Will the Last Centrist Turn Out the Lights?
I was just finishing my story last night on Red Meat Politics (see Outlook on Sunday -- I'll post a link when doing so becomes legal) when the immigration bill died in the Senate. It's all related. It's the political Zeitgeist: There is no center anymore. Bipartisanship is collaboration with the enemy. To form a coalition is to engage in political suicide, unless, that is, you join the burgeoning National Coalition To Stop Political Coalitions.
I'm not sure who killed the center in American politics, but the FBI might want to consider pulling Karl Rove's phone records.
(Or does that sound like a partisan shot? Sorry. I'm not a partisan, you know. I'm beholden to no faction. I refuse to associate even with those who describe themselves as Independents, lest they think I'm one of them. Reporters aren't joiners. No label can confine my vast and sprawling and complex and extremely eccentric ideological portfolio. Also there are issues on which I've yet to formulate a firm position, such as whether we should return to the Gold Standard.)
(I will note that it's conceivable that I'm a pagan libertarian, to use Michael Lewis's phrase.)
Here are some key passages in the Dan Balz analysis in today's Post:
'The November midterm elections changed the balance of power in Washington, with Democrats now in control of the Capitol. The compromise immigration bill in the Senate enjoyed the support of Bush, Senate Democratic leaders and some prominent senators from both parties -- the kind of coalition that many politicians claim to prize. The bipartisan bill still ended up in a heap.
'As McCain said in Tuesday's Republican debate in New Hampshire, "It's our job to do the hard things, not the easy things." But for a long time, Washington politicians have flinched at the hard things, preferring to engage in political combat aimed at gaining partisan advantage first.
'There is little time for progress on difficult issues before Bush's lame-duck status reduces his power even more and before the 2008 presidential and congressional campaigns turn the country into a partisan battlefield. Immigration provides one clear test for the system before that reality locks in. So far the system is losing.'
Broder, meanwhile, is pretty much disgusted with the presidential candidates and the campaign-trail extremism, and sees an opening for a third-party challenge. I doubt it, but who knows. (By the way, whatever happened to Ross Perot?)
Mickey Kaus celebrates demise of the bill and takes issue with Balz: 'Balz's piece is a near-Platonic example of the Neutral Story Line--a sweeping, seemingly profound and biting analysis that nevertheless doesn't offend anyone because it doesn't seem to be taking sides. But of course it does take sides. It takes the "bipartisan" side--simply assuming that "comprehensive immigration reform" is a good idea.'
Here's McJoan at Dailykos: "A much better bill can be crafted two years from now, when we'll likely have a more reasonable Congress and President to deal with."
Hugh Hewitt also pleased: 'Round 1 to the realists, both as to the security issues and also to the broader point of how the Congress operates. Now it is Mr. Reid's choice: Does he want a bill? If so he will give ground and time to the GOP, and if a new version appears shorn of its worst features and bulked up in crucial respects, he won't try and con America on a process designed not to illuminate and persuade but to cajole and jam down.'
But Kevin Drum is disappointed: "The defeat came almost entirely at the hands of the hardliners, and I confess that I can't figure out what they're thinking. Sure, they think the current bill is worse than doing nothing at all, but when do they think they're going to get another crack at this? It's going to be years, and at this point it looks to me like the political
environment in the future is more likely to be more liberal than it is to be more conservative. My guess is that the hardliners aren't going to get a better deal in 2010 than the one they voted down on Thursday."
Tom Tancredo, prez candidate, suggested today on Good Morning America that with tough enforcement of existing laws, the 12 million illegal immigrants will go home (transcript from Federal Document Clearing House): "Here's how you handle it: It's called attrition through enforcement. If we actually begin to enforce the laws, secure our border and enforce the law against people hiring people who are here illegally, you will see attrition. People go home if they cannot get the thing for which they came. And then they get in line and they come in the same way anybody else does."
Here's Rudy Giuliani's full statement (via email) after the immigration bill failed: "The American people demand that their politicians enact an immigration reform bill that addresses security first. I cannot support any immigration deal that compromises on this basic principle. This bill failed to guarantee a uniform, tamper-proof, biometric identification card, a single nation-wide database of foreigners in our country, and did not mandate the full implementation of a biometric check-in, check-out system. We can and must guarantee the American people that we know who is coming in and out of our country. As President, my administration will dedicate itself to assuring the American people that we have a secure border."
By |
June 8, 2007; 11:16 AM ET
Previous: At the GOP Debate (With Guest Bloggers!) |
Next: Red Meat Season

Get This Widget >>

Posted by: dbG | June 8, 2007 11:42 AM
//(I will not that it's conceivable that I'm pagan libertarian, to use Michael Lewis's phrase.)//
Not? Note?
Achenbach for Pagan Libertarian in 2008. Streaming video to follow.
Okay, now I've accomplished something today. I might as well do some work.
Posted by: dbG | June 8, 2007 11:46 AM
Instead of "Independent," my voter registration card says "Not Affiliated."
I kinda like that better.
Also, you may want to fix what's in that second set of parentheses, "(I will notE that it's conceivable..)"
bc
Posted by: bc | June 8, 2007 11:47 AM
Greater than 1, less than Last...
And 'Mudge listens to Celene Dion???
:-)
Posted by: Scottynuke | June 8, 2007 11:48 AM
Actually, almost never, Scotty, unless she playing in an elevator I'm trapped in.
But I do need to re-post my item from the bottom of the last kit:
EF's right; starting salary for teachers here in Southern Maryland is about $32,000. That's not remotely enough to raise a family on--and we're a "bedroom community" of Washington, and the "least expensive" quadrant around Washington.
Tony Korheiser had a good show this morning, discussing possible Sopranos endings Sunday night. He also had a really good discussing about rock composer/rpoducer Jim Steinman, who went to the same high school as Kornheiser. Steinman, of course wrote and produced my alltime favorite rock album, Meatloaf's "Bat Out of Hell," which a few years ago was the No. 3 alltime best-selling album (don't know if that has slipped or not). What Mr. T mentioned and which I didn't know was that Steinman also wrote/produced the great Bonnie Tyler song "Total Eclipse of the Heart," which I like alot and which he points out features all that great Baroque, bombastic, over-the-top Steinman emotion and production, etc. Which is now readily apparent when you think about that song. Tony also said that, although Air Supply is almost always awful beyond description (not sure I agree they're THAT bad), they did one good song, "Making Love Out of Nothing at All," which was featured in the movie "Mr. and Mrs. Smith"--and Steinman wrote it. Once again, when you hear it and realize it is Steinman, you say, "Of course; who else could it be?"
Steinman also wrote "It's All Coming Back To Me Now" for -- wait for it -- Celine Dion, of all people. And Mt. T approves!
A critic in a Canuckistani paper, the Calgary Sun, wrote: "On paper, the pairing made me cringe: Squeaky-clean Quebec chanteuse Celine Dion performing a song written and produced by Meat Loaf collaborator Jim Steinman. Yet that album-opening song, It's All Coming Back To Me Now, is undoubtedly the highlight of her English-language recording career. Dion's over-the-top vocals soar and swoop around Steinman's epic, ostentatious arrangement. Not surprisingly, everything else that follows...pales in comparison."
The Toronoto Star writes: "...this album started off with Phil Spector at the helm - an experience harrowing enough to have the results shelved, sending the legendary producer scurrying back into deep seclusion, grumbling something about the ham-handed morons running Celine's career. And yet, the final product couldn't kick off with anything less idiosyncratic than It's All Coming Back To Me Now - seven minutes and 37 seconds written by Jim Steinman, whose fatal absence from the last Meat Loaf record is finally justified here. Now it's Celine who's been anointed most suitable to bring such splendiferous bombast to the masses - and when she finally runs out of breath, whatever 'it' is still hasn't finished coming back. (The rest of the album) pales in comparison to the three Steinman tracks. Given the chance to tackle Spector's most ambitious opus River Deep, Mountain High, it comes off like a jungle-techno ditty with the pitch control on the fritz, at once optimistic and apocalyptic. This is the sound of the Wall of sound being chipped away once and for all..."
"splendiferous bombast" -- I like that.
The Miami Herald, a little Florida rag some of you may have heard of, wrote: "Dion knocks a couple out of the ballpark. Jim Steinman's It's All Coming Back To Me Now features seven minutes of Wagnerian bombast, thunderclap piano chords and emoting that would wither an opera diva. Sure, it's over-the-top but it's passionate and musical."
(The video's here, if you need to hear/watch it: http://www.kovideo.net/music/video/Celine-Dion---It%60s-All-Coming-Back-To-Me-Now/409.html)
-----------
OK, I can go and read Joel's new kit now.
Posted by: Curmudgeon | June 8, 2007 11:51 AM
SCC: Celine, of course...
Wouldn't ever want to upset our Great White Northern contingent.
:-)
Posted by: Scottynuke | June 8, 2007 11:55 AM
JA, the condition you talk about in Washington and our honored legislators is one wherein every man for himself, and no one for the masses. These folks are looking for an advantage, and that the advantage point to them, not those they represent. Washington has finally taken the gloves off and just let the real thing show. These folks could care less about the masses and what they want. Their job is to protect just "certain" individuals or corportation and that's it.
This will not change until the people speak, and speak loudly. Don't get comfortable folks because Washington is working on the people speaking loudly whether they know it or not. And dollars to donuts, when they hear that sound, they are not going to like it, and neither are we.
I think teachers are great. And I know all of them are not alike, exceptions to every rule, but I still think teachers are great people. As a child growing up, I did not like all my teachers, but they all one thing in common, they try to help us be better people and to love learning. We belittle them and treat them badly sometimes, and we should not. These are folks that hold the future of your country in their hands in what they say and do in that classroom.
Posted by: Cassandra S | June 8, 2007 11:57 AM
Do the Pagan Libertarians hold their National Convention Ritual at the vernal equinox?
Also, does it involve nudity?
