Throwing Bullets

Moving On

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 04:28:00 +0000

The pseudonymous blog experiment has come to an end.

It's been fun. Really, it has. But I haven't posted here in a while.

I decided I wanted to come back to blogging, and there's no need for me to blog here anymore.

So I'm going back home. Hope to see you there.

RIP GOP?

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:54:00 +0000

I've been thinking a lot about Arlen Specter since reading yesterday of his decision to leave the Republican party.

My initial reaction was one of shock. (As an aside, I really love Twitter.)

Then, of course, the experts started to weigh in, saying that it was a craven political move designed to help him gain re-election in 2010, since he was likely to lose the Republican primary to a more garden-variety conservative.

At least that's what the experts on the right had to say. The experts on the left held the decision up as further evidence that the Republican party is out of touch and that there is no room in the party for moderation or dissent of any kind. I guess "expert" should be in quotes there. Well, the better word is "pundit" at any rate. (As another aside, I tried to watch five minutes of Rachel Maddow's show last night and couldn't do it. MSNBC ruined her by giving her her very own show. I really used to like her. Now she's nearly as insufferable as Olbermann and O'Reilly.)

See, this is why I like Twitter so much. Asides can be posted as whole other thoughts. I have a lot of asides.

Being a moderate, I tend to think it's a little of both. Obviously, someone who has been a Republican for a very long time (even if he was a Democrat before that) doesn't just suddenly get fed up with the party and leave. He can say the party left him all he wants. The fact remains that it's been leaving him for a long time, so why is it only a problem now? I would say that the Republican party of 2009 isn't that different from the Republican party of 1999, so why not then instead of now. The cynical (and probably correct) answer is that now it benefits him greatly to leave, whereas before it didn't.

Not that I object to Specter giving into political expediency. He is, after all, a politician. He must be a pretty damn good one to have survived in the strange politics of Pennsylvania for so long. In fact, I wonder whether Specter's switch will make him the more liberal Democratic senator from Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania's other senator, Democrat Bob Casey, is actually pretty conservative. (Yet another aside: Casey is proof of my theory that abortion is still the linchpin issue in this country and separates liberal from conservative for many people. By this definition, Specter would definitely be more liberal: he is pro-choice and Casey is pro-life.)

I do think that this decision was more a result of Specter's political need rather than any major, untenable change in the party as a whole. True, there was a conservative Republican running against Specter in the primary and if the party really supported him full force, this wouldn't have been a problem. It's not just the Republican party that does this, though. Remember Joe Lieberman? (I mean, Joe Lieberman before he backed McCain, when he was opposed in the Democratic primary and became an independent so that he could keep his seat. Joe proves a corollary to my theory: in most instances, support for the Iraq war is enough to make one a conservative.)

Still, even though I don't really blame the party for this all that much, I can't help but wonder if what the liberal pundits - and more than a few of the conservative ones - say is true: is the Republican party as we know it, as a force in American politics capable of winning elections, dead?

I think it just might be.

This makes me sad, for some strange reason. Though I don't associate with a political party, and though my very conservative family is convinced I'm quite liberal, if I were forced to choose from one of the two major parties, I would pick the Republican one. It's not for any one view that the espouse. It's just what I see myself as, at the end of the day, even though many Republicans and their supporters infuriate me greatly. I think it may just be that I grew up identifying as a Republican, and it's hard to let that kind of thing go. Also, as much as I don't like the Republicans, I tend to not like the Democrats just a little bit more.

I guess I shouldn't be sad, though. I should probably welcome this development, as someone who would like to identify as a Republican but just can't right now, given the state of the party. I do believe that we need more parties in this country to reflect the diversity of political belief - then perhaps Specter could find a party of his own rather than hopping back and forth between the two major ones - but I don't want to join any of those. I really have a heart for politics - if I had it to do over again, and I could pick a party to go to work for, I would really like to be a political staffer, I think. Right now, I just don't have a party. I don't think I could ever be a Democrat, so the Republicans are my only hope.

I won't be holding my breath, though. Change, when it comes, will probably not be the kind I'm looking for.

Electronic Cigarettes

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 14:01:00 +0000

I was listening to the radio this morning on the way to work.

(My radio is on the fritz again, so I'm stuck on MPB - Mississippi Public Broadcasting. Also, we used to have a cat named Fritz. No, he wasn't named after that Fritz; he was named after Clara's little brother in The Nutcracker, because he was mischevious. He died - the cat, not the little brother - when I was still in NYC. It was really quite sad.)

When I turned it on, the story was about something called e-cigarettes. I just kept hearing them say "e-cigarette" and figured they couldn't really mean electronic cigarettes - because that would be pretty odd. This must mean something else, I thought. Only, it turned out they were talking about just that: electronic cigarettes.

In my head, I pictured some kind of machine that you would hook to yourself and use to inject the drugs directly into your blood stream. I thought the name was more symbolic than anything else. In fact, they look a lot like real cigarettes. Just click on the link above and you'll see what I mean.

