decried as an unfunded public mandate that would likely exhaust the already depleted budget of the city's parks and recreation, education, and welfare assistance revenue, Tucson citizens soundedly defeated the measure with 7 out of every 10 voters checking "no."

I attended a Drinking Liberally meeting back when it took place at The Shanty downtown. The group invited some representatives to discuss Proposition 200. While attendees agreed that public safety is of concern, especially since Tucson operates well under the average ratio of firefighters and police officers per 1,000 in the population and delivers lower response times, it was very disconcerting to hear that "economic recovery" would solve the costs. No details -- none, whatsoever -- on the projected costs or the funding sources beyond some veiled mention of a "general fund." The same fund that has proven time and time again over the past few years to be cut first.

Crime has been trending downward in Tucson for the past decade, and the backers of 200 appeared to fail repeatedly in seeing the systemic problems of crime. The funding for this mandate could be better appropriated into education and after-school interventions designed to deter young adults from opportunities to pursue crime.

Speaking of Education:
Nearly all the propositions to allow for budget overrides for both the City and for the school districts were shot down. The most overwhelming blows came for Tucson proper and for the Tucson Unified School District, which has failed to garner a budget increase for the past three election cycles. Meanwhile, folks living in the wealthier northern and Foothills areas of town shrugged at the one-dollar per $100 property tax increase.

The Finger

2009-10-29T13:24:00.003-04:00

Here's a story I read today on TechCrunch that certainly doesn't have anything to do with technology, but is rather funny anyway.

Here is Schwarzenegger's rejection response to A. B. 1176, which would create infrastructure financing districts in San Francisco. Schwarzenegger had this veto letter in reply for what sources characterize as "hostile" negotiations with Democrats.

In fairness, Tom Ammiano (D-SF) allegedly started it with a Whitney Houston-inspired "Kiss my [gay] ass!"

Fee-Waived Application

2009-10-20T16:48:00.003-04:00

Greetings all.

I have some good news. Transylvania University has offered its alumni a chance to personally recommend students for admittance, and has sweetened the deal by giving out one free, fee-waived college application. The priority deadline for application is January 15. Prospective students should include transcript scores, ACT or SAT scores, letters of recommendation, and a personal statement. Details are included in the application packet.

Unfortunately, I moved from Kentucky last year and I am not in touch with any high school students here. So, here's what I'm thinking. I can save some student out there $40 and can grant them a foot in the door to what I think is one of the best private, liberal-arts educations out there. Transylvania is a top-ranked liberal arts institution repeatedly recognized in U.S. News and World Reports and boasts an enriching education built upon tapping into student potential. While rigorous, students are free to take an active role in their education, are encouraged to pursue personal lines of research and study, and can opt to create their own interdisciplinary majors.

Anyway, if you want a free application, let me know. Leave a comment here or get in touch with me through Facebook or e-mail.

Look Into My Eyes

2009-10-11T12:45:00.002-04:00

Nataline Sarkisyan died when she was seventeen. She needed a liver transplant and had been granted a 65% survival chance during her prognosis, but her parent's insurance company, CIGNA, denied the transplant citing the operation as "too experimental."

When her parents decided to take legal action against their insurance company, the case had been dismissed due to a 1987 Supreme Court decision shielding employer-based healthcare plans from the consequences of their coverage decisions. As appalling as this sounds, the judicial branch of our government has a history of taking strong stances in the name of defending civil and economic liberties. Forbath details judicial action preemptively defending ideological claims like "free labor" and "liberty of contract" in his work, Law and the Shaping of the American Labor Movement.

CIGNA buckled under pressure some nine days later, but it was too late. Nataline had passed away. And if there is any recourse in this, it's that the Sarkisyans can sue for emotional distress.

It isn't that CIGNA CEO Edward Hanway failed to meet the Sarkisyans and the California Nurses Association representatives in the lobby that morning. The real indignity is being heckled, cat-called, and even flipped off while being escorted out of the building.

Someone's daughter died as a by-product of rubber-stamping rejection orders. Traveling cross-country and demanding some accountability and understanding is met with an obscene gesture. The closure required in dealing with the death of a loved one is met with a half-hearted apology and a middle finger.

It's perfectly acceptable that we all disagree on the details about how to conduct real health care reform in this country, but when the discourse downgrades to bird-flipping, then the good fight is lost right there. Disagreement need not involve disrespect. Being brash and rude is not equivalent to be heard, let alone contemplated and understood.

Cleansing

2009-10-08T00:39:00.001-04:00

Watch this guy take the neti pot to a whole new level!

Sheesh, and I thought I was hardcore for going heavy on the sea salt. I have to be honest, though. Neti pots do me more good if I think I've inhaled too much pollen over the course of a day, and I choose to wash my sinuses out. When my sinuses are already clogged, it doesn't help me that much. Unless I'm doing it wrong. That could always be the case, you know.

Really, Schumer?

2009-10-01T14:49:00.003-04:00

Jon Stewart effectively sums up the utterly mindblowing reaction to a Democratic supermajority getting two of their amendments knocked down in the Senate Finance Committee, while somehow supporting another $50 million for abstinence-only sex education.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

Democratic Super Majority

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Political Humor

Ron Paul Interview

Today, I have to prepare for a discussion of rhetoric surrounding welfare reform. Somers and Block wrote "From Poverty to Perversity," an article citing how the 1834 New Poor Laws in Britain and the 1996 Clinton welfare reform act embraced rhetoric that began blaming the poor for miring in their own condition. Britain was too spooked by the Napoleonic Wars, thinking that the poor were just moments away from wrecking political dining room tables. In the United States, Gingrich's Contract with America turn compassion on its head, arguing that it was compassionate to get people to work instead of letting them rot on the dole (that provided just enough benefits to keep families afloat while they were looking for work anyway).

The mindblowing thing about all of this is not that politicians enjoy enough diffuse political power to do the very opposite of what public polling suggests. It's that, at the end of the day, all it takes is enough political bluster to get a point across. Somers and Block make it clear that in the course of changing political direction on what a value like "compassion," policymakers pay less attention to the empirical values and instead wage war on ideas.

On its face, Clinton -- even Gingrich -- wasn't saying anything fundamentally wrong about the problem of welfare. People don't mind working so long as they work a job that doesn't leave them sore and broken all the time, mentally drained, or struggling to figure out how to stretch a minimum-wage rate. Work is a means to economic security. People like the idea of having a consistent, stable, and reliable means of getting expenditures handled while being able to save a little for the future. People like having benefits that will take care of them after retirement, so that they can exit the work force with dignity instead of dread. Yet these concerns and frustrations about the world of work don't make it onto the ideological battle.

While I accept the degree of political complacency by our leaders and indifference on our citizenry, I wonder if the authors could've said a lot of paper and just summed up by saying, "The loudmouths always win."