I'm thinking it'll be like "Burning Man" only, er, more liberal. [*There's* food for thought.]
bc
Posted by: bc | June 8, 2007 11:57 AM
Nothing would make me happier than a third party presidential campaign. Well, perhaps a trip to the Caribbean would make me happier, but you know what I mean.
Sometimes I really wonder if Karl Rove has dark nights of the soul. He really does have a lot to answer for, to my way of thinking.
Posted by: Kim | June 8, 2007 12:01 PM
Céline actually Scotty. I had to go in hiding for a week recently as she just released an album in French, the first in 12-15 years at least. As the local media went All Céline/All the Time I had to go to a subterrean undisclosed location. The album (D'Elles) isn't very good I'm afraid. Thinking of it she made only one good album, D'Eux, with Jean-Jacques Goldman. The man can't sing (although he is technically considered a pro singer) but he sure can write a song.
Posted by: shrieking denizen | June 8, 2007 12:03 PM
Every time someone mentions that skinny so-called chanteuse from Quebec I want to pull my own brain out through my nostrils and beat it with a mallet lest I somehow accidentally hear more than a half-second of her caterwauling.
I guess I am accusing Mudge of wanton Dion-referencing, and there is no room for bipartisanship on that issue: she must be stopped, and in as cruel a fashion as possible.
Posted by: byoolin | June 8, 2007 12:03 PM
No, byoolin, tell us what you really think! Thanks for cracking me up! Now I really do have to get to some serious wingman type stuff, since everybody in the lab asked me what I was laughing at....
Posted by: Kim | June 8, 2007 12:06 PM
12th
Posted by: omni | June 8, 2007 12:07 PM
"Centrist views most commonly result from an individual's indecisiveness." -The American Centrist Coalition.
"Third party viability depends on doctrinal viability." -Ibid
Posted by: Shiloh | June 8, 2007 12:09 PM
SCC:12th=>13th
Posted by: omni | June 8, 2007 12:09 PM
Well, *what is* Ross Perot up to lately? Supporting or aligning himself with big science, it seems...
To properly huzzah its new state-of-the-art Natural Science and Engineering Research Laboratory (NSERL), The University of Texas at Dallas got Ross Perot to give keynote remarks at an 11:30 a.m. ceremony June 5. The public wasn't invited to that but the common citizen could go to an open house at the building from 3 to 5 p.m.
The four-story, 192,000 square-foot research facility was completed in December 2006 after 24 months of construction. Officials expect to fill the building with high-level faculty and scientists, including some currently at UT Dallas and others yet to be recruited. They will come from such disparate fields as electrical engineering, materials science and engineering, chemistry, biology and behavioral and brain sciences.
A highlight of the building is the Nanoelectronics Materials Laboratory located on the fourth floor. Work done in the lab has two major components: research into materials for integrated circuits used in computers, cell phones and other technologies, and research into low-cost organic materials. The lab contains a large vacuum system that allows researchers to deposit thin film materials one anatomic layer at a time. [That would make everything anatomically correct, wouldn't it?] Unique in the world, the system cost more than $3 million to build.
Posted by: Loomis | June 8, 2007 12:10 PM
Celine (I have no accent marks avaiable) was actually quite remarkable (and not so waifish) when she won the Eurovision contest back in 80-something.
Since then, not so much.
Posted by: Scottynuke | June 8, 2007 12:11 PM
>There is no center any more.
"Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the center cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere/
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst/
Are full of passionate intensity." -W.B.Yeats, The Second Coming, 1921
Posted by: Shiloh | June 8, 2007 12:15 PM
Joel, I guess you should take solace in the fact that you have been accused of being both a shill for Bush and a left leaning apologist. Sometimes at the same time.
The center is a lonely place. It's a metastable equilibrium, like being balanced precariously on a pointy mountain peak surrounded with ravenous piranhas on one side and ill-tempered rabid ferrets on the other.
I know this place well. I am considered by many at work as a hopeless liberal, while I have been attacked as a fascist in other venues.
In truth, what I try to be, and encourage everyone to be, is confident enough to consider all issues on their individual merits and not accept spurious linkage.
It's okay to be for gay marriage and against racial quotas. One can favor a strong military and still oppose tax cuts. It seems to me that the important thing is to separate that which is logical from that which is not. To refuse to blame all evil on the bad thoughts of white men, yet still support strong limits on CO2. The world is a complex place. The "either you're with us or against us" ethos should go the way of the mastodon.
And Joel. Get with the program. All the smart money's on Berrylium.
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 12:16 PM
Howdy y'all. Whew. From last Kit: sevenswans, you have my respect, and I'm very glad you shared your actions and your friend's last day with us. You're a good example to us all. Cassandra, please follow doctor's orders. Dreamer, I loved your "rant" explanation. Dooley, what a nightmare school saga! Yoki, columbines.
About today's Kit: does Tancredo or anyone else seriously think They are not currently enforcing the immigration laws? Why did they put all those extra folks at immigration/border control and let loose the immigration judges? They're not just twiddling their thumbs. The problem is with the policies and laws They are trying to enforce -- those things the immigration bill was trying to change. I agree that this is just a total embarrassing breakdown of the system. The Cat in the Hat indeed.
Posted by: Ivansmom | June 8, 2007 12:20 PM
Don't worry Scottynuke, some Canadian music listeners regard Celine Dion like Mort Sahl fans view Carrot Top.
Posted by: Boko999 | June 8, 2007 12:20 PM
Kim.. I'd also welcome a third-party candidate... but only if he or she is right-leaning.
(And by "right" I guess I really mean "wrong.")
Posted by: TBG | June 8, 2007 12:20 PM
La comida, and some historical perspective, for thought, from Carlos Guerra's recent column in our local paper:
Why are we arguing over immigration again? In large part, because we aren't all that willing to really fix it.
In 1986, the Reagan White House pushed an immigration reform package through Congress that was supposed to fix immigration in a comprehensive manner. Then, as now, there was concern that millions of immigrants were living here without proper documentation, depressing wages and taxing our social services systems.
The Immigration Reform and Control Act would fix it all, we were told.
Implicit in that reform -- as is the case now -- was that the American economy needed these workers, and that we could ill afford to have such a large population living in the shadows, without legal protections and exempt -- if their employers chose -- from wage minimums and taxes on earnings.
A lot of what Congress approved in 1986 is not too different from what is proposed today.
Immigrants who had lived in the United States without proper documentation for five years or longer, had been gainfully employed during that period and had not been in trouble with the law were offered the opportunity to stay here legally.
To become legalized, they had to cough up a stiff administrative fee that was, in effect, a fine, along with any back taxes.
A guest-worker program was established to allow given numbers to come into the United States to do agricultural and other unskilled work for short periods -- work that Americans wouldn't take.
So why is it that just over two decades later, we are yet again embroiled in another fierce debate over our nation's broken immigration system, and arguing about what to do with millions of immigrants who are here illicitly?
The rest of Guerra's column, with the link below. Will you like the solution he proposes?
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/columnists/cguerra/stories/MYSA060707.1B.guerra.3489205.html
Posted by: Loomis | June 8, 2007 12:24 PM
Thank you for the explanation of the center, RD. The vivid picture of ill-tempered rabid ferrets is particuarly helpful. Really, I do agree with you.
The recent discussion of God, the World and Everything reminded me of something I recently read in Peter Ackroyd's novel "The Plato Papers". Plato is an orator from around 3800 who recounts as best he can piece it together the history of civilization. In one lovely passage he discusses the comic novel "Origin of the Species", by Charles Dickens (the title page was defaced, and they knew of Dickens as a writer). Really, it is funny.
Posted by: Ivansmom | June 8, 2007 12:26 PM
I have this strange thing with Celine. I cannot stand the music, any of it. I cannot stand her mannerisms or the Celine-worship of her home province. All of it makes me wish to lie down on the cold pavement and bang my head against the curb.
However, I can also not escape her. When I was working at the law firm in Montreal, we had our Christmas party all arranged, as usual, at one of the big down-town hotels. And three days before the party the hotel told us we could not have the room because Celine was having her wedding reception there and her florists needed to have the room to decorate on the night of our party. And so we ended up in the very cold basement of an office tower, with horrible cold food being hauled in on trucks. As a thank you for surrendering the room, her people gave each of us... a Celine Dion CD! And what was more, it was one of the ones they distribute to radio stations, which you cannot sell even on EBay. Thanks ever so!
As you can tell, I still hold a grudge.
Shortly afterwards, I was in Manila for business, and got caught out on the street when a typhoon arrived, rapidly flooding everything. A very kind Jeepney driver risked his engine to pick me up, and I was helped out of the water by the people on the bus. They all wanted to know where I was from, I and told them. One fellow with a portable tape player smiled beatifically, pressed a button, and out of the speakers came, none other than, It's all Coming Back to Me Now. Arughghg! Leave me alone!
And the fuss over her son's birth and christening caused traffic jams and street closures all over town. Just get over it people. She's a skinny broad who will, if she hasn't already, end up with nodules.
Posted by: Yoki | June 8, 2007 12:26 PM
TBG - as I have said before, anyone who seriously wants a Democrat in the White House in 2009 needs to find the most extreme right-leaning third-party candidate out there, and then donate lots and lots of money.
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 12:26 PM
I'll stick to Lithium, RD. A lithium-ion battery recently achieved 125 mpg in a Prius and diLithium crystals can't be far off. The other Scotty knows.
Posted by: Shiloh | June 8, 2007 12:26 PM
Scotty, I'm with you. Just thinking of the Titanic song induces uncontrollable facial tremors. Back in the days when her creepy manager (now her creepy husband, how did he dodged the child molestation charges?) was dragging her through every shopping center and noon hour talk show in Quebec she was a pretty chubby 14-15-16 years old with a big voice but HORRIBLE weepy, teary songs. I never understood that but all the mothers and grandmothers were just falling over her, back then. She's got a following here that is absolutely unbelievable. Those women still go gaga over her.
Posted by: shrieking denizen | June 8, 2007 12:27 PM
"Other" Scotty???
I've been replaced just because I can't regenerate the crystals with all these spare neutrons laying about???