I'd never heard of such a thing. Perhaps most people have. I don't know. I just thought it was kind of an interesting concept. The story on NPR was mostly about the battle between the FDA and proponents of the e-cigarettes over regulation of the product - at least the part I heard.

It dawns on me after writing all of this that I really don't have much to say about this subject. I thought I had a point laboring somewhere in my brain. Turns out I was wrong. I did think it was a pretty interesting story, though, so I'm posting it.

Birthday

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 13:57:00 +0000

You say it's your birthday
It's my birthday too, yeah
They say it's your birthday
We're gonna have a good time
I'm glad it's your birthday
Happy birthday to you.

Yes we're going to a party party
Yes we're going to a party party
Yes we're going to a party party

I would like you to dance (Birthday)
Take a cha-cha-cha-chance (Birthday)
I would like you to dance (Birthday)
Dance

I would like you to dance (Birthday)
Take a cha-cha-cha-chance (Birthday)
I would like you to dance (Birthday)
Dance

You say it's your birthday
Well it's my birthday too, yeah
You say it's your birthday
We're gonna have a good time
I'm glad it's your birthday
Happy birthday to you.

Well, happy birthday to me, at any rate.

That's right. Today is my birthday. (No, this is not an April Fool's joke. It would be a pretty lame one if it were.) Normally I wouldn't blog about it being my birthday, but since I haven't been blogging much lately, I figured what the heck.

I haven't really been dreading my birthday this year as I have the past couple of years. I'm no longer insanely depressed and my birthday doesn't conjure up bad memories or sad stories. I'm still restless and wandering, still pretty lost when it comes to who I am and where I'm going, but I feel like I'm looking forward rather than back and that's a good thing.

Still, I can't say I'm exactly excited that it's my birthday. At least I wasn't leading up to it. I am another year older and, it seems, another year further away from my dreams and ambitions.

Today, though, I feel loved. I can't explain it, why I should feel so loved on this birthday more than others in recent memory, when I'm probably more alone now that ever.

I guess that's the thing about the new technologies and the vast expansion of the internet. Now, we're more connected to more people than ever before. On my facebook page, I've gotten plenty of birthday wishes. Friends have emailed and family has texted. I even got a very special birthday tweet from a dear friend.

It's nice to be thought of and it's nice to hear those birthday wishes. Here at work they got me a cake and sang to me and everything. There was even talk of them taking me to lunch, but I think I'd much rather go home and see my mom. Then tonight, my sister (whose birthday is also today - we're twins, in case I never mentioned it) and I are going to have a celebratory birthday dinner.

All the birthday greetings have made me feel loved, but it's also made me a little sad. Sometimes it feels like with all the new ways to stay in touch, we lose sight of the older, more personal ones. Now, a friend who would normally have called me on my birthday might just text instead, or post a message on my facebook, or shoot a quick email. I'm not being critical. I do it, too, probably even more so than other people. I never really thought of how isolated it made me feel until just now.

I realize that this is not a particularly original thought. I also realize that it probably has less to do with me not getting a phone call from so-and-so on my birthday and more to do with the distance I've felt lately from my local, flesh-and-blood, in-person friends.

Normally, they would plan some kind of birthday event for me. Nothing big or fancy, but still a time for me to celebrate with my friends, few though they may be. It won't be happening this year and it makes me feel a little sad, and more than a little forgotten. I realize how selfish this makes me sound. I want that made clear. I am aware of my own weaknesses, and also aware of why they might not be as close to me as they once were, aside from the usual cliche that these things happen. These things do happen, but in this case, we tell ourselves these things happen to make us feel better and to prevent us from having to do anything about it.

The truth is, I know some of the reasons why these things happen, because in this case some of those reasons are my fault.

However, for today, I'm not going to dwell on the negative, because there is so much to be positive about. This past weekend, and good and much missed friend came to visit and we had a wonderful weekend of fun and adventure and television viewing. (I may be an ever older conservative, but I still love The West Wing.) And this coming weekend, I'm going to meet a new friend for another weekend of fun. (This new friendship was formed on the internet, so perhaps it isn't as isolating as I think it is.) And of course there's tonight, plans with my sister that are a twist on our normal, Wednesday evening routine. She will be moving away soon, so it's important for me to get to spend this time with her, and with my beautiful niece.

All in all, it should be a pretty great birthday. What more could I possibly ask for? I am truly blessed.

The Morning Drive

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 16:14:00 +0000

Sometimes, when I leave my house in the morning and I'm driving to work, if I don't encounter another car or person right away, for a brief moment I consider the possibility that the world might have ended during the night and that I'm the only person left on earth.

Of course, then I'll see a car or a person out walking and I'll return to one (or ten) of the million other preoccupations that come with any given day.