Red Meat

2009-09-30T02:33:00.008-04:00

I read in our student paper the other day that Governor Jan Brewer decided to throw a little red meat to her social conservative brethren running the state legislature by announcing a drastic cut -- nay, death knell -- to the University of Arizona's domestic partner benefits.

Signed into law as H.B. 2013 about a week ago, the state recovers $3 million of the already $625 million spent on health benefits and state support. According to the Daily Wildcat article, the decisive cut eliminates state benefits for 170 partners at the University of Arizona. Of these, 30 were same-sex couples and the other 140 were unmarried heterosexuals.

Spokesperson Liz Sawyer of OUT-Reach, a UA group advocated for the now bereft benefits, commented that she did not apply because she believed they wouldn't last.

Chun and Evans include the following abstract in a 2005 article entitled "Maximizing Your Institution's Talent Strategy through a Domestic Partner Benefits Plan:"

...as part of a comprehensive total compensation package, implementation of a domestic partner benefits plan underscores the importance of an inclusive environment that recognizes and embraces diversity in attracting and retaining top talent.

The University of Wisconsin press release mentioning their new benefits package supports such claims.

The American Association of State Colleges and Universities found that domestic partner benefits not only makes sense in education, but in business overall as well. Citing growing opposition to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and "a new middle ground in society's culture wars," employers win by retaining solid talent and edging out over a competitor.

First, while nonheterosexual life partners are characterized as the primary beneficiaries in line for a domestic partner benefits package, such packages also include explicit considerations for children and guardianship arrangements established outside of the realm of traditional marriage.

Second, domestic partner benefits offer a competitive shopping alternative for health and well-being services otherwise difficult to find when venturing alone into the marketplace.

Finally, a university offering robust domestic benefits not only for, say, same-sex couples but also proactive arrangements for enhanced child care provisions, maternity leaves, and family life accommodations throughout the tenure process demonstrates an unyielding commitment to recruiting and retaining top staff.

Even the term "domestic partner" is hard to pin down. Often assumed to include only same-sex couples, a domestic partner can be a person involved in a committed heterosexual relationship who opts to choose pathways to preserve legal and financial independence. This independence can be certified through prenuptial documentation and the maintenance of separate accounts. It is "married but filing separately" without the chapel bells ringing.

Governor Brewer's fast one qualifies as red meat not only for the appeasement of a socially conservative political constituency in the legislature, but for the ravenous support it garnered without the appearance of long-term thought.

Stripped of the Republican founding principle of fiscal responsibility, a legislator had to call it for what it is. With former Governor Napolitano having left to join Obama's Cabinet as head of Homeland Security, Brewer could satisfy the whims of her Republican colleagues, like Senator Paton who claimed that this was payback for Napolitano's executive order that instituted domestic partner benefits in the first place. It was never about money.

Representative Matt Heinz of Tucson called the bill "shortsighted and mean," arguing that if those stripped from the domestic benefit dole turn over to the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (ACCESS) to get care, the $3.5 million in savings would quickly turn into a $7.5 million deficit.

President Shelton has expressed dissatisfaction with the state law and has offered assistance to help those displaced partners recover alternative benefits.

While a majority of Americans believe that same-sex couples should be granted the same rights and privileges in marriage as their heterosexual counterparts, and even more believe that employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is wrong, it appears that H.B. 2013 is not set for appeal anytime soon.

It is this sad blogger's opinion that, so long as a given minority group can be vilified for not fitting so-called norms and traditional values, political opportunists like Brewer will continue to succeed in stripping away rights. So long as it gets her one more vote from the reddest of the red regions out here in the desert, state legislatures will continue to sacrifice state economic health for political partisanship.

Motivated by Hatred

2009-09-16T22:50:00.002-04:00

Keith Olbermann delivers an excellent segment on the unsavory history of racialized memes and epithets and how they uncannily characterize today's political rhetoric.

Obama's Speech to Congress

2009-09-10T14:13:00.003-04:00

Courtesy of The Rachel Maddow Show: Here is the full coverage of President Obama's speech on health care before Congress that took place yesterday evening.

Common Sense Chatting

2009-09-06T11:50:00.001-04:00

Minnesota freshman Senator Al Franken beautifully illustrates how to, get this, talk with constituents that may disagree with you on how to achieve health care reform -- by actually talking. Take a look.

In all due fairness, opposition kept the Obama as the Joker, the Marxist, the Stalinist, the socialist, etc., etc. at bay.

Barbecues and Positive Development

2009-08-31T03:05:00.002-04:00

Hey everyone. I hope you all are doing well.

It's just past midnight, and I'm sitting here still stuffed from a terrific dinner of pork chops with sliced peaches, plums, and chilies, black beans and rice, corn tortillas, and fresh greens. (Thanks, Dev!) I have to repay the favor sometime with soul food. No worries.

Anyhow, the second week of classes start up tomorrow. The first went by rather smoothly. I definitely enjoy the Social Policy class on Tuesdays and Thursdays. For our first week, we read and discussed Jill Quadagno's One Nation, Uninsured in which she details the history of health care reform in this past century. I have been fervently recommending it to my colleagues and friends on Twitter.

She makes a highly convincing argument that health care reform is largely shaped by the configuration of competing interests. The persons most successful at offering and advancing health care reform are highly mobilized and on-call to write letters and contact representatives and officials, present a unified message of resistance (or support), and offer significant amounts of lobbying capital (e.g. money). And if you're not on the FreedomWorks payroll, by all means, stand tall and gang up with your fellow co-workers, union members, or school and community organizations. Although she is rather honest about the power that lobbying firms command compared to "we the people," reform happens when sympathetic groups stop vying so hard for their individual self-interests and start negotiating common desires.

In between book chapters, I visited a couple of meetings of local university clubs. For crying out loud, I need to get out of the department every once in a while, and I just happened to brush across some passionate, fun, and lively students trying to make a small difference. I met with the university's Social Justice League and rubbed shoulders and shared picnic food with the Black Graduate Student Association at a welcome back event. A few days earlier, I attended an open house at the Martin Luther King Cultural Center hosted by the African American Student Association.

Commiserating over the questionable presence of diversity on the campus or pitching ideas about how to reach more students interested in volunteerism and social justice, I felt obliged to introduce myself. Name, school, what I do, the hopes for accomplishment. I'm trying to work on the 30-second meet-and-greet. "Hi, my name is Dee. I am a Ph.D. student in sociology, and I am studying the impact of multicultural organization membership with regard to resilience." Something like that. I kept shaking hands, smiling, and practicing.

It was so rewarding to see a beam of smile in response. Heads would nod; some would press me a bit further. A few would ask questions or dig for a hypothesis. I met one really nice lady named Nura at the AASA. She works for the McNair Scholars program, and she says that she too is interested in understanding how minority students from typically disadvantaged backgrounds muster the courage and diligence to balance home, school, perhaps a job to help with family finances and more while still maintaining solid grades.