*sobbing in the corner*
:-)
Posted by: Scottynuke | June 8, 2007 12:31 PM
TBG - At this point I would seriously consider a third party candidate who might be more conservative than I would like, if I thought he/she was a straight shooter.
RD put it best. Like that's never happened before!
Posted by: Kim | June 8, 2007 12:32 PM
>I'll stick to Lithium, RD.
And you can always scrape a little off and put it on your tongue to make the voices go away.
Posted by: Error Flynn | June 8, 2007 12:32 PM
RD, the "either you're with us" or "either you're against us" as you describe it is still working quite well where I live. Someone wrote a letter to the editor this morning saying those very same words, and this was in regard to the war in Iraq.
It is not just some, folks, it is us. As in we the people. We. Us. Here. Now.
Posted by: Cassandra S | June 8, 2007 12:32 PM
This is, sadly, happening here in Canada, too. And since Cassandra is correct that it is *we* who are buying it, my question is, why don't we just stop it? Haul our representatives into halls all over the country and tear a stip off them. Tell them what the program is, instead of the other way round. Nobody has been able to give me a satisfactory answer to that question.
Posted by: Yoki | June 8, 2007 12:38 PM
I knew that was coming, Error, and I'm prepared to conjecture that lithium may be an anodyne for bipolar politics, sold as soma for a Brave New World.
Posted by: Shiloh | June 8, 2007 12:40 PM
Weird story about Céline Dion. During the late 1990s my father started suffering from some kind of poorly-defined mental degeneration. When we finally got him out of his house and into the supervised environment he needed, it was discovered that he owned 17 copies of the same Céline Dion CD.
I mean, if he was going to get so oddly obsessive, why couldn't it have been with "Abbey Road"?
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 12:45 PM
I always knew that someone who could think up such a lovely handle as sevenswans would be truly lovely beautiful person.
And you really must make it to a BPH some day soon and tell us some of those stories. We might just have to draft TBG to drive out there to get you...
Posted by: omni | June 8, 2007 12:46 PM
I'm with byoolin. You were talking tune cooties, and now I'm going to have that in my head all day.
The only place where it is permissible to play one's Celine Dion Album (not that I am admitting to owning one, I do, I just won't admit to it out loud) is as you cross certain portions of Saskatchewan or like provinces where radio is so bad that it makes her or Alvin and the Chipmunks sound good, and then ONLY when you can't find your Alvin and the Chipmunks cd. However, once you have met that condition, if you are alone in your car, you may then cauterwaul along with her. Seriously singing keeps me awake, and I only own a Patsy Cline, A Bette Midler, and one Celine Dion. I sing them all equally badly.
Posted by: dr | June 8, 2007 12:48 PM
Yoki, I believe that Celine's son did not have a baptism but a coronation! I completely agree with SD, the Manager/Husband thing is very creepy but will probably be a best seller some day.
Posted by: dmd | June 8, 2007 12:53 PM
I followed that video link and listened to about 15 seconds before clicking on the Beyonce featuring Shakira video. But I bet everyone here already knew that.
Posted by: omni | June 8, 2007 12:56 PM
Mudge - "Air Supply" was for those who thought "Toto" had too much of an edge.
But yeah, "Making Love out of Nothing At All" does have a certain poignancy.
And did you catch the snippet of Bonnie Tyler in that commercial for an automotive guidance system? Betcha Steinman never saw that one coming.
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 12:56 PM
It is hard to have an edge when you are called "Toto".
Need urgent boodle help, metal frame on my glasses just broke, and one lens popped out, I can now only barely see my screen (computer lenses). Anyone know a quick fix?
Posted by: dmd | June 8, 2007 1:02 PM
Cassandra and Yoki, yes. We need people who don't want to stay in politics to go into politics. We need people who don't see it as a career, but as a 'temp job' (kudos to Aaron Sorkin for that line), who go in get the job done, do the deeds that need doing and then want to go back into their own lives.
I watched a snippet of a documentary on J. Edgar Hoover the other night. Seeing Rove and FBI in the same sentence - I had a wierd sort of twin sons from different mothers moment.
Posted by: dr | June 8, 2007 1:04 PM
duct tape?
Posted by: dr | June 8, 2007 1:06 PM
dr, driving across Saskabertiba, while musically barren in many places, is *not* an acceptable reason to inflict Celine on yourself, your vehicle's sound system, or any living being.
That's like dumping PCBs in the Sahara just because it's nothing but a lot of sand.
RD, that's interesting about your dad. Did anyone look into the direction of causality there? Maybe 17 CD CDs isn't a symptom. (Maybe we could drop iPods in Baghdad!)
Posted by: byoolin | June 8, 2007 1:07 PM
Do NOT use superglue.
Posted by: Shiloh | June 8, 2007 1:08 PM
dmd | Get someone to fix them for you. Or, if you're alone, squint
Posted by: Boko999 | June 8, 2007 1:10 PM
dmd - people usually have a dominant eye. Sit back a ways and try holding the lens up to one eye or the other too see which one works best. Then try to channel "Colonel Klink."
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 1:11 PM
This is a perfect opportuniy to wear an eye patch - arrr
Posted by: omni | June 8, 2007 1:13 PM
byoolin - They weren't opened, but yeah we thought about that too. I remember my brother joking that we were wrong to worry about the booze all those years.
The real threat was bombastic French Canadians.
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 1:16 PM
hum hum typo alert!
last para second line, with will?
Posted by: shrieking denizen | June 8, 2007 1:19 PM
Advice on computer glasses:
(a) force that sucker back into the frame and bind it in place with bent paperclips (possible stabbing hazard), duct tape (possible transparency hazard), or super-glue (possible toxic fume hazard).
or
(b) Close that eye.
Posted by: ScienceTim | June 8, 2007 1:20 PM
Is my 1:13 post a faux pas because it isn't September 19?
Posted by: omni | June 8, 2007 1:24 PM
Thanks for the tips, dr first thought that popped into my head - duct tape, but since I am at work had to settle for packing tape. It is precarious but I can now see, well except for the fingerprint smudges that I can't clean off now.
Tim - re: paperclips and glue, I am a complete klutz the ramifications of those solutions are too dangerous to consider.
Posted by: dmd | June 8, 2007 1:25 PM
Dmd, if worst comes to worst, poke a pinhole in an index card and hold it up to your eye...
On the other hand, Colonel Klink sounds good. Very good.
Could you look up the nearest jewelers or eyeglass shop and pop over at lunch and see if they'll repair it while you wait or at least provide you with a cane to make your way back to work?
Just remember, take deep breaths. "Don't Panic!" As long as you can still boodle, you're OK. We're equalivent to the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy with actual on-line editorial help, anyday.
If you have index cards and scissors and are handy, I'd suggest trying to hold the lens in place with cut-out cardboard. (diagrams are on page 3+ infinity, under "Arts and crafts projects to do only when desperate." It's the diagram right after making silverware out of buffalo dung, kindly contributed and field-tested by Curmudgeon 300 years ago.)
If you do so, send us a picture, as it sounds like a fashion that goes PERFECTLY with tin foil hats. Don't forget the paperclip necklace for the glasses, either.
However, you can also set your screen to larger print if it would make things easier for you. Most Windows NT type programs have an accessibility feature. It'll have to do until tactile screens or Jaws are standard features.
Posted by: Wilbrod | June 8, 2007 1:26 PM
dmd, you didn't say you were at work!
The correct solution should be obvious:
Call it a day.
Posted by: byoolin | June 8, 2007 1:29 PM
Padouk, in Canada the smart money's on Célinium. *blowing on my scorched tail feathers from byoolin's withering AA fire*
I guess I'm the guy that'll have to turn out the lights. I've always considered myself more-or-less a centrist--and indeed DO take severe umbrage at the assertions, such as the one above, that centrism results from "an individual's indecisiveness." Have I ever struck you people as being indecisive about issues?
I consider centrism more or less to be something like the equivalent of moderation and "common sense," with some pragmatism thrown in. But what really ticks me off is the notion--usually propagated by the right wing--that there is something inherently wrong with the center and moderation. Those wingnut glassbowls NEED to define the center that way simply as a necessary means to justify their own extremism. Ideology usually depends upon NOT being a moderate, or taking an even-handed approach to things. To me, moderation, pragmatism and common sense all go hand-in-hand: either an idea "works," or it doesn't. The problem with virtually all the righwing ideological positions (in addition to their inherent selfishness) is that they plain "don't work." All the Neocon theories about the war in Iraq have simply been wrong, wrong wrong. You can't impose democracy at the point of a gun; the notion is inherently self-contradictory. (If that idea DID work then perhaps we'd have to re-think gunboat diplomacy. But since it simply doesn't work, and has never worked, anywhere, at any time, it's kind of a no-brainer to me. It's not ideological; it just doesn't work, so there's no great need to go into detail about its morality.)
I spent a lot of my early years as a reporter covering politics, and just about the very first thing I ever learned was how to count. It's amazing how many people in politics --as well as the public in general-- simply don't know how to count. I'm not talking about math literacy; I'm talking about looking at the electorate and counting heads. And here's how you count. (Someone might quibble around the edges with these numbers, but they are approximations, and close enough for govmint work, so don't start chipping.) It is a given from many, many polls and surveys that Conservatives make up about 35 percent of this country. Liberals/the left in general make up about 25%. Moderates/the center make up about 40%. That means that moderates/centrists make up the largest pluraity of voters.
Now, to make up a dominant coalition/win a presidential election, Conservs need their own 35% plus a tad more than 15% from the middle (15% of that middle 40% group equals three-eights or about 38% of the moderates/middle) in order to get, say, 51%. In other words, Conservs can win by carrying their own side, plus only a little more than a third of the center--and they already "own" a good part of that group anyway: moderate Republicans, etc.
Now, look inside that center/right coalition: 35% conserves plus 15%+ centrists. That means that conserves constitute about 70% of that coalition--so of COURSE conservs control it and dominate the issues.