It happened to me this morning, though, and I actually reflected upon it for a moment, rather than brushing it away. There was no one out, which is unusual because it's a nice day today and it wasn't all that early. Everything seemed so silent and still. My thoughts drifted to the idea that I could be the only person left. The radio was on but it wasn't broadcasting anything other than ads, and I figured even those could be running without any person needing to be around. I probably didn't think it through that much, but I didn't hear a live voice speaking to disconnect me from the notion that I was the only soul around.

Then, I saw a car up ahead, way in the distance, cross through the intersection at the end of the street. It brought me out of my reverie and made me feel less alone.

And then the live guys came on the radio, confirmation that I wasn't it.

Perhaps I should start putting live TV on in the morning to reassure myself.

The strange thing about it, though, was that I didn't feel all that scared at the prospect. The thought ran through my mind and caused no great alarm. Probably because I knew it wasn't really true. But in that brief moment, it almost felt true. I looked around me and everything was so still that it seemed impossible that there could be life behind the walls of the houses. But all I really felt was peace, like even if it had been true, everything would have been okay. Lonely, but okay.

I think I felt this way because I've really been working on my faith lately and trying to make sure I know that I'm never truly alone. I think the fact that I could contemplate being utterly alone in this world - even in the shortest and most abstract of moments - and not panic means I'm taking a step in the right direction, even if it is an infinitesimally small one.

Quote of the Day

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 01:13:00 +0000

Let not those who hope in you be put to shame through me."
~Psalm 69:6 (ESV)

This is my prayer for myself, as I once again set out to serve my God half as well as I serve myself.

Speaking Of

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 18:35:00 +0000

Fits and starts:

President Barack Obama is comparing the stock market to the daily tracking polls used during campaigns, saying that paying too close attention to Wall Street's "fits and starts" could lead to bad long-term policy.

A Start, Not a Fit

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 18:03:00 +0000

As I'm sure you noticed - or not, if you've given up reading this blog, either for Lent or because of the dearth of postings of late - I haven't blogged anything in a while. Just now I was thinking about this fact. I've thought about it before, but this time, instead of just making a mental note - soon to be forgotten - to update the blog, I started to wonder why.

I tend to blog the way I live: in fits and starts.

This weekend, I'm pretty sure someone told me that I have a problem with commitment. (I say pretty sure because I didn't think much of it at the time, and now that I remember it I'm not sure I'm remembering it correctly.) Given the identity of this person, the comment was kind of ironic. But that's rather beside the point.

Still, I've never thought of myself as a person who can't commit to things. I perceive myself as being the opposite, a person who clings desperately to her commitments when any sane person would have long since abandoned them. And I'm not just talking of relationships, but in nearly all aspects of my life: the job I have...the church I attend...the television shows I watch.

Until just now, I've never really thought of that as a bad thing. And more, I see that in some areas I do have problems committing. I think those result from a lack of energy, as is the case with this blog. I think about blogging and it makes me tired. I'd much rather pick up a book or watch television. That, and I don't really feel like I have anything worthwhile - or even superficial - to say.

More accurately, I don't have the words. There are a great deal of things about myself and life and the world and God and others that I long to be able to communicate. It makes me profoundly sad that I so seldom am able to put these feelings and thoughts and impressions into actual words on a page. This is a pretty painful state to be in for one who loves to write, whose only effective mode of communication is the written form. It's so painful that I just give up. I don't even try because every time I sit down and no words come, the discouragement overwhelms me to the point that I can't see my way through it.

It's better if I don't try. If I don't pretend to be a writer anymore. Everything else is swimming along smoothly. There are bumps along the way to be sure. I'm not sure I'm in the right place. I'm not crazy about my job - that's probably related to not being in the right place, come to think of it. Still, I have hope about the future. So it's better if I don't try to write anything, on this blog or otherwise. It's not good for me to spend that much time in my own head anyway.

Except now, right now, I'm able to write this. Not that it's good. But it's coherent. The strings of words I've cobbled together aren't gibberish. Unless my mind really is that far gone - a possibility I'm not quite ready to rule out.

I won't say I'm back. But I do miss blogging. I like to type out my thoughts and think that someone will happen along to read it, whether they are an old friend or a new acquaintance or a complete stranger. It makes me feel more connected, even if no one responds, than I do in a room filled to the brim with people. It makes me feel more alive.

So I'll try. I'll make the effort. It's worth the effort. That's a cliche, but it's true. Some things are effortless some of the time, but nothing is effortless all of the time. At some point, you have to give to receive and you have to do to be.

Do be do be do...

Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

Maybe I really am back...

Quote of the Day

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:35:00 +0000

And it seems likely that, as journalist Eli Lake argued in The New Republic, anti-war voters might soon discover that rather than electing Jimmy Carter, they might very well have elected Ronald Reagan.
~Michael C. Moynihan, at Reason Magazine Online

Normally I post quotes that I like or agree with. This one, however, I don't agree with. Of course, I'm not one of the anti-war voters he's talking about.