You know, it wasn't too long ago that I felt rather frustrated with my department because I found so few opportunities, and even fewer sympathetic or interested ears regarding my substantive interests. While acknowledging that I can still benefit greatly from the methods training I receive here, I also understand that, here, "race" means "Hispanic" and "community" gets as much respect as "culture" does if it's only used to talk about all those bothersome residual sums of squares. Chips over half-moons, indeed.

These good blessings came to me this week and taught me that, yes, there are people out there who care about this project. I have to venture away from the department. I have to go find them, meet them, greet them. It's my job to get out there and shake hands, meet over a cup of coffee, and discuss how our academic worlds come together.

In the name of a former advisor and good friend in career development, "Network or not work."

So far it's working.

Weiner in the Lion's Den

2009-08-25T13:26:00.002-04:00

FOX and Friends hosts Democratic Representative Anthony Weiner from New York to talk about policy details in health care reform. Little did Gretchen and Kilmeade know that Weiner would come in with dual barrels blazing, spending his full five minutes debating and shooting down Republican talking points. Take a look.

I particularly enjoyed Weiner calling attention to the tired "government-run, socialist" meme and asking politicians to knock down Medicare and the VA if they despise federal medicine so much. That's a classic. More than that, in agreeing with the need of cost containment, he quickly reprimanded the hosts for not realizing that private insurance are skyrocketing far higher and faster than Medicare rates. He also agree that reimbursements should increase for doctors and hospitals at the expense of insurance shareholders.

Finally, he dismissed the pedestalling of tort reform and interstate shopping as insurance companies have corporate, commercial rights and loopholes to exploit rate changes. Think about his district. New England -- tiny states all jam-packed together. It would result in less overhead porting services (which isn't to say that insurance would start accepting more claims if these weren't attended to in the original bill) to neighboring states while domiciling in states whose rates and premiums were more favorable. It's the same reason why all the major credit card companies this decade had been domiciled in Delaware, the state with the most lax regulation laws.

I have to admit: I think I have my first political man crush.

Who's Reverend Wright?

2009-08-24T22:50:00.007-04:00

I find it highly ironic and painful to hear the audio track featured below -- and I'm not even halfway through it yet -- that the Republicans raised such a fuss about Obama's affiliation with Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and you've got guys like this speaking in front of congregations.

Warning: The following Youtube footage features potentially offensive and graphic language. Pastor Steve Anderson issues a tirade about homosexuals, and specifically Barney Frank, makes comparisons to Sodomites, and then explains why he "hates" Barack Obama.

Anderson preaches at the Faithful Word Baptist Church in Tempe, Arizona. Regarding the hatred he carries in his heart (never mind he says, you know, he has love for all of God's creations, presumably with Obama included, yet boys will be boys and melt snails with salt), Psalm 58 becomes bastardized beyond compare. From what little I got of it, David's praying for God to carry out some vengeful, Big Brother payback against people that... perhaps they urinated in his Corn Flakes that morning. Maybe they were too busy being sodomiterrific and could give a damn less what David was doing, and all the man wanted was some attention.

Actually, we don't know for sure. The audio cuts off there. There's a sermon in mp3 format on the church site entitled "Why I Hate Barack Obama," but he spends a little too much time joking and giggling about political points. I'll give you extra credit and a cookie if you get something I didn't.

In all seriousness, I have no problem with whatever spirituality or religion they practice or toward whom they entrust to interpret verses and teachings. Religion, after all, needs all kinds -- the humble and the belligerent. Conveniently enough, people like Anderson want the government to stay out of their personal, professional, and spiritual lies until it comes time to cast their scorn. "Hands off my guns!" they deliver at the pulpit, condemning you too to keep hands from your unborn should you, for some horrible reason, have to consider the option to have an abortion.

Jesus, he says, wouldn't have supported socialized medicine at all. Maybe it would reduce the reimbursements He made when He chose to heal the sick, the blind, and the crippled -- without prejudice and for free of charge. As Chris Matthews mentioned in a recent broadcast on Hardball and later reminded on The Colbert Report, that America has had a very ugly and raw history with regard to political assassination. To give off-kilter individuals air time to reinstate this dire need to "retake" our country "at all costs" against whatever real or imagined threat being offered on the table, is to be as culpable as the man who takes that gun and bullet into hand.

That goes for politicians trying to score points within their party. That goes for news commentators audibly cheering "Real America" even at its most intellectually bereft hour. That doubly goes for pastors who forget that people bring recording equipment into church with which to ding you later.

If this were the real Communist, Socialist, Stalinist, Nazist world of your sick and twisted fantasy, then government thugs would have dragged you (me included, probably) into the streets to be shot at point-blank range. No Gestapo has revealed itself. No plot to overthrow capitalism has been cranked out via fax machine. We are free to think and say what we want, but to do so only until it infringes upon the rights of someone else. When you stand up in front of a church, Pastor, and proclaim how much you hate Obama and how you wish God would strike him down, you are declaring his life null-and-void of worth. I find it reprehensible that you goad those who believe in abortion and the death penalty, but you fail to recognize your contempt and malice.

I suppose, like putting "LOL" on the end of what would otherwise be a rude statement or a smiley, or more appropriately, praying for God's guidance during your sermon only to bastardize the Good Word's content to the lowest intellectual denominator, you think it can be excused.

I take pity on you -- that someone in Tempe won't be foolish enough to take you too seriously, and for you to learn a better way to touch the hearts of your congregation.

Anyway, readers, you be the judge while this fool celebrates and grossly misinterprets the wrath of God as permission to commit those same atrocities. The website features contact information. I think I'll ask him right now. If he writes back, I'll let you know.

UPDATE: The church e-mail inbox is full. You can reach his church via phone at (480) 248-4082. Be sure to give credit where it's due and Digg the original story from Twitter. Thank you very much.

Real America

2009-08-20T17:09:00.001-04:00

Protestors stand at an intersection of Orange Grove Boulevard to talk openly and candidly about the importance of having health care reform.

Call 'Em Out!

2009-08-19T17:26:00.003-04:00

Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, being of sound mind and Jewish heritage, answers a woman who asked, "Why are you supporting this Nazi policy?" like so.

You know what? Good for him! I wish more politicians had that much backbone. Folks like Frank and Representative Weiner from New York who held Republican feet to the fire when offering an amendment to -- go ahead -- terminate the Medicare program since it was "government-run, socialized medicine." We need that kind of gusto to drown on all the bullshit so-called ~~obstruction~~ protesting at the rallies.

Letter to the President

2009-08-16T20:17:00.003-04:00

After reading one too many articles about the public option nearly removal from health care reform, I decide to vent my outrage through my computer instead of hunting down the first Tea Bagger I could find and beating said person to a pulp. My blood pressure's still a little elevated, though.