OK, let's do the math on the other side. For the Democrats/Liberals/Left to win a majority, they need to hold their own 25%, plus they need at least 25% more from the 40% center group. That means Dems need 5/8ths or about 63 percent of all the centrists moderates. And once again look inside that coalition: liberals/leftists don't even make up a majority of their own coalition; the moderates do, by a narrow margin [call it 26% moderates plus 25% liberals/left, or 52% of the coalition being moderates.] So any left-of-center coalition can succeed-but the left/liberals can't even control the majority of their own coalition.
The mathematical conclusion from this is that liberals/the left have NO CHOICE but to align with a larger and stronger block then themselves: moderates/centrists. Thus the "battle for the center" is a "must-win" situation for the Dems, but is NOT a "must-win" for the Conservs.
Which is how a glassbowl like Bush or Reagan becomes president. Nominating a McGovern or a Howard Dean or a Dukakis or a Kerry means you make the liberals/left happy-- but you can't get 63 percent of the middle with that candidate. So you automatically lose. The ONLY way a center/left coalition can win is with a centrists/moderate (Democrat) candidate who can pull 63% of the middle. So Dems not only HAVE to go to the middle, they have to win it decisively. A narrow win in the middle does them no good. So the liberal/left has to agree to a candidate who is usually NOT one of them, if they want to win (Carter, Bill Clinton).
To me this is a completely non-idealogical argument--it is purely electoral math, nothing more.
But the problem is always this: unless there is strong leadership from the middle, the extreme ends tend to dominat their parties. The Republican party has been thoroughly dominated by its Conservative wing (don't ask me why; it's bizarre and repulsive, as far as I'm concerned). The Democratic Party is not so dominated--but then it gets accused of being fractured, all over the place, etc., all of which is true.
Posted by: Curmudgeon | June 8, 2007 1:31 PM
Oh, my goodness. I just read Krauthammer's column, and I agreed with pretty much everything he said. Even his gratuitous political swipes were kind of even-handed, and had the effect of representing identifiable political voices, rather than arguing for a specific political opinion.
The Apocalypse is upon us.
Posted by: ScienceTim | June 8, 2007 1:35 PM
c)or, you could use bent paperclips, duct tape or super-glue to close that eye.
bc
Posted by: bc | June 8, 2007 1:38 PM
I think I'd go with Omni's suggestion.
Posted by: Yoki | June 8, 2007 1:47 PM
The purported Krauthammer column is suspect. Maybe some prankster replaced the column that he actually wrote.
Posted by: Dave of the Coonties | June 8, 2007 1:49 PM
The Fibber needs to have his defibrillator replaced later this year--what of a new Defibberlater? Pace wanted to stay in the race, but is also to be replaced. Bartlett's tired of the lies--no surprise? Lute tells the truth. And all indicators point to Poland and Romania--for all the torture mania--and where is Dana on this story?
House of cards collapses?
House of Cards, the British political thriller novel, starts with Francis Urquhart sitting at a desk, commenting that "nothing lasts forever. Even the longest, the most glittering reign must come to an end some day."
Posted by: Loomis | June 8, 2007 1:55 PM
The BBC production of "House of Cards," presented on Masterpiece Theater some years ago, was extremely popular in our house. The fellow who played Francis Urquhart -- I've seen him in a lot of things, but presently do not recall his name -- plays evil really well.
Posted by: StorytellerTim | June 8, 2007 2:04 PM
Um, I mean, "I do not recall his name at present."
Posted by: StorytellerTim | June 8, 2007 2:09 PM
dbG, Shrieking D, thanks for the typo-spotting.
I added the Rudy G. statement to the kit because what strikes me is that it contains absolutely nothing in it that could be construed as compassion. McCain, I thought, was quite eloquent the other night (and I realize most people didn't see it) in talking about immigrants as real people who have contributed positively to this country. Hang on, let me dig up McCain's statement...
Here we go:
"
My friends, we know what we're talking about is the latest wave of migrants into this country. We have to stop the illegal immigration. But we've had waves throughout our history.
Hispanics is what we're talking about, a different culture, a different language, which has enriched my state, where Spanish was spoken before English was.
My friends, I want you the next time you're down in Washington, D.C., to go to the Vietnam War Memorial and look at the names engraved in black granite. You'll find a whole lot of Hispanic names.
When you go to Iraq or Afghanistan today, you're going to see a whole lot of people who are of Hispanic background. You're even going to meet some of the few thousand that are still green card holders who are not even citizens of this country, who love this country so much that they're willing to risk their lives in its service in order to accelerate their path to citizenship and enjoy the bountiful, blessed nation.
So let's, from time to time, remember that these are God's children. They must come into our country legally. But they have enriched our culture and our nation, as every generation of immigrants before them.
"
Posted by: Achenbach | June 8, 2007 2:16 PM
Mudge - I think you are quite right. The Dems need only look to 1946, when the Republicans swept the Dems out of power, to see that taking control of Congress does not guarantee taking the White House, For Dewey did not, it turns out, defeat Truman.
The Dems won in '06 mostly because Americans were mad about Iraq, not because everyone suddenly got in touch with their inner Streisand.
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 2:24 PM
Thanks for the McCain quote, Joel. McCain continues to distinguish himself from the other Republican presidential candidates as the sole adult. While I can't bring myself to vote for him for a variety of reasons (since I'm not a journalist, I can admit to my liberal biases) I respect and admire him.
And Guliani? He wants a "biometric" national identity card? How about implanting a microchip in every citizen and legal resident? That would work. And corneal scanners at all bus and train stations. Then we could rid the nation of "invalids." Yeah, that's the ticket.
Posted by: CowTown | June 8, 2007 2:27 PM
I wouldn't vote for Rudy Guiliani for dog-catcher, and I mean that literally. I find it hard to believe anyone who followed his manic control-freak record as mayor of New York could. (Other than his bishop maybe.)
A man like that in charge of the country would be a disaster. We'd be under martial law in 15 minutes.
Posted by: Error Flynn | June 8, 2007 2:29 PM
Ian Richardson. He died in February.
He's famous for his stage acting as well-- he played Richard II and borrowed upon that to play Urquhart. I must say he played the shakespearean overtones of that script to the hilt. The monologues were very good.
He also played Polonius in "Rosencrantz and Guildernstern are dead" and Professor Higgins in "My Fair Lady".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Richardson
Apparently he also voiced Death in a British satellite TV adaptation of "Hogfather". That must have been jolly.
Posted by: Wilbrod | June 8, 2007 2:37 PM
I didn't think Inauguration Day speeches lasted 15 minutes, Error...
Posted by: Scottynuke | June 8, 2007 2:37 PM
Home page alert, FYI...
Posted by: Scottynuke | June 8, 2007 2:45 PM
Anybody else hearing that Paris Hilton has been taken to court, in a police vehicle, handcuffed? I can't get video on my work computer, and this is driving me mad.
Posted by: Yoki | June 8, 2007 2:45 PM
Right, Mudge, about the electoral counting. By the way, everything you said about the far right holds true for the far left as well. This is what drives me crazy about local & national Dems who complain that our Democratic elected officials aren't liberal enough. I truly believe some of them would rather have ideological purity in their losing candidates than get Democrats elected and in policy positions.
It is interesting to me that many of these ideologues, on both sides, are fairly young (remember the Reagan Revolution, with all those shiny scrubbed college Young Republicans?). In my youth, of course, there was Captain Kangaroo and others teaching us to share. Now, at least two generations of people have explicitly learned the word "compromise" on Sesame Street. Yet these same people utterly abandon the idea, and appear not to believe the truism that governing is the art of compromise. Maybe we need Kermit, Oscar and Bert & Ernie to give gummint seminars to elected officials and activists alike.
Posted by: Ivansmom | June 8, 2007 2:55 PM
Ivansmom;
I could make a comment about which two of those Muppets are already in the White House...
But that would be wrong.
:-)
Posted by: Scottynuke | June 8, 2007 3:00 PM
Tucker Carlson once claimed that McCain was so popular with the press because of his celebrated "open bar" policy.
Good idea, Ivansmom, about the Sesame Street thing, except the far right would oppose Bert and Ernie because, well, you know, there are those rumors.
And about extremists in control. My brother and I learned that in 1984 when we wandered into a Democratic caucus to learn more about Gary Hart. Scary. Ex-hippies and aging socialists dominated. Sometimes it seems that only those with extreme views can muster up the passion to get really involved. Which is sad.
Well, fellow campers, next week is Management Training.
Please keep me in your thoughts.
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 3:06 PM
Not only taken to court, but taken to court in tears, see photo in the story. Trying real hard to find sympathy - nope can't do it.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/06/08/paris.hilton.ap/index.html
Posted by: dmd | June 8, 2007 3:07 PM
Ivansmom, you should know that only regisered Democrats watch Sesame Street, since it's on public television (sticking tongue firmly in cheek).
Posted by: CowTown | June 8, 2007 3:09 PM
Ahem, that would be "registered." Thank you for your kind attention.
Posted by: CowTown | June 8, 2007 3:11 PM
You're right, RD, about Bert & Ernie. Perhaps we could have a bipartisan seminar featuring Elmo. The length of the seminar would be directly dependent on how quickly all the attendees, working together under Elmo's constant guidance and supervision, could compromise on some given position or policy. The thought of an entire afternoon (or even an hour) trapped in a conference room with that squeaky furry little monster might be a powerful incentive.
Posted by: Ivansmom | June 8, 2007 3:12 PM
>Anybody else hearing that Paris Hilton has been taken to court, in a police vehicle, handcuffed?
Yes indeedy. I just ran out for a slice of pizza and found cable coverage a la O.J. with a chopper shot of the police car.
It was as delicious as the pizza.
Of course you have the obligatory celebrity apologist pointing out that y'know, she was *still in custody* in her 2700 sq ft. house overlooking Sunset Strip.
And we know how tough that can be.
Posted by: Error Flynn | June 8, 2007 3:14 PM
Have a good weekend everyone. Looks like a storm might be headed this way. Current temp 90º; real feel 100º. By the time I get home I'll be drenched in sweat.