I didn't go back and read the articles he links to. Maybe they make compelling arguments. He attempts one as well. Still, I'm not convinced. I have a feeling that Obama will come out a lot more like Jimmy Carter than Ronald Reagan when all is said and done, and not just on the domestic front.

While there may be stuff that the anti-war crowd doesn't like (and really, these people are never going to be satisfied with a U.S. President - not in my lifetime, anyway), there's much to dislike from those of us on the opposite side of the fence as well. Perhaps Obama will manage to piss all of us off before his job is done.

Quote of the Day

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 18:29:00 +0000

Heard this on the radio this morning and I liked it:

If you hate a person, you hate something in him that is part of yourself. What isn't part of ourselves doesn't disturb us.
-Hermann Hesse

Whiny Complaint of the Day

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:51:00 +0000

From yesterday's Dear Prudence column (yes, I'm back to reading Slate):

Dear Prudie,
My mother does something that is most annoying to me. She gets my and my brother's names confused. She calls me his name and him my name. My brother is 15, very immature, not so bright, lies and steals everything, and is either gay or bisexual. I am about to hit 20, very mature, very intelligent, never lie, never steal, and am straight. I have told her time and time again to stop doing it, but she tells me that she gets our names confused because she is always around us. By the way, I personally believe that is a typical excuse by moms for not thinking before speaking. So what should I do about this?

—Not Him

Reading this, I almost wonder if this crap is for real. Seriously. If you're really that upset about something like this that you have to write to an advice columnist about it, then you have issues. I definitely question the whole "very matrue, very intelligent" thing. Of course, he's probably tried complaining to everyone else about it and they told him to grow up and get a life, so his only recourse is mailing an advice columinist. It's a wonder this guy hasn't started a blog already.

For the record, I have a twin sister and my parents (and lots of other people, including family and friends) would call us by the wrong name all the time growing up and even now, and it never ever bothered me one bit. And I'm a pretty sensitive person, perhaps even overly so.

Down a Kidney and a Spouse - Now That's a Bad Day

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 15:44:00 +0000

This is an interesting legal story out of New York. The man gave his wife one of his kidneys eight years ago. Then, at some point later, she cheated on him and they went through a nasty divorce. Now he's suing her in part because he gave her the kidney.

My initial reaction to this was to think that this case wouldn't go very far. But Saletan's explanation of the argument in favor of the case make it seem like it's not completely out there. Still, I have my doubts. It's not so much the bioethical problem of receiving payment for donating an organ that is a hangup. It's the fact that courts usually look at what kind of precedent they will be setting when they make a decision.

I don't think this case will ever make it to a jury. The man would probably win. He's very sympathetic. And I think the consequences of such an outcome would be something most judges would want to avoid. I think judges especially try to avoid decisions that interfere in marriages. Now, every spouse will think again before giving a kidney if the other one needs it, or so the argument goes. Also, the recipient spouse in a future case may feel trapped in the marriage by the fear of a big lawsuit if she or he leaves.

Then again, if the case has merit, it's hard to stop even if a judge wanted to. And it's a situation that isn't likely to come up incredibly often, which might make a judge more willing to just let the case go forward.

I can't help but think of poor John Locke on this one. (And I don't mean the philosopher.) He was conned out of his kidney by his wretched, long lost father. At least in this case, there could have been good faith on the part of the wife at the time of the donation. Maybe the problems started later.

Speaking of Lost, the new season is coming up soon...

I Thought Maybe I Was Thinking of Someone Else

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 06:05:00 +0000

I've been a little preoccupied lately, so I haven't been following all the transition news the way I would like. However, earlier this week I heard on the radio that Obama is going to appoint Leon Panetta as CIA director.

My initial thought was that I heard it wrong. Now, I just think it's a pretty stupid move.

I'm keeping an open mind about many of the Obama appointments and about his administration, even though I didn't vote for him. He seems like he's a good man and I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Soon, he will be the President of this country, which means he'll be my President as well. He deserves respect and also deserves support.

That support doesn't have to be blind, however. I may be inclined to be less critical than most of my fellow non-Obama voters, but that doesn't mean I'm going to sit idly by while the man does something that doesn't make any sense. And appointing Panetta doesn't make any sense at all. I don't really have much of a problem with Panetta overall, but it strikes me that our national intelligency agency has enough issues without appointing someone without any obvious intelligence experience. In a time when competent intelligence is crucial, this appointment looks like a big, glaring mistake.

Perhaps I will be proven wrong and Panetta will turn out to be a fine CIA director. But I can't help but hope that Obama comes to his senses and tries to find someone with actual experience in the field. Intelligence strikes me as a highly specialized field and it might help to have someone with specialized experience, rather than just someone who might know a lot about government but knows very little about intelligence.

A Very Sad Day

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 05:54:00 +0000

My grandfather died today.

Well, technically, I suppose it was yesterday, or very early this morning.