I need to understand why a public option is being taken off of the table. I have been fuming about this all afternoon. I know my blood pressure's elevated right now, and I'm hoping that what I've heard is just the media needing a news blitz for the day.

Let me rephrase the question.

What safeguards are in place to ensure that Americans get fair, affordable access to health insurance? I need a better sense of what Congress is willing to do in order to keep insurance companies in life -- to increase the percentage of cases covered, to open access to people with preexisting conditions, to improve the appeals process, etc. What laws are being put in place to protect us?

I ask this because I thought a government-run plan would have taken care of all that stuff. Side by side, let the people decide what's a better deal. Now that that is being taken off the table, we're left with "co-ops" that have hardly the size or the buying power as the big insurance companies. Even if you got a sizeable co-op to form, we're still left with the same problems: no buying power regarding what gets in a customized health insurance plan, no control over rate fluctuations, no negotiations, no appeals.

In short, the American people are sold this half-hearted benevolent promise that the insurance companies will "do right by us," when they have largely failed to do so in the number of years they've been running. And the individuals protesting nothing about health care reform, but rather building an incoherent case of why you're a Stalinist, socialist, Marxist, or whatever misinterpreted code word of the week, these fools are getting duped by politicians who want to keep their campaign contributions.

President Obama, WE elected you to do a job, not the drug companies and the pharmaceuticals and insurance tycoons. We know that it's not easy, and we want to give you time. We also want to feel like we're actually making real REFORM, not being sold empty promises. Cynicism is very tough to crack in this country. We gravitated toward your message of hope during the campaign because, while we were well aware of making less money and scraping to get by and feeling like our efforts were for naught, we felt like you would get it. You would fight for us.

I'm not willing to count you out yet. I support you, but it's hinged upon people keeping their promises. Please don't throw away this golden opportunity.

I'm still young and (relatively) healthy. I can dope myself up with OTC meds if I get sick, and I can tolerate not breathing well. But millions of Americans don't have that time or vitality. Please don't let us down.

If you have a story to share or a question regarding health care reform, visit the White House "Reality Check" page and write it there.

The Third Wheel Series

2009-08-12T04:42:00.004-04:00

I am happy to note that a number of people have done Internet searches about being a "third wheel." People tend to arrive here by doing a Google search of some combination of being or feeling like a third wheel.

Way back in January, I wrote an academic-style article about the third wheel and I explained Fritz Heider's balance theory in relationships. My friend Caroline liked the throwback to her psychology class, but I wanted to do more with it.

So, here it is. I call it the Third Wheel series -- a collection of four articles offering academic and practical advice on communication strategies, understanding feelings, and resolving this third wheel problem. The series features a number of exercises that you can do at home to practice.

It's perfectly okay to laugh. Emotion-focused work sounds corny, phoney, and a little too soft and delicate for us hardened survivalists of life. We think we can weather any emotional difficulties that come our way by pressing through them.

If that works for you, fine. Read it anyway. Don't knock things until tried.

The entries are listed in chronological order.

Enjoy. Comments are appreciated as always.

Make or Break

2009-08-12T03:50:00.003-04:00

You did it.

I'm hoping that you practiced. Maybe you felt really ridiculous for writing your feelings on pad and paper, and scratching them out, and editing it twice, and keeping your ears perked up for an inappropriately placed "you." That's okay. It takes a lot of practice to be emotionally cognizant, and the proverbial Rome was not built in a day either.

You had an advantage. You practiced. You know the "I" stuff, the "you," and the "we." Your friend could have been really cool and did his own Google search for being a third wheel. Maybe he practiced, too.

Or not. You can never tell these things for sure.

Prepare for the talk.
Keep a cool head. The goal in talking things out is to reach out to the other person and to let your friend into your world. This is simultaneous. The words you choose, the tone you speak from, and the eye contact really help speak this real intention to share some feelings.

Your goal is to reinforce what you have been practicing. Keeping your emotions in check is vital. The clearer your head and the ability to stay cool and collected will allow your real feelings to show through your speech. If you're busy biting off words and tensing up in response to what's being shared -- it's not all flowers and sunshine and soft kittens, right? -- you'll self-sabotage all that hard work.

So, before going in there, relax. Get a bite to eat. Have something to drink. Relax. Take some breaths. Don't surreptitiously motor off what you've been writing on paper. Just take a minute to think about what you really want out of this talk. Make that the prominent image in your head. You want your buddy back! Think of the good times you've shared because careful word choices might make that happen again.

What if you're the victim of blame?
Just remember this simple rule. While talking, your job is to pick really good, thoughtful language to help open up the dialogue. Carefully chosen words can often diffuse any build-up going on in your friend before it even starts.

It's not perfect, though. Maybe your friend had a bad day and you happen to be on the tail end of some frustration. Is it your fault? No. Is it appropriate? Certainly not. Again, be cool.

Conversations are great because we tend to take turns with each other. You get heard. Your friend gets heard. You take turns speaking and listening. Frustration might make that difficult sometimes, and you might get cut off. Before you tell your buddy to pipe down, change your position. If you're leaning in, try straightening your back and sitting up. Try moving your hands. If they're in your lap, put them on the arm rests.

It's a pretty innocuous nonverbal change, but it really shows a shift in the conversational response. You're moving from "verbalizing" mode into a focused stance. It is not intended to be confrontational. After all, you aren't balling up your fists or tensing up ready to leave out of your chair to commence an eventual choke-hold.

Try the following strategy change. You know how to pick about bad "you" words. Your friend may fire off a full salvo of them. Recognize them, for your own sake, and then move on. You're really interested in the feeling part.

Here goes.

Fuck you, man! I call you back! Don't start that shit with me. I'm just super busy with my new girlfriend and classes. I don't get to spend time with anybody!

What's on the tail end? Your friend says, "I don't get to spend time with anybody." Granted, you'll bite your tongue before admitting that the girlfriend still gets time. I hear you. Beneath that angry bluster was something. What do you think?

Let's just stick with a literal interpretation. You're taking your friend's words at face value. He doesn't have much free time. He feels like he's in a time crunch and he has a lot of things that he feels are a bit much to juggle at the same time.

So, start there with your response. This is a great way to show active listening: that is, repeating the last thing you heard and offering it back. If all else fails, keep it simple.

Okay:
It sounds like you don't get to spend time with anybody.

Better:
It sounds like you're really pressed for time.

Don't be afraid to get literal. Seeing it in print, it looks like a cheap ploy. In actuality, being able to fire back that language is another quick, clever way to diffuse some tension. You use good language to make yourself heard, just like you try rehashing what the other person says so that they, too, feel heard.

Use your better judgment. The stronger the anger/resentment response, the safer it is to keep it simple and just fire back the same words. If you feel particularly proficient at good emotional language (see Exercise 1 from "Time to Talk"), and your respondent feels a bit cooler, try throwing it an emotion. Your friend might attach to it in the same way people go "Yeah!" when you get something right.