Posted by: omni | June 8, 2007 3:16 PM
I find it hard to believe someone who was born to first-generation Adeline Lombardi and Gerald Tancredo could be such an a$$ when it comes to immigration.
I can bet there are a few members of his family that came in illegally. I know mine did. My grandfather came across the Canadian border (thanks friends!) and later became a legal citizen by joining the army in WWI.
Posted by: TBG | June 8, 2007 3:20 PM
ditto your last post here, big storm headed this way as well.
Posted by: dmd | June 8, 2007 3:22 PM
I find it amazing that a liberal would be considered 'far left.' The right wing noise machine really has squewed the dialogue down there. In Canada most balanced budgets and significant deficit reductions in Canada have been acheived by liberal and social democratic governments.
Of course we do have gay marriage, stem cell research, and limits on election buying.
Posted by: Boko999 | June 8, 2007 3:23 PM
I'm afraid I do have a little sympathy for her. Though I'm really sick and tired of the Paris Hilton all the time coverage. She's in a cell, alone, for 23 straight hours at a time, with one hour a day to interact with a guard, for a traffic violation. Isolated confinement for the type of person she is: I'd call that unusually cruel punishment. Isn't this covered in the Bill of Rights. Ah, yes, right there in the VIII Amendment.
Tchau boodlers
Posted by: omni | June 8, 2007 3:24 PM
Yoki, she's going back to jail!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19102663/
Posted by: dmd | June 8, 2007 3:24 PM
Thanks dmd, and Error.
Posted by: Yoki | June 8, 2007 3:29 PM
I'm trying not to be too happy about Ms. Hilton going back to jail. She did some wimpy service and paid a fine for driving while intoxicated but its what follows that to me says she deserves this. She was stopped while suspended for driving two times. they let her go the first time. The second time, they did right hauling her back to court. She has shown an absolute disregard for the law. What did she think would happen?
Posted by: dr | June 8, 2007 3:34 PM
She thought she'd smirk and bat her eye lashes and then cry and it would all go away. Just what she's been taught to think.
Posted by: Yoki | June 8, 2007 3:36 PM
I don't know for CA, but drunk driving has become a criminal offence in Haute-Maine, not a traffic violation. She got a very lenient initial sentence, breaking the conditions of her release (i.e. driving vs not-driving) got her back in. She showed an abysmal lack of judgment all along. Mind you an unknown cute looking 22 years old with no record would probably not have been sent to jail.
Posted by: shrieking denizen | June 8, 2007 3:36 PM
Let me get this straight. Paris Hilton returns to jail to serve her full sentence while Scooter, Dick and W remain at large!
I have a certain amount of sympathy for her too. Yeah, put her in jail--but to let her go and haul her back in seems unduly humiliating. She was in, just keep her there until the time is up.
Posted by: dbG | June 8, 2007 3:39 PM
I just checked, and guess what? I'm mean.
Posted by: Yoki | June 8, 2007 3:40 PM
Hate to be too cynical but I wonder if there was a strange spike in the Sheriff's bank account. Out of curiosity, a Sheriff has the ability to change the terms of incarceration like that?
Posted by: dmd | June 8, 2007 3:41 PM
I fear I owe the Boodle a most abject apology for every bringing up the name Celine Dion. In two years on the Boodle, that may be the worst thing I've ever done. To our friends in Canuckistant in particular, I abase myself and grovel at your feet. Have some poutine on me. Please. It's the least I can do.
Posted by: Curmudgeon | June 8, 2007 3:44 PM
>Mind you an unknown cute looking 22 years old with no record would probably not have been sent to jail.
After a DUI and 2 driving-while-suspended, I don't know. They do have some rules about these things. Paris is 26 and has enough money to have a chauffered Rolls follow her around to make sure she doesn't drive while drunk. "Yo Freddy, she's staggering. Help Ms. Hilton in the back and follow us home in her Bentley."
I'll bet a 26 yr old black man in a Honda would've had a 50/50 chance of being beaten silly on his way to the station the first time and would've been tossed in the clink for the whole sentence in a heartbeat.
Posted by: Error Flynn | June 8, 2007 3:45 PM
Anyway, it was all Tony Kornheiser's fault.
Posted by: Curmudgeon | June 8, 2007 3:47 PM
And now some real news.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/space/06/08/space.shuttle.ap/index.html
:-)
Posted by: Scottynuke | June 8, 2007 3:49 PM
Yoki, you're not mean! :-) I'd have loved to see Arbusto in the same situation, crying in a cop car! (Maybe that makes me mean).
dmd, I believe the judge/prosecutor are bringing the Sheriff up on contempt charges. Apparently he didn't have the authority to do this when it was specifically forbidden in her sentencing.
Remember the other day when I said I knew everything about Paris & Britney? The joys of middle-of-the-night-beep-surfing. And . . . then you're hooked.
Posted by: dbG | June 8, 2007 3:49 PM
How can you people be so cruel to poor Ms. Hilton? She started with next to nothing and coaxed a career out of it.
Posted by: Boko999 | June 8, 2007 3:55 PM
Hey, I never said liberals were far left. I said the far left (past the liberals) and the far right have some things in common. Of course, where I live a lot of folks think "social democrat" is like "communist". They probably won't be visiting Canada soon. Their loss, we spent our honeymoon there and it was splendid.
About Paris being in jail: she's not there for a traffic violation. That wasn't worth jail time. However, she was convicted of what we call a "wet reckless" - driving after drinking but with a lower blood alcohol level than the requirement for drunk driving. Like virtually every other California criminal defendant, she paid a fine, had to take classes, had her license suspended, and was put on probation. Probation is given to many many criminal defendants, and was imposed to ensure didn't commit any other criminal offense for a specific period of time. Probation is a huge incentive to be good. The carrot: if you are good, no jail time. If you are bad, lockup. It is bright-line and simple. Most people with a wet reckless or DUI have no problem completing probation without incident. Paris chose to drive with a suspended license. Twice. The second time they violated her probation, and there really was no doubt at that point that she'd go to jail. Any other defendant would have. This is a particularly irksome violation, and a very common one throughout the U.S., because it is purely selfish: the violator believes her ability to drive is a right unfettered by regulation, not a privilege granted by the State, and ignores the fact that she's been told not to drive for a period of time. As to the isolation: I'm sure that was purely for Ms. Hilton's safety in the county jail, in light of her wealth and notoriety. I bet the sheriff didn't want to think of her loose in the general population.
Posted by: Ivansmom | June 8, 2007 3:56 PM
I know, dbG. I wasn't interested *at all* right up to the moment she got out after three days. At that point, I was lost.
Posted by: Yoki | June 8, 2007 3:56 PM
Now I have another tune cootie, Boko:
"Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'..."
:-)
Posted by: Scottynuke | June 8, 2007 4:00 PM
Extraordinary rendition to a secret prison in Poland or Romania may help to quell the media hoopla about Paris Hilton, but then the media may actually do some investigative journalism and find out where she is being held, thus requiring a presidential pardon or commutation of sentence. Call me cynic for observing the priorities of the mass media and public demand.
Posted by: Shiloh | June 8, 2007 4:00 PM
It was Paris' shrink who told authorities that if she remained incarcerated, she'd be subject to a nervous breakdown, hence, her release to home detention--per early reporting coming across the Web.
Time for this kid (spoiled brat?) to grow up and face some reality, as well as consequences.
Posted by: Loomis | June 8, 2007 4:02 PM
And some very happy news for me.
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2007/06/07/vitamin-d-recommendations.html
I get to take more cod liver and halibut liver oil capsules. mrdr thought I was nuts, but I gave a loud wohooo during the breakfast news this a.m.
Posted by: dr | June 8, 2007 4:04 PM
And Ivansmom, she could have afforded taxis and ten designated drivers, too. That makes this a particular slap in the face of the law.
I say sentence her to 2 years hard labor making license plates.
Posted by: Wilbrod | June 8, 2007 4:05 PM
Jeez, a Breakdown? Now I really feel sorrry for her...NOT. Would it be too cruel to say that a breakdown would be up for her in terms of personal growth.
Posted by: dr | June 8, 2007 4:10 PM
A story like that does make you feel smugly virtuous, doesn't it, dr? That was my reaction when I saw the WaPo story. This is from someone who takes a multivitamin, plus 1000mg of calcium with 400mg of D plus 200mg of soy every day...Smug, just completely smug.
Posted by: Slyness | June 8, 2007 4:14 PM
Per Joel's 2:16:
http://www.loc.gov/rr/hispanic/ghtreaty/
In December 1845, the U.S. Congress voted to annex the Texas Republic and soon sent troops led by General Zachary Taylor to the Rio Grande (regarded by Mexicans as their territory) to protect its border with Mexico. The inevitable clashes [Read: PROVOCATION BROUGHT ON BY THE U.S. TROOPS' PRESENCE] between Mexican troops and U.S. forces provided the rationale for a Congressional declaration of war on May 13, 1846. [Might be instructive to dredge up who was 'fer and who was 'agin.]
Hostilities continued for the next two years as General Taylor led his troops through to Monterrey, and General Stephen Kearny and his men went to New Mexico, Chihuahua, and California. But it was General Winfield Scott and his army that delivered the decisive blows as they marched from Veracruz to Puebla and finally captured Mexico City itself in August 1847.
Mexican officials and Nicholas Trist, President Polk's representative, began discussions for a peace treaty that August. On February 2, 1848 the Treaty was signed in Guadalupe Hidalgo, a city north of the capital where the Mexican government had fled as U.S. troops advanced. Its provisions called for Mexico to cede [A WHOPPING, HUMONGOUS] 55% of its territory--present-day Arizona, California, New Mexico, and parts of Colorado, Nevada and Utah--in exchange for $15M in compensation for war-related damage to Mexican property.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 8, 2007 4:18 PM
Wilbrod writes:
I say sentence her to 2 years hard labor making license plates.
Sorry, Wilbrod, you're a half-day late. Leno did this joke as part of his monologue last night. And the first plate Ms. Hilton made during her time on the California license plate manufacturing line during her 72 hours in jail, according to Leno?