Death really sucks, you know? I mean, I know that in many ways it was a blessing. He had been going downhill for a while and was in a lot of pain here at the end. But still. It sucks.

The worst part, I think, is that he died alone. He didn't suffer, it happened fast, but he was all alone in his house, which is like being alone in the world sometimes. I know he was lonely. We lived with him for a long time after Katrina, and he liked having us around so much. He was sad to see us go. I remember commenting to someone once that no one should spend Christmas alone. My grandfather died two days after Christmas. He didn't even know it was Christmas. And no one should ever have to die alone.

My mom's having a rough time with it. Her mom died over ten years ago, so now she's lost both of her parents. It helps this time that my sister had her baby almost three months ago. My grandfather got to meet his great-granddaughter and he loved her very much. And she's a beautiful bundle of hope at a time when we all could use a dose of it. I think that having her around will help all of us with the grieving process, my mother most of all.

This is just a hodgepodge of the things I'm feeling and thinking. It's actually a bit overwhelming. But I'm so used to coming here and blogging every time something big is happening in my life, so here I am, even if I don't quite know what to say. Perhaps I'll have more coherent things to say later. All I have now are indelible images of the day: Arriving at my grandfather's house to find my sister outside bawling, meeting the very kind man named Tom from the funeral home, seeing the pear that my mom had put in her purse to take my grandfather because he'd liked the other one she brought him which was a miracle because he wasn't finding any food very palatable lately, going through his walled and pulling all of his papers out of the safe, feeding my beautiful niece and thinking how much I wished I could be oblivious to what was going on like her, watching my father be the most supportive husband ever, finding the flower with the poem attached that the funeral home people had left behind on my grandfather's pillow, lots and lots of crying.

It's been a long, hard day. Tomorrow should be the same.

Dilemmas

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 21:11:00 +0000

I just completed my third semester of prerequisites for nursing school. I got As in both of my classes, once again.

This semester was tough for me. The work wasn't hard, I just wasn't feeling especially motivated to do any of it. I think part of it may have been that I was hoping to have already finished my first semester of nursing school by this time of year, and instead I'm still toiling away taking pre-reqs.

It kind of depressed me, I think. I started to wonder if I was just fooling myself that the nursing school thing was even possible. I knew I could get into school. I just worried about how I was going to pay for it. I started to consider staying on at my current job, or maybe looking for a new job, maybe even for something in law.

Right now, I'm still leaning heavily toward the nursing school option. I still don't quite know how it's going to work, but I believe it will happen somehow.

One option I've been strongly considering is attending nursing school at my local community college and only getting an ADN instead of trying to do an accelerated BSN program. There are many benefits to this option: it will be a lot cheaper, I can probably work part time while in school, the pay differential at hospitals in this area virtually nothing, and once I have a job at a hospital they will probably pay for me to go back to school to get my BSN through a bridge program.

I hesitate to do this because I feel like I should go ahead and get the BSN out of the way. If I do an accelerated program I will be done in a year, which is much better than the two years it'll take to get an ADN. I also just like the idea of getting a BSN better than getting an ADN. Also, I feel like I'll want to move into advanced practice someday and I think that having done the accelerated BSN program will look better when applying to masters programs.

If I go the BSN route, I'm going to need to find a way to pay for it. I've thought of the military as an option. I wanted to go into the military after law school but it didn't work out. I'm not tied down to this place (though I would miss my family), so it's definitely an option. I just don't know enough about it. I know I will have trouble getting scholarships because I'm a nontraditional student.

A part of me also wishes I could do med school instead, but that just isn't an option for me. I know I will be happy with nursing, though.

So that's the state of my schooling at the moment. (Some people have been asking which is why I'm putting this update on my blog. Well, that, and it's been a while since I posted.) I'm still mulling any and all options. I know the right one will present itself soon enough.

Counting the Ballots in Minnesota

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 18:53:00 +0000

I know it's been a while. I've been a bit busy transitioning to a different job at work and also wrapping up my classes for the semester.

I did find something fun today that I wanted to share with you. As you know, there is a statewide recount going on in Minnesota to determine the last remaining Senate seat in the new Congress. It's a very tight race between Republican Norm Coleman and Democrat (and comedian) Al Franken.

The Star Tribune has a ballot challenge project that is a lot of fun. You have to register, but once you do, you can vote on some of the ballots up for review to decide who should receive the vote, if anyone.

Some of them are pretty hysterical. One of them made me burst out laughing, never a good idea at work when you're supposed to be working. The ballot lists five people, Coleman and Franken among them, and then it lists a place for write in. The ballots look like they are optical scan.

The ballot in question has a darkened circle next to Dean Barkley's name. (Barkley was the Independence party candidate and drew a significant proportion of the vote which is why this whole mess is happening in the first place.) Then, the bubble next to write in is also darkened and the name written in the line next to it is "Norm Coleman." For some reason, it struck me as very funny.

Honestly, it's hard to see why some of these ballots were challenged. I guess that's what happens when politics and law collide.