Talk it out.
This conversation can happen in one fell swoop, or it may take several get-togethers in order for the understanding to emerge. If things go well, the two of you can make plans to talk again. The sooner, the better. You want to go into subsequent talks still fresh off the progress you made in the previous one.

Is this relationship worth saving?
Unfortunately, this is the sixty-four million dollar question that I can't help you with right now. Why? You're ultimately the one who decides when a relationship is worth saving or abandoning.

In the process of prepping for the talk, you learned just exactly what you wanted to save, right?

I was willing to entertain the idea that, from the start, you might not be able to put all those positive memories together. They get lost in complacency, and as time goes on, we tend to forget things. We get bogged down in everyday foolishness and lose touch with what we really enjoy in life.

In the meantime, I recommend stopping where you left off and resuming your soul-searching another day. I also recognize that if you struggle with finding the good worth fighting for, and, as hard as you try it you fail at finding it after having taken several stabs at it, then maybe there isn't something worth fighting for after all.

There is no magic "second try" or "third one for charm" to this dilemma. You are ultimately the judge of what's worth keeping in your life.

Don't beat yourself up over it. Just like you can't blame individual circumstances for contributing to the make-ups and break-ups in your life, you can't beat yourself up for not "trying" hard enough to salvage a friendship. An unfortunate truth is that a good lot of the friendships we carve out in life are made to be transient.

Maybe you are blessed to have friends that date back to high school. And that's good! It's also uncommon. You have a set period of time -- four years, if it all works out well -- to have a set of peer relationships. Afterward, they tend to fade out as you embark on new life challenges. Your twenties are fraught with that, too, be in the friends you make in college or ones you pick up in the job market, or neighbors along the way, or co-workers or what have you. You start new classes, socialize in different circles, move to a new house, maybe even embark in a serious relationship with signs of marriage potential.

Good friendships really do weather all those storms. Sometimes you won't get to be so buddy-buddy and chummy as a typical, stable routine might afford you. After tending to hang out every week or two, life may catch up and you find that several months have gone by.

Life happens. Relationships can and do survive life's challenges. It only takes one good spark -- just a bit of kindling -- to bridge those gaps. People can be close, grow apart, and pick up where they left off.

However these talks progress, ask yourself one simple question.

What do you mean to me?
You have already answered the question before. Recognizing it or not, you were doing this way at the beginning when I asked you to think more about the friend you care about and love, the friend you miss who, all of a sudden, got bogged down in his life.

The strong emotions and the powerful relationships that created them, I think, are worth fighting for. They are worth a few bad conversations and even some misplaced blame and anger. They are worth trying again.

There's a big difference between stumbling for words when thinking what someone means to you, and -- flat out -- not having anything worth fighting for. Give it some time. Between the talks, try to figure it out. Don't overanalyze it. Don't try to generate this false system to establish how much a given friend is "worth." Don't assume arbitrary values to hiking trips, video games, or happy hours.

Just let your heart tell you what's what, and let your head give you the foresight and understanding to deliver those words.

Time to Talk

2009-08-12T02:35:00.003-04:00

Last time, we talked about getting back in touch with your friendship.

Let's review a little. Third wheel relationships are very inconvenient for that person left behind. The common denominator in the third wheel situation is a state of emotional free-fall. Whether spoken or recalled or not, people develop really intense feelings and connections in a strong friendship. We usually capture snapshots of such strong connection through photographs, stories, jokes, and camaraderie, and a good collection generates a really strong emotional high. The more distance that grows in this third wheel arrangement, the more literal distance we place between ourselves and that intensely powerful friendship.

If the third wheel situation is left unattended, that hurt can go from dismissed or unattended into profound outbursts. It is a time bomb. Pretending that it will go away or work itself out is false from the start, and it just sets you up for more harm in the long run. So, do yourself a favor and do your relationship a favor by standing up for it.

In this entry, we're going to talk about talking it out.

Take blame out of the equation.
Pretend for a moment that I said this to you...

You know what? You never even bother to try to talk to me anymore. I just call you up and leave messages and you can't be bothered to return a phone call. You don't care about me!

If I went off on you like that, chances are you won't feel sorry for me or care what I think.

Whenever our feelings hurt, we try to blame the other person for causing the problem that in turn made us feel terrible. In order to dignify that hurt, we need to change tactics here. Like I said last time, you can't control the ebb and flow that happened to get your third wheel into motion.

People go through changes, plans get made, events of importance pop up. People fall into and out of love. People go through tough times and great ones. Blessings come and go. Bills are here to stay. Problems might be, too.

A lot of life just happens. Even the most vigilant friends cannot predict when things spin out of control, and neither can you. You can only control how you respond to the changes. Naturally, blaming someone for things that were out of their grasp is just such a trap.

How do we diffuse blame?
To do that, you need to start thinking in terms of "I-statements". Think about it this way. You know how you feel. You are in control of your feelings. You're not a mind reader, just like you are less certain of how other people feel in a dilemma. As appreciated as it is to express empathy, sometimes it's more helpful and solution-minded to stay in your own head and thoughts. Start the conversation from there and then try figuring out where your friend comes from.

We'll return to blame in a moment.

Good self-focused statements have a few components to them.
First, they are built around a "trigger." A trigger simply refers to a preceding event or situation that gives you the opportunity to attach a feeling to it. For instance, if I said, "Whenever I go for a bike ride on the trail, I feel such-and-such way," the trigger is riding a bike on the trail. The trigger is the condition that enables a positive feeling to emerge.

Second, you need a strong feeling-statement. It's the "such-and-such" in the previous example. Good feeling statements use specific emotion-focused language that really crystallize what the trigger experience does to you.

If I said, "Whenever I go for a bike ride on the trail, I feel happy," that doesn't help much. The statement is grammatically correct, but it doesn't really help that other person get inside my head. "Happy," albeit positive, is a pretty weak feeling-statement because of its nonspecificity. In other words, plenty of things make us "happy." What's the big hairy deal about riding on the trail?

Weak:
Whenever I go for a bike ride on the trail, I feel happy.

Improved:
Whenever I go for a bike ride on the trail, I feel my worries slip away.

Even better:
Whenever I go for a bike ride on the trail, I can just focus on enjoying the weather and leave all my troubles behind. It really relaxes me and puts me at ease.

To review, a good I-statement includes (1) a triggering experience that sets the stage for a good feeling and (2) the good feeling that emerges from it. Statements need both parts to be correct. Statements should also include specific language that really helps the other person understand where you're coming from.

In this exercise, these kinds of I-statements are helpful because they are ultimately helping us get in touch with how we feel about our friendships. Trigger phrases can resemble one of any number of good times you have a friend: going out to the movies, playing video games together, enjoying a happy hour, or taking a road trip, or so on.

When you're ready to talk with your friend, these statements start to change form a bit. I will explain this in more detail below.

Let's begin blameproofing.
Okay, so it's all fine and good to talk about bike rides, but your buddy just ditched you and you're sick of putting up with it!

Fair enough. You're mad. I get it, and it's good you're acting on it. But if you start off an I-statement with...

Whenever you can't be bothered to return my phone calls no matter how many times I leave a voicemail, I feel like it's my right to kick your ass.

You lost.

You lost control and you got out of your head. The only "I" in that sentence referred to you leaving a voicemail. The facts become debatable, and your friend might not even be in the mood to feel sensitive after you just hit him over the head with blame. Right in the kisser.

Remember the primary rule. The relationship got out of control, and pointing fingers won't get things back into place. You can only control your reactions.

Let's repair that outburst.

The respondent started out, Whenever you can't be bothered to return my phone calls...

Staying in touch via telephone is the trigger statement. However, the emotional response is pretty strong and we have no clue about the facts. Whenever we become angry or resentful, the facts are usually the first thing to give way to that emotional outburst.

Simply put, accusatory second-person language can't fit into a trigger, much less a self-directed feeling. So if you see the word "you" in there, it should probably get cut out. The first-person "I" is good, but it only belongs in a trigger if you're talking about yourself. Good triggers in a heart-to-heart chat mention neutral, collective activities that can evoke a positive feeling. In other words, you'll need to talk about the times in which you feel connected to your buddy. It sets the stage for talking in more detail about what you miss, what went wrong, and so forth.

Instead of "you," try "we."

Weak:
Whenever you can't be bothered to return my phone calls...

Improved:
Whenever time goes by and we are unable to talk on the telephone...

The who's who of initial phone contact is clearly less important than the actual lack of communication going on. Saying it like that may help your friend recognize when a call wasn't returned or how long it has been since plans were made. It may, and that's good; or it may not. Don't get hurt. That's okay. You are not starting out with blame and you are setting the stage to be heard and respected. That's way more important!

Now, the feeling depicted was an action: "I feel like it's my right to kick your ass." And certainly not an action worth following (especially if your friend can go toe-to-toe with you). The feeling is pretty clear. Anger would motivate someone to get into a fist fight.

Remember the reaction I gave you to the word "happy?" Anger is also a nonspecific feeling-state. If you need help remembering nonspecific feeling statements, say this rhyme to yourself.

glad
sad
bad
mad

Again, we know what these words mean. We get the gist of how people use them. Unfortunately, they don't really help us understand our friend to any degree of depths. Life in general can make us feel glad, bad, sad, or mad at any given point. You want to stick with specific, powerful language that really makes your feelings come alive.

You wouldn't feel so hot knowing that despite how much fun you have with your friend, the best you can come up with is "glad." True?

Threats of butt-kicking aside, let's correct the latter part of the sentence. How does this sound to you?

Whenever time goes by and we are unable to talk on the telephone, I feel out of sorts.

The impact of not speaking regularly becomes clear. Feeling out of sorts is a good way to describe, perhaps, the imbalance of not staying in touch. The friend talking right now is referring to a comfortable routine that involves, at the very least, just speaking with some regular contact. The phone calls could be quick chats or more thought-provoking conversations. In any case, if they don't happen, the friend feels disoriented and out of touch.

If given the floor to speak further, the friend could go into greater detail. Subsequent statements should elaborate on that "out of sorts" feeling. Elaborate at will. Just remember to keep the "you" out of it. You're talking about disorientation you personally experience and you're still in your own head right now. Help your friend experience the disorientation.

Practice, practice, practice!
I strongly recommend practice for blame-proofing. It is easier to practice on your own because the friend and the relationship giving you grief aren't in your face. The more adept you feel at writing and speaking positive, helpful language, the easier it will come out in a dialogue session.

Remember that you will make mistakes. You won't get those perfect sentences on the first try. If I'm doing any writing, I like to do it with two pens. A pen is good for the exercise because it is much harder to erase than a pencil. That said, if you goof up, it gives you a better opportunity to see the mistake and then go about correction. The first pen, of course, is for writing what comes into head. Don't think too much. Just write it out. The second pen is for revision.

Has a problematic "you" shown up? Are you triggering with anger instead of neutrality? Would a "we" sound better here? How's that feeling word? Does it help your reader understand you better?

Mark through troublesome words and phrases and write an improvement above them. Don't let the red ink trouble you. You're supposed to get better with practice.

Try these exercises.

Exercise 1:
Glad, sad, bad, and mad. These are good-for-nothing words. Enhance your emotional vocabulary. Fold a sheet of notebook paper lengthwise and then widthwise so that you have divided it into four sections. In each section, write a generic word in capital letters. Fill each section with more powerful descriptive terms. Feel free to use a thesaurus and write until unproductive.

Exercise 2:
Stay in your own head. Write down ten positive experiences you create in your own spare time. Be sure that each statement has a well-defined trigger phrase as well as a definite feeling-statement attached to it.

Exercise 3:
Go a little deeper. Review the statements you did in Exercise 2. Copy down a statement from the previous exercise, and then elaborate further. Write an additional sentence to develop that feeling for a reader.

Exercise 4:
Be wary of blame. Leaf through a magazine or read some blog entries online. Take note of any statements prominently featuring second-person language like "you." Is there blame going on here, or not? If it looks like a blame sentence, copy it down and correct it.

In our final episode of the Third Wheel series, we will discuss what happens after the talking.

Feelings First

2009-08-12T01:33:00.005-04:00

Back in January, I wrote an article about being a third wheel. The good news is that people have stumbled onto my blog trying to figure out what, exactly, that term means. I think the picture included in that entry gets the message across, but I thought I would revisit the topic again and give some practical advice on how to handle that situation.

Assess the ties that bind you.
The first step is to figure out the relationship between you and the two other people in the circle. But to do this, you have to accept one basic truth to the third wheel situation.

The third wheel experience can happen to anyone and it often reveals itself well in advance of you getting the hint.

It is really easy to be the friend of one or the other partner in a relationship that's taking off a bit quickly. It's really easy to get attached to one of your friends more than the other one. Maybe two of you share an intensely passionate interest in a given number of hobbies or activities, or maybe with time pressures demanded elsewhere, the common ground once held begins to shift.

You have to abandon the idea that you are in complete control of the tide and flow occurring within the relationship. The only thing you can control is your reaction to your friends.

Okay, so now you have calmed down a bit...
That's great! You will need a cool head for the analytical work to go on from here. Like I said, you need to have a good sense of why the relationships you have going on around you started in the first place. Keep the questions simple.

How did you meet?
Who introduced you to each other?
What was your first impression?
Did that impression change or remain stable?
What do you like to do for fun together?

Even this baseline volley of questioning can get complicated, especially for relationships that have lasted a long time. Don't get upset at not remembering the particulars. As relationships age, the details may become unclear. For what it's worth, I tend to characterize relationships by the amount of complacency going on within them. With a lot of the pressures of daily life soaking up most of our concentration, people tend to evaluate their friendships favorably so long as there's no inordinate, in-your-face drama going on. Nevertheless, problems need not be acute and in your face to cause you grief. (That's why you're in this third wheel pickle, right?)

Transition from the baseline to the deep and meaningful.
What makes this mental activity is your willingness to be thoughtful and honest about your feelings. Even if you spend more time just rehashing the basics of your relationships, being able to do so proficiently helps your brain get ready to do the more serious kinds of soul-searching later on. I would only hope that, at this stage, you feel okay with being honest and you learn to laugh off the moments of corniness you may experience.

Trust me when I tell you that I, too, am a guy and I chuckle a bit at the idea of getting emotional. We all do. Anti-emotionality is bred into all of us.

Tough! Just give yourself a little reminder. Remind yourself that you're doing this work because, at some point, that whole complacency thing you had going on in your relationship stopped working. Being passive and idle allowed these unsettling feelings to creep in. If you don't deal with them now, they will fester and become even more unmanageable. At that point, you veer into that "can't take it back" territory, saying things you may very well regret in the future.

The ultimate guiding question is, How do you feel when ________?

Keep that in mind when revisiting the points below.

What do you do for fun?
Do you and your friend have a "routine?"
When was the last time you had a blast?
What's a "perfect day" like?
Do you have any inside jokes?
Do you know each other's secrets?

Train yourself to talk with feelings in mind.
You want to get a solid idea of just good your relationship got when things were working out very well. You want to be at the top of your game. You want to remember the good times, the better ones, and the best ones. It's because this third wheel phenomenon does a solid job exemplifying just how far you fell from this high point.

The common thread in just about every third wheel story is the idea that, deep down, conscious or not, recitable or not, you had a really awesome friendship or relationship going on in which you put a lot of stock and investment. Really investing in someone -- getting to know them, hanging out with them, sharing your feelings and thoughts, cementing positive experiences (pictures, stories, etc.) -- means that a lot of care and work has been put into the relationship. Even if you didn't know it or thought of it, that connection is very powerful. When threatened or dismantled, consciously or not, severing that connection generates an awful lot of hurt.

We might deal with it by ignoring it, making excuses, or pretending as if it doesn't exist.

Next time, we'll continue with suggestions on how to talk to your friend while resolving this third wheel dilemma.

Grin and Bear

2009-08-05T19:38:00.002-04:00

Benefits.

I have been a young working professional for seven years now. It will be eight years by next spring. I think once young people get past the sparkling visions of multi-figured salaries and living in the best cities in the country and having that wonderful blend of professional life and night leisure, that we start waxing about the comfort and security that successful employment can bring. We can make that transition from tolerable apartment to our first homes. If we're single, we think about the marriage life phase; if we're heading there, we cement plans. Children optional, but the nice car is not so much, and neither is a step-up from hand-me-down furnishings. But above all that, the benefits. Whatever size the family, we think about getting off that university insurance payroll (if we were ever on it) and start preparing insurance coffers to take care of us when sick and to handle us if we die unexpectedly.

I did it too. I began speculating how much salary I could command on the marketplace, and it took a few years before I began thinking of the important issues: weekly schedules, vacation time, telecommuting, and those bright and shiny benefits.

I never got them. Like many college students (and probably more so now considering the state of the economy), I couldn't afford not to work. I enjoyed my time interning as a parenting counselor and a victims of crime advocate, but I thought I was "too good," had "too much professional training" to settle for a $20,000 annual salary at a nonprofit. My student loans pushed $25,000, so I ventured back into the world. At one point, I cobbled together three jobs out of financial necessity.

I would describe myself to your face as a behavioral counselor, though the reality was that it was a part-time, hourly gig that I could have learned on-the-job. If you could sound like you cared over the telephone and take notes at the same time, you had it made. I earned $10.25 an hour at that job and was denied a yearly raise because the parent company knew I would be leaving for school. Once enjoying the freedom to work as many hours as I could while we were behind on intakes, the parent company knocked every caseworker down to a 32-hour maximum. No benefits.

I would grab dinner around five, and then drive to the factory. I worked the graveyard shift. It wasn't difficult work since I had to sort and scan incoming freight, but we were talking 12-hour shifts (and 14 in mandatory overtime). I worked over 40 hours a week, but because I was a temp, I received no benefits. We were also expendable, too.

When I wasn't working at the "clinic," I waited tables a couple nights a week for some extra cash. Saturday was probably my favorite day of the week. It wasn't because I could go out and have a good time. It was the one afternoon I had off so that, when I got off at 5 a.m., I could crash until the sun made it impossible to keep my eyes closed.

I held two jobs for a long time prior. I managed to keep three for about six months. One winter night, I was driving home and a microsleep came over me. It felt like a split second, as if I just blinked. In that blink, I managed to go completely off the road and into the grass shoulder. I snapped out of it just in time to cut a hard right at a transitioning red light into my neighborhood. Any further delay and I would have been wrapped around a tree.

The money was tempting but hazardous to my health. I quit the factory, and then I left the clinic. My manager at the restaurant was super sweet to me about the whole thing. She let me work until just shy of 40 hours. I had no clue the restaurant would close for business about a month later, but it was good while it lasted. Sleeping right, eating okay.

But no benefits.

I worked at the mall for a while, too, before this whole three-job foolishness, and the manager talks to me one morning about being financially crunched. Her husband had been struggling to get on the police force, and money was tight at home. She mentioned health insurance. I chortled. She chastised in return. I told her that I have managed just fine without health insurance for many, many years.

I was six when I had my tonsils removed, and even then I only had them taken out because the impending sore throats were practically killing me. I was sixteen when I unexpectedly passed out in high school. I had a brief seizure in algebra class. We went to the emergency room for treatment. The doctor referred me to a neurologist who, to the tune of $600 for a consultation, could find not a damn thing wrong with me. He was dumbfounded, and it was then that I realized that being totally ignorant of something can still bring in a paycheck.

The rest of the bill came. The know-nothing doctor, the IV drip, and a sick craving for anything McDonald's could throw together because I was not allowed to eat while being tested. It was four figures forced onto piddling savings and Mom's hourly job and welfare benefits. We nearly defaulted. I worked all summer long to save up some money for college, and out it went with the borderline collections threats. Because my name was on the bill. Because I had no idea what would happen to me if I didn't pay this thing.

Who puts a teenager through stuff like that?

That was thirteen years ago. Never had another seizure, so I assume it was some fluke thing. I developed allergies later in life. I don't remember all the details, but a drive to Louisville meant that some generous soul or kindly hospital service was willing to help out with the tab. Some x-rays revealed several cysts and polyps in my sinus cavity. I live with one nostril open. The blockage shifts left or right depending on how I sleep; it's usually the left, and I get nosebleeds only on the right side.

I couldn't tell you how much the surgery costs for repair. Maybe it's because you block out impossibilities. You don't think about saving or preparing or setting anything aside because, even if I did get it, how could I pay for the missed time off work? How soon can I recover and get back to full strength? Or what if the complications messed me up worse than I began in the first place?

Wait. Hang on a sec. One other procedure. Wisdom teeth removed sometime that summer before I graduated. The anaesthetist doped me up too much. I didn't want to wake up. Mom carried me on her back to the car, dumped me onto her bed, and I stayed like that for a full twenty-four hours. Another $800. Payment for a near overdose, I tell you.

When you're like me -- working class, not much savings, you get used to getting by -- health care is a luxury. This whole nose thing aside, I consider myself relatively healthy. I don't smoke. I drink in moderation. I'm lean, even with a bit of belly on me. I must be doing something right if I have thus resisted the family legacy of chain smoking, adipose tissue, and cardiovascular disease. But that's not to say I'm totally immune. And that's also not to say that I am doing anything beyond common-sense prevention.

I can pay a couple of bills or get a physical. I can pay a credit card (eventually) or opt for that surgery. That's what it comes down to. Being healthy won't get me financially back on track. I am taking away from my own well-being now and banking on the chance that I will get it back sometime down the road.

I am twenty-nine years ago and the luxury I have right now is sheer dumb luck. I also have university health coverage. It would probably require me completing a Ph.D. before I understand all of the benefits attached to it, and it would require every bit of dumb luck and then some to get covered in the event something does happen to me. If so, it would have to be catastrophic; we're talking explosions rivaling those in Transformers 2. Then and only then might a company grudgingly offer to pay. It's the small, everyday stuff that might keep us alive that are exempt from coverage.

Today isn't such a bad day. I'm breathing particularly well out of my right nostril.

Tell It Like It Is!

2009-08-05T04:42:00.003-04:00

Keith Olbermann delivers an excellent Special Comment regarding health care reform and political bribery. Thirteen minutes, worth every second. Take a look.

Head Gasket

2009-08-04T01:15:00.010-04:00

Orly Taitz borders on hyperventilation in this clip.

Once anyone can get past the shrieking and histronics, then one cannot help but wonder how on earth she would manage to hold up in court should America v. Obama actually ever go through. She called the mainstream media "brownshirts." She says no one is listening despite journalistic due diligence in covering and reporting all sides of the issue.

No surprise that Taitz released her version of Obama's alleged Kenyan birth certificate to World Net Daily. The scan appears below. If your head can tolerate it, here's a link to the article.

With the help of some intelligent and thoughtful friends with whom I share membership in an Internet forum, we all did some fact-checking with the document. By no means are we operating on the caliber of the real legal professionals out there who do this for a living, but here is what we came up with.

A fellow user complained that Obama is violating his campaign promise for more transparency in government proceedings by blocking and sealing his personal records. I would love to see the user try to hold that position and then argue cogently for a right to privacy, but that's an entry for a later date. Anyway, my rebuttal answers this criticism and a bad analogy about underage people being able to purchase alcohol while refusing to show identification. I responded,

But if the minor were to appear in court and try to argue that his rights were violated when asked to show ID for proof of alcohol consumption, he would get shot down in a second in court. States laws of alcohol purchase indicate that customers must provide identification to prove their age, and that businesses have a right to ask for ID so long as the purchaser looks under middle age.

The user wrote,
The burden of proof rests with Obama.

No. It does not.

What does "innocent until proven guilty" mean? It is formally called the presumption of innocence. Funny how innocence is not explicitly stated in the Constitution either, but criminal prosecutions have inferred this right derived from several Amendments -- the 5th, 6th, and 14th ones, in particular.

It means that prosecutors must bring the burden of proof to the courtroom. In fact, I like the President, but I kinda wish he would get more direct with these so-called "birthers" and tell them to go take a hike. You want to prove he was born in Kenya? Cool. Go ahead. Take your time. If you don't mind me, I've got a country to fix.

I think this is the only proof you got. Too bad it got debunked.

First.
The fake birth certificate is dated February 1964. Obama was working toward his third birthday before the hospital would prepare a birth certificate? I get that some countries are slow in processing paperwork, but that's a bit ridiculous.

Second.
Kenya had been known as the Dominion of Kenya up until December of 1964. Why would the birth certificate be erroneously entitled the Republic of Kenya?

Third.
Coast Province Hospital only keeps hand-prepared records of births from the 1960s. After being besieged by multiple requests, the hospital could find no birth certificate having Obama's name on it.

Google is having a field day trying to keep track of all the debunking.

47-044.
The serial number on the certificate refers to the 44th president of the United States turning 47 years of age. I hope he has a sense of humor about that since his birthday's this week.

Signed, E. F. Lavender.
As much as I would love to meet an African surnamed after a delightfully fragrant flower alleged to cure headaches, it's actually a brand of... detergent.

Again, this is the real deal.
No gimmicks, no forgery.
This is the man's birth certificate.

At the end of the day, Ms. Taitz needs to appear coherent and capable of arguing through her case logically and rationally. She appeared anything but that in this clip, and I would hope that this controversy can be finally put to rest.

But who am I kidding? I would bet my life savings (which isn't all that much, unfortunately) that when I wake up in the morning, someone else will be all the more convinced -- not by facts, not by logic, not by evidence -- that there is something criminally, morally, and fundamentally wrong with a man of mixed racial heritage running our country. I think we can expect the stories to become even wilder as time lets on.

Some blame the media for egging on the crisis. Perhaps the media is paying a bit too much attention to this story, but I cannot imagine a suitable alternative. Whether the birthers get air time, receive legitimation from fringe journalists like Lou Dobbs and Glenn Beck, or whether Taitz can summon up a logical legal case, it doesn't matter. This is pure and unbridled disruption, and someone out there has a stake in egging it on. Televised or not, people would continue whispering, shouting, hanging from rooftops crying false outrage.

Cognition is not fueling this. I wouldn't even cheapen the word "emotion" either. It's just uncontrolled frustration and anger. I think race still plays a big role in generating this animus, but even racial tensions have some order of palpability to them. It's not like you have a bunch of people of different races fighting for media coverage, or a lot of them chasing after scarce jobs (let alone that harsh reality garnering attention). Not one bit. There is this brooding, seething, repugnant sort of anti-.

Ah! I struggle for words here. This isn't even an issue of anti-intellectualism. I think it's a cheap appeal to the lowest denominator, a par excellence of outgroup antagonism.

Whether people make fun of his name or despise his skin color or question his patriotism or bastardize his status as a leader in the Free World, there will always be people that refuse him the standing of his reputation, gifts, achievements, talents, and scholarship.

He will always be "the one that got away" from his predetermined cage of ghettoization.