DBL STNDRD
Posted by: Loomis | June 8, 2007 4:23 PM
>>"By the way, everything you said about the far right holds true for the far left as well. This is what drives me crazy about local & national Dems who complain that our Democratic elected officials aren't liberal enough."
Sorry. Do I need a lawyer?:-P
Posted by: Boko999 | June 8, 2007 4:26 PM
Loomis, I didn't see Jay Leno.
I'm not paid 2 million to be on time with my jokes. Not that I wouldn't complain if I were.
Posted by: Wilbrod | June 8, 2007 4:33 PM
Loomis: President Polk also campaigned on the Oregon Territory issue ("Fifty-four Forty or Fight") with Canada. Now that the immigration bill appears dead it may be worthwhile to discuss annexation of the remaining 45% of Mexico and returning to the 54/40 border to reduce the incidence of illegal immigration. Alternately, we could sell Alaska to Canada - and cede Arizona, California, New Mexico, and West Texas, etc. to Mexico and deport illegals to those states.
Posted by: Shiloh | June 8, 2007 4:36 PM
I felt so virtuous that I went up front to check out the new candy dish. Had some too.
Our intrepid receptionist is the only person on the planet who can make eating choclate look like she is eating a health food.
Posted by: dr | June 8, 2007 4:55 PM
I have previously proposed the plan that we eliminate illegal immigration by Mexican citizens by annexing Mexico. Of course, this would do nothing to stop the influx of Nicaraguans, Salvadorans, Panamanians (DARN those Panamanians!), and bootleg Céline Dion CDs.
Posted by: Tim | June 8, 2007 5:17 PM
Ivansmom | You're right. You didn't say you thought liberals were far left, you said far lefties complained that candidates weren't liberal enough. This tortured me all the way to the beer store.
Because liberals are despised by both sides I couldn't imagine far lefies (Maoist?s) complaining about the lack of a candidates liberal credentials. I projected that onto your post. This explains why I flunked that Wonderwhatevertest and the shape of my nose.
Thank you for straightening me out.
Posted by: Boko999 | June 8, 2007 5:25 PM
Isn't Vermont in discussions to change nationality from US to Canada? If that initiative succeeds, some border adjustments in the Northwest would be highly appropriate. I assume Seattle would remain in the US, since losing Microsoft would be a terrible blow to national pride.
Posted by: Dave of the Coonties | June 8, 2007 6:29 PM
Not only that, Dave. The Turks and Caicos have proposed joining Canada too, without much interest on our side. I myself think it would be a fine idea to have an island province. Just think about Spring Break!
Posted by: Yoki | June 8, 2007 6:34 PM
Ivansmom and Error I agree with your comments totally, although looking at the picture of Paris Hilton on the front page of the WashPost, I do feel sorry for her. I am a mother of a daughter is in a similar situation, and as a mother my heart goes out to her. I do think though, at some point young people have to know that they cannot flaunt the law and do what they want. I tell my daughter all the time, it is not all about you. There are other people in this world. I am an old softie anyway, I can't stand tears, mine or other peoples.
The difference with Hilton is that she could afford to pay someone to drive her around, and not get under the wheel. With so many folks, it's getting back and forth to work. If you can't drive you can't go to work, and then what? You loose your job, and everything goes from bad to worse.
And Error, it is true that if a Black man was caught doing what she did, we would be reading about that accidental slip he made on the way to the jail house.
Posted by: Cassandra S | June 8, 2007 6:52 PM
We don't want Vermont, we want what is jokingly referred to as the Alaskian panhandle. Perfidious Albion indeed.
Posted by: Boko999 | June 8, 2007 7:08 PM
"who is in a similar situation"
I am frying chicken wings for a graduation party this evening. There are so many. A young woman up the street from me is graduating from high school tonight and her parents are giving her a party. The cake is here too. Are any of you celebrating with your children or friends that have children? It is such a special time for young people. And for their parents too.
Congratulations to parents that are celebrating graduation with your young people. A job well done.
Posted by: Cassandra S | June 8, 2007 7:32 PM
dr | Don't get too comfortable. There is a war on in the Ivory Coast where 50% of world's supply of cocao comes from. We're going to be discussing 'Blood Chocolate' before too long.
Posted by: Boko999 | June 8, 2007 7:35 PM
Say it ain't so, Boko.
Posted by: Wilbrod | June 8, 2007 7:38 PM
Every one here probably caters these affairs, right? And please don't tell me you don't know what a chicken wing is? While typing this I am so laughing. We live in the same country, but sometimes it is like living on another planet. Our worlds are so different. The cake is from both worlds, Wal-Mart.
Posted by: Cassandra S | June 8, 2007 7:40 PM
Cassandra-enjoy the celebrations. We have been in a constant state of not quite celebration, but relief, since Frostdottir finished her high school requirements last month and started college.
If I weren't so tired from mowing the lawn I'd be celebrating the nomination of a new Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. I'm not pinning to many hopes on new leadership, but there is hope that someone not tied to the mess will be able to clean it up. Never did like Pace.
Posted by: frostbitten | June 8, 2007 7:43 PM
Turks and Caicos could be quite a nice mini-province, though the cost of coast guard services would be pretty high. I imagine that taxes on mansions and resorts could pay the bill.
The Alaska panhandle is sort of an odd deal. I suspect people from Anchorage and Fairbanks would love to sell it off, at least after all the trees have been cut.
Posted by: Dave of the Coonties | June 8, 2007 7:46 PM
What's catering, Cassandra? Is that when you shoo the cat out of the kitchen when you're cooking?
I have never fried chicken wings, but I have made chicken wings for parties-- there is this Mudge-like recipe for miracle chicken wings that uses around 20 ingredients and you marinate the wings and also glaze the wings. Very tasty.
Posted by: Wilbrod | June 8, 2007 7:46 PM
Cater, ha! If you mean, do I get my family and friends to pitch in, you bet. Or buy stuff from Sam's. If I don't bake our cakes they usually come from the Target bakery. The thought of those chicken wings, plus all the other good stuff which is always at a family or neighborhood party, makes me wish I were there.
I admit to a little pity for Paris, too. Remember I used to be a defense attorney. I think she absolutely needs to be in jail, I would have been outraged at any other outcome, if she can't learn to play by the rules then she needs to suffer the consequences, but still. Prison is worse, but jail is hard. Aside from personal inconveniences, there is always the threat of TB and other diseases which float through the air. She's no doubt less comfortable but MUCH safer in isolation, and not just from the other inmates. I wish she'd learn something from this but I have doubts. Of course, since this is the only time I've ever paid any attention to her at all, my pity is weak and my interest will soon fade. Whoops, there it goes now.
Posted by: Ivansmom | June 8, 2007 7:48 PM
My new favorite simile, from last week's Dilbert cartoon: like a hundred drunken clowns with bees in their underpants.
Posted by: Ivansmom | June 8, 2007 7:50 PM
Cassandra, Thanks for remind me of celebrate the graduation. My third daughter is graduating from the middle school. And I treasured her saying to me, "We are a family." She is growing up faster than I ever tracked it down.
Also, thanks for the blessed words you shared in your daily posting, especially in difficult times.
Posted by: daiwanlan | June 8, 2007 7:52 PM
Tim | You forgot Honduras, were the contra terrorists under the control of Negroponte attacked Nicaragua.
Posted by: Boko999 | June 8, 2007 7:53 PM
Ivansmom, Can you help me to know why a prison term served by Ms. Hilton need to be 23 hr solitary confinement for her sentence?
Posted by: daiwanlan | June 8, 2007 7:57 PM
Cassandra, I blush at what you must think of me.
#2 graduated from High School last Wednesday. We went to the ceremonies, and felt very proud. And then we came home, and baked cupcakes and (I kid you not) fried chicken wings that had been marinated in buttermilk and double-dredged in seasoned flour. The wees (all #2's friends) came by the house with their parents, and we picnicked on fried chicken and coleslaw and three-bean salad and cornbread and cupcakes. Then all the girls ran upstairs to change, all the boys ran to the basement to change, and they went to a dance at their school. I drove them there, Himself picked them up afterwards, and brought the girls back here to play in the basement playroom as long as they liked. That way we knew they were safe and not drinking and not driving on the roads with other cars filled with drunk grads.
We are not rich, and we are not fancy. We are just like you. There is *nothing* in your post about Graduation Day that is unfamiliar to me.
I think you will like this. Whilst neither of my girls is very much planning to marry or have children, I have already warned them that what they see on TLC about *Weddings* is not their fate, should they change their minds. No wedding planner, no tiara, no guest list of thousands... My mother did not make a big ugly production number of her wedding(s), I did not of mine. If my girls marry, I plan to buy "Weddings for Dummies" and rent the community hall.
None of this lifestyle escalation for us, I assure you.
Posted by: Yoki | June 8, 2007 8:02 PM
Dave of the Coonties, I don't know if you read fiction at all, but if you do you should read Chabon's The Yiddish Policeman's Union. A ripping yarn, and very funny about the Alaska panhandle.
Posted by: Yoki | June 8, 2007 8:05 PM
My theory ("Ahem, I have a theory...") about Paris is that she's probably never alone with her thoughts. Ever. There's always a maid, cook, staff, assistants, take my dog, get my dog, let's shop, something going on at all times around her to feed her attention.
Faced with being alone, actually alone in a quiet room with no bling, no "let's fly to Rio tonight", no sycophants, the emptiness imploded and she just wailed and cried until the sheriff said "get her outta here, it's not worth it".
After her release, secure in the knowledge she had once again gamed the system and gotten away with it, the fact that they decided to bring her back into court and would actually make her go back must've really whacked her.
But honestly, it's good for her and the people she endangered. I'm sure the book is in the works.
Posted by: Error Flynn | June 8, 2007 8:06 PM
Ivansmom, you are a riot, a funny riot though. Wilbrod, no caterer? Sorry about the catering comment, I just thought you guys would hire someone to cook for you. You have to remember I'm from the old school. Sam's has chicken wings? Glazed wings sound really good. Ivansmom, you cook too? You go, girl.
diaw, you are more than welcome. They do grow fast, and before you know it, out the door.
Posted by: Cassandra S | June 8, 2007 8:07 PM
As I understand it, the judge did not impose the 23-hour solitary on our Paris. The prison authorities, along with our favorite Sheriff, decided that she would be distinctly more comfortable in a private room than in the general population, with all that entails. Nothing to do with the sentencing.
Posted by: Yoki | June 8, 2007 8:08 PM
Error, yes and yes again. Whilst of course, I think to myself, "I could really do with 23 hours a day of alone time for a month or two, so long as I had some good books and writing supplies."
Posted by: Yoki | June 8, 2007 8:13 PM
Yoki- You made me smile with your wedding warnings. Mr. F and I see large, expensive, weddings as a child rearing failure. It matters not if the parents or the couple pay. I think Frostdottir got the message when her "sweet 16" was a nice dinner out with the 'rents and a Netflix movie at home. If she still held out hope that keys to a new car would accompany her brand new driver's license the disappointment did not show. Perhaps it's a sign that she is growing up that she no longer sees "reality TV" as reality. Well, at least not ours.
Posted by: frostbitten | June 8, 2007 8:16 PM
EF, that is a very good theory. Not as good as one involving the geometry of dinosaurs, but still quite excellent.
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 8:23 PM
Hah! Frosti, we are cut from the same cloth.
I have actually heard people say, "Of course we will pay for our child's post-secondary education. Oh, and buy her a car at 16."
Of course? Of course?! Um, not at my house. Even if I could (which I can't) I wouldn't. Isn't a car one of those things you have to work to buy, when it gets important enough to you, and then it is a terrible beater? And you do all the work on it yourself?
We are, with the graceful help of 6 grandparents, paying for the first degree. And that is why they have to have picnics and no catered parties for High School grad. Because we don't have that much money.
Posted by: Yoki | June 8, 2007 8:26 PM
RD & Ivansmom should realize that succulent morsels of those "ill-tempered rabid ferrets" may still be around--and we vote (well, sometimes; and sometimes it's actually counted!)
The piranha medallion community has toyed with supporting Ron Paul, but only if he drops his Republican pretensions and runs as a wingnut Libertarian again; we in the ferret morsel community are once again considering (heh, heh) Ralph Nader. May the best loser shaft his closest allies!
RD calls the center a "lonely place"; Shiloh quotes a century-old poem that "the center cannot hold". What is the center? I remember a psychology professor ranting about how the Eisenhower presidency had moved "the center" rightward, with Kennedy and Johnson being his examples of the shift (he considered them right-wing Democrats). If the center had moved rightward in 1973 then where is it now? And where should it be? Inquiring Minds want to know!
Alternately "the center" is where I (uber-capital "i") am at, and all the rest of you are out there closer to the fringes. Thus, there are currently approximately 300 million different political "centers" in the the U.S.A. Well, at least we know where RD's is: a mountain peak with vicious critters on all sides (at least my gonfaloon is on the warm-blooded side--thanks, RD). We are all envious of the Olympian view it provides, and of the defensive security of holding the high ground.
Shiloh, why am I suddenly surrounded by the reeling shadows of indignant desert birds? Have you been rocking that cradle again?
Posted by: MedallionOfFerret | June 8, 2007 8:29 PM
I just popped online for a sec, check out the weather (big storms in the area) and I gotta say...the WaPo headline "Carl Bernstein on Hillary Clinton" not only made the *way* wrong image jump to mind, but it made me shudder. I guess the rock-star-wage editors have gone home for weekend.
Posted by: LostInThought | June 8, 2007 8:30 PM
What I get from this whole Paris Hilton bit is a realization that we are all in this together. Schadenfreude can only take you so far before empathy kicks in. I really do kinda feel sorry for the woman. I would like to think that if I had been born into such a life I would have done better, but I can't say that for sure.
Still, enough is enough. I look forward to the day when "Paris" either brings to mind the city of lights, or that soon to be famous (in a good, though one hopes lucrative, way) Achenbach daughter.
And I imagine I'm not the only one.
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 8:32 PM
Cassandra, I love to cook. At one point when I was much younger I think I thought that cooking was too "girly", though I always liked baking - also, my mom never taught me and I had no experience of it. Somewhere along the way I discovered that, necessities of eating aside, cooking good food is really satisfying. About then Ivansdad started about a 2 1/2 year cycle of constant theater work (read: nightly rehearsals) and I happily took over the cooking.
Daiwanian, Yoki's got it. Paris Hilton is very rich and very famous, and very spoiled. Most people in jail are not really bad people (those go to prison), but opportunity is everything. I'm sure the sheriffs saw lawsuit signs everywhere and decided that for her own safety, their peace of mind, and the county's peace of pocketbook, Paris was a good candidate for isolation. It is harder on her than it would be to have cellmates, but much easier for the staff.
Posted by: Ivansmom | June 8, 2007 8:34 PM
Cassandra - I'm impressed that you decide to splurge for actual chicken wings. They are, of course, a delicacy item nowadays. I remember that in my tender youth they sold for about a dime-to-a-quarter a pound in the grocery store, and you could pick up a bag full of them fried for a buck or so at any fried chicken joint. Sometime within the past year, I saw them priced, side-by-side, along with boneless, skinless chicken breasts, at $1.99 per pound.
Posted by: Bob S. | June 8, 2007 8:35 PM
Ooops, I meant to choose "Preview".
I meant, "... decided to splurge...".
Posted by: Bob S. | June 8, 2007 8:36 PM
Don't forget Belize and Costa Rica, Tim.
Ferret: In his cyclical view of history, Yeats saw signs that the 2000 year cycle of Christianity was ending and would be replaced by an antithetical system. Thus:
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,/
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?"
Posted by: Shiloh | June 8, 2007 8:42 PM
Yoki, I smiled a lot while reading your comment. Good for you. And for your girls.
Error, I suspect you are correct in your assessment of Miss Hilton's lifestyle. Going to jail isn't fun for anyone. I don't wish it on my worse enemy. Most young people have a pretty hard time trying to paddle through life, although some have the cushion of money. Many suffer without the necessities. I see children that do just that in the circles I'm in. Most of them see the roses, but are never mindful of the thorns, someone else said that, but it is a pretty accurate assessment.
Finished with the wings, and so sleepy. The g-girl is here, but gone to the graduation. It's her cousin. She will probably be sleep before the graduation is over.
We love our children and grandchildren dearly and more than words can express many times, yet we don't know how it will turn out. We know what we want for them, but there are no guarantees in this life. We pray for the best. I believe in my heart that most parents love their children, there are of course exceptions to that rule, but many times parent just don't know how and what to do. We learn as we go along. And some never learn. I suspect Miss Hilton's parent love her very much, and I also suspect that they too, are very sad tonight. We all want good for our children, and we love them no matter what. Death does not stop that, and I'm sure jail does not either. It probably makes us realize more than ever how deep and strong that love is.
Posted by: Cassandra S | June 8, 2007 8:43 PM
I've also got a bit of sympathy for Ms. Hilton, who (while she's embraced it wholeheartedly) has had most of this celebrity thrust upon her, without ever having a chance to develop any skills with which to cope with the negative aspects. That being said, I'm pretty sure that she'll survive just fine.
I have (unfortunately) some experience with the way that jail time is counted, and it was not at all uncommon for 11:30 p.m. Sunday - through - early A.M. Thursday to be counted as five days time served, for non-violent and relatively trouble-free prisoners. Trust me, if you're not especially accustomed to the surroundings, each hour seems like an eternity.
Posted by: Bob S. | June 8, 2007 8:43 PM
I'm gonna get in trouble for this but:
I get a kick out of the people on the boodle portraying themselves as just working stiffs.
I may be wrong but from pictures I've seen and the jobs you've described I would estimate the boodle's median income at $75,000.
Please don't pretend you know anything about living in poverty or not knowing where your next meal is coming from.
Having to eat Kraft Dinner at college does'nt count.
Posted by: Boko999 | June 8, 2007 8:44 PM
Cassandra, I spent most of last weekend cooking for my friend's daughter's baby shower. 4 turkey breasts, dried beef dip(mom2be's fave) and a huge platter of cookies (~ 14 dozen, 4 different kinds: rugelach, extra-short shortbread, melting moments and almond fudgy brownies). The mom2be's teenage sister made a beautiful cake. I also made cookies for a friend's daughter's graduation the week before.
Other friends made roast beef, pasta salad, dips, we brought everything. A lot of times I'll make potato salad too. . . my sister, who has way more money than I do, always says there's nowhere you can buy homemade cookies, so please bring some.
I do understand that your life is different from some others on this boodle, but I think in the important ways many of us are alike in treasuring our friends, helping out in our communities and getting up every morning and doing the best we can. It's so good that we can share all that here.
Now on to Yoki. Yoki, I can understand the rest of it, not that I think you'd raise Bridezillas, but surely NO TIARA is a crime against nature. It's jewelry--what are you thinking?
And I agree with your Paris comment. My kitty-corner cube mate and I were saying today how nice it would be to be inaccessible with a pile of books for a month. Not to trivialize the reason she's there.
Posted by: dbG | June 8, 2007 8:46 PM
I prefer drumsticks and thighs myself, Bob S. so I never particularly priced wings, but I do think you're correct-- they tend to be more expensive. I never understood that-- wings are more skin and bone than meat. Crispy, though, and we all know crisp sells.
"Chaçun a son gôut."
Posted by: Wilbrod | June 8, 2007 8:46 PM
Wilbrod - Strictly supply and demand. Once wings became a hugely popular bar snack, the demand drove up prices dramatically. I'm willing to bet a lot of money that the Purdue scientists are working day and night to produce a hundred-legged centipede/chicken hybrid as we speak!
Actually, a very similar thing happened with "skirt steak" (umm... "cow diaphragm") which was the traditional meat for fajitas, largely because it was quite inexpensive, and the seasoning/marinade served to tenderize an otherwise tough cut of muscle. Once the dish became popular with wealthier people, the price skyrocketed.
Posted by: Bob S. | June 8, 2007 8:54 PM
And, Ferret:
"The Hand That Rocks the Cradle is the Hand That Rules the World" - Wm Ross Wallace, in praise of motherhood.
Posted by: Shiloh | June 8, 2007 8:55 PM
Boko, where you are isn't always where you came from.
Scholarships, assistantships and working the rest of your way through doesn't mean you didn't live on food stamps as a child or have negative cash flow halfway though every month as an adult. Now? No. 6 years ago? Yes.
Posted by: dbG | June 8, 2007 8:57 PM
Boko, 75 grand is one thing in the midwest, something else entirely in NYC, LA or even NoVa.
Besides, isn't there always the possibility that some of us were raised below the poverty line, didn't really know what steak was until our 20s, and have been lucky enough to do something with our minds to break that cycle? (Regardless of the gifts of the mind, luck has a lot to do with it.)
The flip side of the love of money coin is fear of no money. People develop that fear because they know what it entails.
Besides, Paris Hilton types aside, in a lot of ways, we're all just working stiffs.
Posted by: LostInThought | June 8, 2007 9:00 PM
Cassandra, I will confess to a meat-and-cheese platter for the elder child's high school graduation party, but that's as far as I've gone with catering. She graduated at 9 a.m., so it was a luncheon affair. For the younger child, who graduated from NCSSM, the school had a reception in the gym after the ceremony, which was on the grounds. Nothing fancy, the parents of the junior class provide the refreshments.
I rather dread the wedding stuff. Older child was in two weddings last fall, both of which were fancy (read expensive) affairs. She will want the same, but will have to deal with trying to get $$$ out of her notoriously tight father. I only have two requirements: a proper invitation and prompt mailing of thank-you notes. Personally, I had nice small weddings, with receptions in the fellowship hall. Since alcohol is forbidden, that keeps the costs down considerably. She won't be happy with that. I just wish my mother were here to make her wedding gown, as she did mine.
Posted by: Slyness | June 8, 2007 9:05 PM
Boko - Although fate has laughed at me in some ways, I have never been poor. I have been lucky. And I know it.
I think the reason so many people get so hostile with people like Paris Hilton is that they act as if luck has nothing to do with their position in life. They act as if to be privileged is their right.
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 9:05 PM
Anybody willing to comment regarding boko's "assessment", (notice I use that word a lot, I like it,) about poverty and the boodle? I'll bet the spelling is wrong, have to look it up.
Median income, 75,000? Wow! In my dreams that is unreal. Please folks, be honest. You all know me, and I've laid my cards on the table. I am not ashamed of my circumstances, and that doesn't mean that I would not mind them being better, just means that they are what they are. I consider you friends no matter what. And if friends aren't honest with friends, hey you know the guy that doesn't like you is going to stiff you.
Posted by: Cassandra S | June 8, 2007 9:07 PM
Cassandra - I make a lot more than 75K.
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 9:13 PM
Boko - Interesting. Actually, I'd guess that darned few of the regulars here actually come from extremely comfortable backgrounds. I certainly would agree that it seems likely that very few of us have spent extended periods without knowing where we were going to sleep, or where the next meal was to be found.
I personally grossed just under $20,000 in 2005, and just barely over $20,000 in 2006, before all of those annoying expenses and deductions. It was more than enough get by (I wasn't supporting anyone else, except for completely voluntary help that I gave various folks), but hardly opulent. I'm absolutely ecstatic that I recently got a job that puts me on track to make about 50% more annually, but probably not nearly so happy as my roommate and landlord, with whom I'm about one paycheck from finally squaring our account!
I will say that as recently as six years ago, I agreed to sell my car (definitely my only significant asset at the time, and I was going to sell it for $600!) so that I'd have the money for about six week's rent and a bit left over for food and bus/subway fare. At the last moment, an angel intervened. I've lived on $20 for three weeks (rice, beans!) in a town that ain't cheap, while needing to pay for public transportation and/or do some HARD, LONG walking to get to work. I've also talked to people whose lives made all of that seem luxurious.
So, yeah, you're right that this isn't technically a gathering of hardbitten survivors of the mean streets and withered fields.
But it's also probably not quite the group of self-congratulating poseurs that you almost seemed to imply.
Posted by: Bob S. | June 8, 2007 9:16 PM
Well, I'm like RD regarding Boko's assessment. I've been lucky. Working for the gummint as I do I don't make even half what I would in the legal world, but we have more than enough to live a good life (of course the Boy might think otherwise, but his definition may be different). We don't have enough money that I would cater events, buy expensive cars, or live in a McMansion (or even a giant roofed house). However, honestly, I wouldn't do those things even if I did have that kind of money.
Ivansdad & I paid for our wedding. Proper invitations and prompt thank-you notes were a must, the dress was off-the-rack on sale, the flowers were from my aunt's garden, and the party was a family-catered affair. Being responsible for yourself can concentrate the mind wonderfully.
Now to reply to the most astonishing post above: BOB S.! YOU FOUND CHICKEN BREASTS FOR $1.99 THIS PAST YEAR??? They are over $4 for a package of 3 here. I can't bring myself to buy them -- it is cook the whole chicken or wait for a sale.
Posted by: Ivansmom | June 8, 2007 9:17 PM
Although to be truthful, I don't know exactly how much I make. Really. My wife handles that money stuff. I live like a child.
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 9:19 PM
While I do not make more than 75 our family is well above the median due to my husband. That said, my kids don't know that, they know they are luckier than some, no catered parties, no gardeners or cleaners, the kids earn money by helping out.
I would have empathy for Paris is she ever acted anything but a spoiled brat. Perhaps she wasn't taught to respect everyone. I have told my kids repeatedly I would kick their butt (figuratively) if they were to act "entitled".
Posted by: dmd | June 8, 2007 9:20 PM
More than median, less than Padouk.
And I'll be the first to admit luck had everything to do with it. Education was the only way I saw out and I got some good breaks.
Posted by: dbG | June 8, 2007 9:22 PM
Cassandra, I'm retired and bring home a little less than half of $75,000. My retirement income is a little over half what I grossed when I worked, but with taxes, retirement, and what I put into savings, I bring home about the same as I did working. This works out because my husband and I split our expenses, and I have always been very, very frugal.
Posted by: Slyness | June 8, 2007 9:24 PM
To be slightly more specific, I'm very near boko's median. If I ever get a judgeship here in Oklahoma, I'll break six figures. Barely. Last year for the first time my salary was what my dad made while I was in high school. Oddly, this was truly some sort of milestone for me.
Posted by: Ivansmom | June 8, 2007 9:24 PM
The secret to having a nice wedding is to have the bride's father engaged in an embarrassing competition with his sister. It seemed very important to him that his only daughter's wedding be nicer than that of his niece's. As a result our wedding had a lot of white roses and some pretty gosh darn good music. The reception even nicer. Of course, we knew hardly anyone there, as they were mostly business associates of my father-in-law, but we didn't complain.
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 9:25 PM
Boko, I started out at $10k/yr as a tech. Try living in NJ on that buddy. ( Oh yeah, the community college was paid for by dishwashing and restaurant work. I worked 35 hr weeks in high school. )
Car insurance was $1k on a $700 car, and it cost another $200/mo to keep it on the road. Then try find an apartment (in the 80's) for less than $600/mo. Not.
There were many times I had to sell stuff to pay my bills and eat, and I'm talking Ramen noodles and rice.
For most of my career I was either in small companies that tended to go under every 6 months while you worked 70 hrs a week, or as a consultant with no better job security than week to week, if that.
I invested every penny I didn't have (i.e. credit cards) in computers and software and spent years hunkered down in a pretty bare apartment with 2" thick manuals to learn the skills I needed to get somewhere.
Do I make good money now? You bet, and I worked my butt off for it.
Oh, and come to think of it I just re-mortgaged the house to pay medical bills, and if I lost my job I'd be living in my sister's basement in a month.
Yeah, it's all gravy down here.
Posted by: Error Flynn | June 8, 2007 9:26 PM
Here's the thing about money. It's about reaching an equilibrium. If I were to suddenly make half as much, the pain would be in the transition. You know, going from a nice suburban home to a town house or apartment. But after that it really doesn't matter.
No amount of money will make my daughter better. No amount of money will make the sky more blue or the sound of Bach more beautiful. Once you are above the level of poverty, money really doesn't buy happiness.
Posted by: RD Padouk | June 8, 2007 9:31 PM
That's it, RD. After you've passed the level of meeting basic needs, money can get you more and better stuff, but not health or beauty. I don't like a lot of "stuff". Most of my clients in my past job, and most of the cases I see now, have problems which stem from not having enough money. They're real, and I respect those problems, and I am blessed that I'm not there.
Hey Error, speaking of medical bills, I hope and trust you are pulling through okay. You don't talk about it much and I don't ask, but I haven't forgotten and I know the Boodle hasn't either. We're like an elephant. Watch out for mice.
Posted by: Ivansmom | June 8, 2007 9:40 PM
RDP: //Once you are above the level of poverty, money really doesn't buy happiness.//
I wish money were enough to help your daughter.
6 years ago I made less than half of what I make now (small town Ohio, non-profit academic institution job). Definitely above the poverty line, but unable to put much aside for retirement, paying the minimums and still living on pbj for lunch or grazing in the garden, tapped out partway through the month. While I wasn't any less happy, I worry a lot less now. And while 75K would have been a fortune there, it doesn't go anywhere near as far in Philadelphia.
My good friend has assured me that if I ever become homeless I can live in her back yard and bring the dogs.
Posted by: dbG | June 8, 2007 9:40 PM
Money was never a focus of my life. I worked mostly for non-profit organizations in health, hospice, economic development and community planning. I retired early on a tax-sheltered annuity and presently do some consulting work, but deliberately keep my income low to avoid certain tax consequences. My participation in the boodle should significantly lower the $75k estimate.
Posted by: Shiloh | June 8, 2007 9:40 PM
1st for real?