Right Position, Wrong Response

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:37:00 +0000

I am a supporter of gay marriage, but I have to say, I find this very troubling.

What I find most sad about it is that those among us who should most understand the need to be tolerant are so quick to deny tolerance to others who may disagree with them:

Marc Shaiman, the Tony Award-winning composer (“Hairspray”), called Mr. Eckern last week and said that he would not let his work be performed in the theater. “I was uncomfortable with money made off my work being used to put discrimination in the Constitution,” Mr. Shaiman said. He added, however, that the entire episode left him “deeply troubled” because of the potential for backlash against gays who protested Mr. Eckern’s donation.

Oh, so it's only troubling because people on the side you care about might be hurt, not because someone just lost their job because of their political and religous beliefs. That's completely ridiculous.

This just ensures that the two sides will remain even more insulated from each other than they already are, which means very little by way of progress will ever take place on this issue, at least in this generation. This man could have possibly bridged some kind of gap and aided in some kind of hope for at least a partial understanding between those who stand opposed to one another. Instead, he's tossed out like a piece of garbage, along with the 52% of California voters who agreed with him. Way to continue to marginalize theater there. Brillant!

Link via Althouse.

So Much for Bipartisanship

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 05:07:00 +0000

Perhaps someone can tell my just what exactly bipartisanship means. I always thought it meant looking to what unites us rather than what divides us and working together to make some kind of progress and compromise. I thought it meant respecting those who disagree with us, whether they vote a different way or belong to a different party.

Think again.

Apparently, bipartisanship really means joining together with those in the opposite party who supported your candidate and ostracizing those who identify with your party because they didn't support your candidate.

I suppose it's well within the rights of the Democratic leadership to try and kick Joe Lieberman to the curb. He backed the losing ticket. But given his record, prior to this, as a good Democrat, a man who eight years ago was on his party's ticket and very nearly became Vice President, I would have to reasonably conclude that his decision to back McCain was one of conscience rather than one of pettiness. And that should be respected.

Then again, I suppose I shouldn't be expecting reason out of Harry Reid. And the Democrats have been trying to get rid of Lieberman for a while. But do they really want to alienate him from caucusing with them just because he disagrees on the one thing he thinks is most important to this country and he voted and supported the guy who aligned with him on that issue? I know that technically he's not a Democrat anymore, but this is the Democrats fault for opposing him so strongly in the primary in order to get rid of him in the Senate. The Republicans are willing to welcome him into their caucus, but he doesn't really belong there as he's a fairly liberal guy.

I suppose I'm biased because I really like Joe Lieberman. He may, in fact, be my favorite politician. (This is, admittedly, not much of a contest.) Still, I think that anyone who has served his country as Lieberman has deserves a bit more respect than this. What, he can't be a good committee chairman anymore because he didn't support Obama? Is this really the tone of bipartisanship that Obama wants to strike? "You're either with us, or you're with the Republicans." Does that sound familiar? I thought this election was all about change. I'm not saying that Obama is behind this, but I do think he should do something to stop it.

This Year's Girl

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 22:53:00 +0000

I would like to dedicate this song to Sarah Palin. I hear she's being blamed by those on the inside for McCain's loss on Tuesday, and I thought she could use a bit of cheering up.

I would like to say, though, Sarah, just for the record, that if what the blamers say is true (e.g. if you didn't know Africa was a continent and not a country) and you decide you really want to try and go for the big one in 2012, you might want to do a little studying and you might want to get some national political experience, you know, now that you won't have the Veep position for that.

Check that. Let me be more blunt. If it's true (or even if this is true), then you should probably just stay in Alaska because you have no business ever running for President. I've wanted to defend you, sister. Really, I have. In fact, I've even stepped up from wanting to doing a time or two. I still think you got a raw deal from many in the press and the opposition. I think you're an amazingly skilled politician, and if you'd just said "no" when McCain asked you to serve, there might be hope for you nationally someday. But you didn't, so there isn't. The Republican party is going to need better and brighter than you if they are going to come back in four years, so you either need to come up with a pretty good explanation of all of this or just give the hell up.

Just sayin'.

This story did provide a moment of cognitive dissonance for me. This negative story was reported on FOX News, that bastion of conservative news (I must confess that I preferred their news coverage to any other on election night - what does that say about me?) yesterday, and this morning, the folks on MSNBC were defending her.

Of course, the ones doing the defending were Joe Scarborough (a man I've grown to love, but we can save that for another time), who is a conservative - though I wouldn't exactly describe him as a Palin fan - and Mika Brzezinski, who has some kind of weird kinship with Sarah Palin - because they're both women - despite being a less-than-conservative journalist, or so I imagine. I say that lest you think it was Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews taking up her cause.

Michael Crichton

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 22:21:00 +0000

I read on Gail's blog yesterday about the death of Michael Crichton. It really shocked me.

I've long been a fan of Crichton's novels. I loved the way he would use science, instead of the easier and more popular law and order, to tell an interesting story. I am not a scientist, so I have no idea how accurate the science he portrayed in his novels was, particularly when it rose to the level of science fiction, but he always presented his stories in an knowledgeable and plausible way. I always looked forward to him coming out with another book, and I'm sad that there will not be any more forthcoming after his last arrives next year.

I know a lot of people have written him off because of his position in opposition to the science of climate change. I read State of Fear and found it to be an interesting novel. I do not take the science he presented as gospel, but I think he's smart enough that perhaps the shrill insistence of those pushing the climate change agenda deserves a second look. I also know that I do not know enough about this issue to make an informed statement, so I will not say anything else.

This was not the only time that Crichton courted controversy with his writing. His next novel, Next dealt with issues of ethics when it comes to science, in the area of bioethics and genetic engineering. He also wrote Disclosure, which wasn't about science at all and caused some to call him a sexist or a misogynist, and also Rising Sun, which also had nothing to do with science and led to cries of racism in relation to his portrayal of the Japanese and their culture. Way back in the 1960s, pre-Roe, under the pen name Jeffrey Hudson, he wrote a book called A Case of Need, in which the issue of abortion plays a large role.

I think some of the allegations leveled against him and his works were unfounded. Still, they kept him interesting and made his next novel must read to me. He may not have been the most talented writer ever, but he could certainly craft an engaging story that was also pretty damn smart. I, for one, will miss him, and I look forward to reading his last book, whatever it may be about.

Another Election Hodgepodge Post

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 19:04:00 +0000

Proposition 8 passed in California, meaning the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman is now enshrined in the California constitution after the Supreme Court there found a right to marry in their constitution. I think this is really sad and a mistake, but I don't live in California so I don't really have a say in what their constitution says or doesn't say.

Actually, I think this highlights the problems with the proposition system in California. (Though, I recognize those on the other side will say what it highlights is the problem of legislating by the judiciary. I just happen to disagree with that assessment on this particular issue.) It seems kind of silly that the constitution can just be changed along with the whim of the electorate. That hardly sounds like a constitution at all.

It appears the amendment will not go into effect retroactively, but that hardly makes it any better. I agree with Andrew Sullivan (words I haven't uttered in a while) that sooner or later, there will be marriage equality for homosexual couples in more states than just Massachusetts. It's just a matter of when.

Another interesting story out of this election was the likely re-election of Ted Stevens to the Senate. The guy gets convicted for seven felonies and a week later he's reelected by the citizens of Alaska. The margin looks pretty narrow, but still. That is just crazy to me. It sounds like something that might happen in Louisiana. (Or, to be fair, Mississippi.)

Some are suggesting that this might be a way for Sarah Palin to get some federal government experience in preparation for a run for the Presidency in 2012 (or later). If Stevens ends up resigning, then Alaska law calls for a special election which she could enter herself. I guess that's an intriguing possibility, but I can't figure out quite why he'd bother to resign since he was already convicted and won anyway. I suppose he could be expelled from the Senate, but I also don't see why the Democratically controlled Senate would bother to expel him if he's bound to be replaced by another Republican. I mean, how ridiculous does it make Republicans look with this clown hanging around. (All of this assumes that he isn't going to prison as a result of his conviction.)

I suppose he might be convinced to resign, but all I need to do is point to Larry Craig as an example of someone who didn't do what everyone expected, even after he indicated that he would.

Here in Mississippi, we still have two Republican senators, as Roger Wicker defeated Ronnie Musgrove by a fairly handy margin. I honestly expected this race to be a bit closer. More proof that negative campaigns work...at least on a local or state level.

Speaking of negative campaigns, I'm still trying to work through whether I think Obama was successful because he ran a mostly positive campaign based on a message of hope, or whether he won based on the negative campaign he ran against the last eight years of President George W. Bush. I do think the message of hope resonated with a lot of people, and it's hard to deny the excitement of a certain segment of the population that Obama is now our President. I just wonder whether that population was something more than a very vocal minority, and whether most people were persuaded by the message that the past eight years have been awful and that McCain would be more of the same.

I think I believe this more negative, cynical view. Not to take anything away from Obama and the campaign he ran, I just think this message against the past (instead of hope for the future) struck more of a chord with voters. Also, it bothers me a little bit that Obama isn't considered to have run a more negative campaign. Sure, there was a lot of positive stuff, and he always brought it back around to himself, even after he attacked, but running against the last eight years and hitting it just as hard as you can is negative. It's just that when the person you're attacking has a 20% approval rating, no one minds much. (Well, minus the 20%, but most of them weren't going to vote for Obama anyway.) Also, it's easy to keep the campaign less negative when you have such an unpopular incumbent to run "against."

I predicted a year ago that whoever the Democratic candidate ended up being would win the election. I felt the unpopularity of Bush was too much for any Republican to overcome. And I still think that's largely why Obama won.

Prediction Updates

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:33:00 +0000

I'm working on a much longer post on a different (but related) subject, but I did want to update you all on my predictions from last night, both of which turned out to be wrong.

I really thought that the spread for Obama in percentage points of the popular vote would be around 3-5 points. I was thinking closer to three than five. Turns out I was a bit off there. I didn't really base that prediction off anything other than instinct, so I have no one to blame but myself. Right now the split is 6 points, and I don't imagine that will tighten at all with further counting. I did predict to my father that the difference wouldn't reach the 10% predicted in the polls, and it looks like that prediction will turn out to be accurate.

My second prediction could turn out to be true still, but it's looking like Franken lost to Norm Coleman in Minnesota by around ~~300~~ 700 votes. (That is not a mistake. The numbers changed so I updated them.) I'm sure there'll be an automatic recount there because the margin is so thin, but unless there is a change Franken will lose. I don't know anything about Coleman, but I figure he has to be at least marginally better than Franken, so this is heartening news.

Some Hasty Thoughts on Election Night

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 04:50:00 +0000

Obviously you've heard by now that Barack Obama will be the next President of the United States.

I find myself inspired by the election of the first African-American President. And I do think there's something incredibly engaging and likeable about Obama, even if I don't align myself with him politically and don't think he's quite ready to be President. It's very exciting to be alive and be a part of such a historic thing, and a positive one for a change. I do wish the talking heads on T.V. would stop trying to find the right language to convey just how historic this is, because they mostly end up sounding stupid. I think it's better to let this moment speak for itself. (Kudos to Juan Williams on Fox News, who managed to strike the right tone between awe and temperament.)

More than this, though, I find myself more bothered than I thought I would about McCain's loss. (Oddly, I think this had something to do with seeing the movie last night. More on this at a later date.) Today, more than any other day in this whole process, I found myself really wanting McCain to win, really thinking his election was crucial to the future of the nation. I am not going back on my own call for calm upon the election of Obama. I still don't think there's major cause for alarm, and I retain my optimism that things will work themselves out as they always seem to.

McCain's concession speech was good, as concession speeches almost always are. It is harder to watch a concession speech when your candidate is the one giving it. I've never had that experience before since I've been voting. (I did not vote for Bush in 2000, but I did in 2004.)

I did predict the final result would be projected at 10:00 p.m. my time, and that turned out to be true. Obviously, it's going to be an electoral landslide for Obama. He'll also end up with more votes than anyone in the history of elections, if for no other reason than turnout. Still, I think the percentage points separating the two men will not be more than five points, and will be closer to three. This is just a prediction, though, and is not much comfort in the face of an overwhelming mandate for Obama.

One more prediction, and I hope this one will end up being wrong: I think we'll be seeing Senator Franken come January. When I turn 30, I think I will run for Senate here in Mississippi, since I'm just as qualified, though not nearly as funny. (You'd think for the Senate that would be a plus.)

I could just sit here and retype all my stuff from Twitter tonight, but I won't. If you want to read my thoughts, check it out.

I'm off to bed soon. I may just wait until tomorrow to catch the big Obama victory speech.

Election Day

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 22:42:00 +0000

I voted this morning. Bright and early. It was probably around 7:30 or so. I was expecting huge lines so I left extra early. Turns out this was unnecessary. The lines were short and it probably took less than 5 minutes to get in and out of the door.

There wasn't a lot on the ballot here. We had President (obviously), both our U.S. Senators (an anomaly because of Trent Lott's resignation), U.S. Congressman (also obviously), two judicial positions, and election commissioner.

I almost wrote myself in for election commissioner. No, I'm not kidding. Don't worry. I didn't actually do it.

I voted a mix of Democrat and Republican. Mostly Republican, I think, because in a couple of the races, there were only Republicans running. (In one, actually, the Republican was unopposed.)

I will be watching the results pour in tonight just like I always do on election night. I may pop on the blog to say something (or I may just use Twitter), but I'm not going to be formally blogging the affair. I've got some homework to get done tonight, because of course I left it off for the last minute again.

I spent my election eve at the movies. I saw Oliver Stone's W. I will probably have more to say about this later. For now, I will say it was an interesting experience, though I almost surely missed the point. Also, any true Bush hater would hate it, and would be better off seeing Fahrenheit 9/11.

The Best Sketch from Saturday's SNL

noreply@blogger.com (Lorelei Leigh) — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 00:18:00 +0000

You may have heard John McCain was on Saturday Night Live this past weekend. It's been all over the news. I thought he was pretty funny, particularly in the cold open with Tina Fey where they bought ad time on QVC. (If you want to see any of the sketches, go to Hulu.com.) "McCain Fine Gold" really made me laugh.

Anyway, lost in all of this (understandable) hubbub over McCain was what was easily the best sketch of the night, where Ben Affleck did a hilarious and pretty impressive impersonation of Keith Olbermann and his show Countdown.

Check it out: