A Shared Belief

Many people don't understand others who have strong religious/spiritual beliefs.  Now, I'm not talking about the ultra-conservative, right-wing nut jobs that the media would have you believe are what ALL people of faith are--I'm talking about your everyday people who live their lives according to their faith and use their faith to help them get through.  Two of these people I would like to talk about.

The first man I want to tell you about, I don't REALLY know.  The man is Brian Rafalski and he is a hockey player.  Today, he retired from the Red Wings and had a press conference to announce it.  In his speech, he gave his reasons for walking away from the $6 million he was to earn next year.  Among the reasons were his health and his family.  He said that this past year had been hard on him physically, mentally, and spiritually and after talking to his wife and advisers, he felt that God was leading him in a new direction.  He said that his life is now about serving God, his family, and others, and that hockey is not a priority, so he is retiring.  He made it clear that God was very much in his decision-making process and was very humble about it.  Quite a few people were extremely bummed about his saying this.  As a person of faith, everything that he does WILL involve God.  He didn't stand there and try to get anyone else to believe the way he does, he just gave his reasons for what he is doing and the process involved in coming to this decision.  If he would have come out and said he used voodoo dolls and a Ouija board to decide his life, I really think there would have been much less of a hullabaloo.  I'm very saddened by the way some people reacted to this and the amount of intolerance, which bordered on hatred.  If someone were to say they called on their earth goddess to help in all decisions, I certainly wouldn't belittle them in public.  I don't know why Brian Rafalski wasn't given the same consideration and why, at the least, his remarks were considered 'eye-brow raising.'

I have known the second man for somewhere around 45 years.  Pete is a shirt-tail relative of mine, but I have always considered him more of a friend.  We used to talk on the phone a lot and we would go out as friends to the movies once in a while.  As we got older, our lives took us on very different paths.  We saw each other only a few times the last 30 years, but we seem to take up where we left our friendship the last time.  Whenever we were together, we had an easiness between us that comes with being friends for many years.  And, no romance between us--we're both long-time married.  ;)

A few months ago, I got some very distressing news about Pete.  On 22 July of last year, Pete was diagnosed with acute myelogenous leukemia--AML.  He had a sub-type that killed half of all those diagnosed with this devastating disease within 9 months.  He underwent chemotherapy, but was told he needed a bone marrow transplant to ever be considered 'cured.'  And so, he has been working toward that end for months and was expecting to have the transplant in the next couple of months.  Pete, too, is a man of faith and through this entire ordeal, he has had the attitude that whatever happened was how it should be.  He never wavered in his belief that God was in control.  The other day, he was told that his chance of ALREADY being cured is in the 20-40% range and each month he has no signs of the cancer, means he is closer to being declared cured.  Somehow or another--and the doctors don't know why--the chemo worked, despite the odds being extremely low, and he has had no cancer since December.  As it stands right now, having a marrow transplant might be the worst thing for his condition, as the procedure isn't without risk.  He will continue to take it a day at a time and see what God has planned for him.  He will trust that any advice he gets will be the correct advice.  He will use his faith to make the decisions he has to.

Both men have a deep faith and both men rely on it for help in making life-changing decisions.  Neither one is shy when it comes to acknowledging where his strength comes from.  In private and in public, both let people know Who is in charge of whatever happens to him.  Neither one is obnoxious about his faith, but many would deem it inappropriate for them to say what role their faith has in their lives.  Why there is so much intolerance, I don't know.  It seems as if people would be so much happier and easier to accept if someone was to say that advice came from the neighbors or psychic or deli owner than they are when God is given the credit.  It really is a sad state in our world when tolerance is at such an all-time low--especially when everyone 'says' how tolerant they are.

Read More

This Is News?

I have said, ad nauseum, that I don't bother with the news anymore.  I really think I used to be a news junky, but the stuff that passes for news these days has completely turned me off.  And we have three 'stories' that put me over the edge--the kind of things that make me want to shoot my TV.  (Again, there IS a reason I don't own a gun...)

Our first story deals with a group of organizations trying to strong-arm McDonald's into retiring Ronald McDonald.  Their idea is that HE is a big part of the fattening of America's kids.  Bullshit.  I'll say it again:  BULLSHIT!  Okay, okay--I see what everyone else sees and I do realize that there is a problem here in the US when it comes to weight.  (Believe me, all I need do is look in the mirror.)  But, cartoon characters selling food is the least of the reasons for it.  The number one problem in this country is this:   a family can be fed McDonald's food OR Kraft Mac & Cheese or any number of processed foods for MUCH, MUCH less money than it costs to buy fresh fruits and vegetables.  Until the cost of fresh, 'healthful' (sorry, but I HATE that word) food is as cheap as processed food, people WILL gravitate toward what they can feed their children for less.  And, with the number of mothers who also hold jobs outside the home (I also HATE the term 'working mothers'), time is also a factor--and it does take a lot more time to cook a meal with fresh foods than with packaged.  Obesity in America is more than commercials and it would take days for me to write my impressions--which I won't do here.  Food and exercise are not the only factors at play here--we have society and career choices and other things, as well.  I'm sorry, Michelle O, but getting kids to 'move' is NOT the big solution to the problem we have here.

The second story that sent me reeling was about a 'pageant mom' who Botoxes her 8-year-old daughter and then went on Good Morning America and TALKED about it!  Is there ANYTHING that can be said about this story?  To begin with, I have hated 'beauty pageants' since I was quite young--I always thought the participants were ridiculous.  And then when they came out with pageants for little girls--who, by the way, dress up like little sluts--I was completely appalled.  To find out that these poor little tykes are getting Botox injections isn't surprising, but IS completely disgusting.  This is another reason why the rest of the world hates America.  (And with that statement, I'm thinking that little girl beauty pageants are mostly a US thing--although I COULD be wrong.) 

Story number three has to do with the Arnold Schwarzenegger and Maria Shriver split.  To begin with, this is a non-story for me.  I'm really surprised they lasted as long as they did--they just looked awkward together.  So, the split isn't surprising.  The story that sent me over the edge comes from the LA Times and it is titled 'How To Talk To Kids About Arnold Schwarzenegger's Infidelity.'  Really?  Is he relevant enough these days for kids to even know who he is?  I asked The Oldest about this and she said the story wouldn't even be on her kids' radar, as not one of them knows--or cares--who Arnold is.  So, who exactly is making this a much bigger deal than it is?  Don't most kids have friends who have gone through parents splitting up and haven't parents had the 'talk' with them?  This is a topic that most parents have to get to at some point--just like they have to do the 'facts of life' talk.  So why is this a topic that is so upsetting to kids just because it involves Arnold and Maria?  Am I smelling a publicist at work here?  Unbelievable.

When stories such as these are headline-inducing, I wonder if it IS true that the world is going to hell in a hand basket.  Far too many issues are being ignored by the news people and we allow it.  If we quit 'following' the junk news and actually tried looking for relevant stories, maybe we would go back to the days of insightful and meaningful and informative journalism.  But I highly doubt it.  And so, I will continue to ignore the news and wrap myself in a little cocoon of isolation.



 

Read More

REALLY??? I Mean, REALLY??????

According to a mental_floss tweet earlier today:

"The Journal of Animal Ethics says the term 'pets' should be replaced by 'companion animals.'  'Owners' should be 'human carers.'"

What?  Are we afraid we'll hurt their feelings if we call them pets?  I love my cat, but REALLY????  I think some people have too much time on their hands AND need to get lives.

Read More

We'd Rather Have The Money

My husband, K, is one of the last of a dying breed:  He will retire from the only place he has ever worked.  (While he WAS in the Navy, I don't really consider that a job--more of a school/training sort of thing.  AND a way to pay the country back.)  So, he has put in over 30 years at the same power plant he was hired into a few months after he got out of the Navy.  The job is one that he likes and the pay has been good enough that I never had to go out and work.  As far as employers are, K hasn't complained too much, nor has he piled praise--it just is what it is.

A lot of work places have taken the direction that many schools have and that is to reward everyone for everything.  "You did SUCH a good job of washing your hands after using the toilet!  Here's a certificate for that!"  "You got here on time for FIVE days in a row!  Here's your gold ribbon for that!"  And on and on and on.  Don't get me wrong, I think it's good that people are appreciated, but sometimes companies go a bit far--like rewarding employees for doing what they SHOULD do, their normal jobs.  Yesterday, K got one of those rewards.

Working in a power plant can be very dangerous.  There have been severe accidents that could possibly have been avoided.  Many things can go wrong:  explosions, electrocutions, falls, etc.  And it is up to every worker to do everything in his/her power to do right and not have an accident, or cause one.  The company pounds safety into the employees' heads at every opportunity, which isn't a bad thing.  Unless it is because the company is more concerned about how much they would have to pay an employee if he/she was injured rather than the health and safety of the workers.  And sometimes I think it is just that. 

Anyway, the company is constantly giving safety rewards.  We will get $10 gift certificates and the crew will get pizza bought for them.  And they are appreciated, but not really necessary.  However, the reward that came home yesterday just kind of made all the employees who got it say "WTF?"  In a nice enough presentation box--faux velvet-lined, black with gold lettering--was a (solidly nice, I suppose) key chain and a laminated card stating safety 'rules' to be worn on the id card lanyard every employee wears.  Okay.  While a lot of people would wonder what the problem here is, let me tell you.  First, everyone thought the laminated cards were completely ridiculous.  Next, not everyone wants a key chain with the company logo embossed in it--no matter HOW nice it is.  Besides, who DOESN'T have about thirteen key chains laying around that they don't use already.  And last, WHY the hell the special presentation boxes?  While the company gets them at a good price, I would suppose, these are not all that cheap--so why?  I guess the bottom line is this:  Why spend all of this money on something that no one wants or can possibly appreciate?  I think most of the employees would much rather have a couple extra bucks in their paychecks, rather than some of this stuff that the company gives.

So, is this wrong to feel this way?  Is this a waste of money on the part of the company?  Are the employees just being completely ungrateful?  Input would be appreciated.

Read More

Not For Me

I am always amazed at companies that charge extremely high prices for their products and then want customers to PAY for their catalogs, as well.  Kind of reeks of arrogance, I would say.

Read More

All The President's Men

The other night I was channel surfing and came across the movie 'All The President's Men' on one of the movie channels.  It is the story of how the Washington Post--namely, Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward--broke the story of the Watergate scandal.  I remember when I saw it the first time--I was wowed by the performances of Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford.  Actually, to be perfectly honest, I was wowed by Redford--how gorgeous he was in this movie.  Those were the years when he was his most-beautiful.  ;)  Anyway, I love to watch old movies and compare my feelings about them NOW as to how I felt THEN.  And this movie definitely has me looking at things in a different way from what I did at the time.

First off, let me say that Richard Nixon was not then, nor is now, my favorite President.  (Actually, I can't find one to accept as 'favorite,' as my assessment of the Presidents seems to change as the years go by.)  As hard as this is to say, I could never accept him as trustworthy because of his looks--he always seemed to have a bit of a weasly look to him and never looked honest.  At the time of his 'take down,' I was front and center cheering and applauding.  I thought there had never been a more crooked person to hold the office of POTUS and thought the man got much less than he deserved for what he did.  Today, I don't have quite as harsh feelings about him.

Without turning this into a Republican vs Democrat--or liberal vs conservative--thing, I do believe Nixon wouldn't have been pursued so doggedly by the Washington Post if he had not been Republican.  (This is the same as conservative reporters 'going after' Barack these days.)  The Post--and Ben Bradlee--were VERY liberal and I believe they delighted in doing what they could to smear Nixon in any possible way.  That he actually WAS dirty, made it so much better.  Also, if he wouldn't have LOOKED so damn guilty...  But, I don't believe Nixon was much different from any other POTUS that has been, is, or will be--he just happened to be the one that got caught.

Years ago there was a 'gentlemen's agreement' about what would and would not be printed about the POTUS.  Roosevelt was never photographed--or the photos were never published--sitting in his wheelchair.  The wheelchair could have given the suggestion of weakness and that wasn't a good way for the POTUS to be seen.  Even though JFK was a womanizer and his numerous affairs were some of the worst kept secrets in Washington, the papers never mentioned the fact--because there was respect shown to the office.  This is no longer the case and hasn't been for some time.  Some people think the internet and 24-hour news networks are the reason for this, but it has been a much longer time coming than that.  A good reason for this is the fact that, as a society, there has been a breakdown in common decency and respect.  Plain and simple.

It is human nature to want our leaders to be 'perfect,' or, at the very least, better than we are.  Before TV, the internet, etc, it was much easier for us to believe that those in the public eye were (or could have been) a step above us in every aspect.  Of course, we know better today.  There are very few people that show any sign of being even a little bit better than 'only human.'  And too often, we won't give our leaders the courtesy of being 'only human.'  Every one of us has something in our past that we wouldn't want examined in the cold light of day, but most of us are lucky enough to not see our mistakes talked about on the 6 O'clock News.  Unfortunately, because of the nit-picking ways of the 'opposition,' far too many highly qualified people won't even try to become elected officials.  And that is a crying shame.  Isn't it time that we allow our leaders to be human and make mistakes?  Can't we forgive youthful indiscretions?  Couldn't we look at how good of a leader a person could be and ignore a mistake from the past?  Or should we expect more from them?  I don't really know the answer, but I'm afraid that our best potential leaders will never step forward because of the unattainable standards we set for others, and can't come close to in our own lives.

Read More

Breasts and Other Lady Parts

There was a time, if someone (read that as 'a guy') wanted to touch my breasts (or look at them naked, for that matter), certain conditions had to be met.  First, I had to know his name--and his entire history and genealogy.  We had to have been together for a fair amount of time and we had to be in love.  Considering I only have had three loves in my life, not many guys have seen 'the girls.'  (So I have Puritanical morals--sue me!  ;))  This is why what happened to me yesterday is so different than what has been 'usual' in my life.  I allowed someone to poke and prod, stretch and knead, squeeze and hold my unclothed breasteses.  I don't remember the person's name, I never saw her before, and I most likely will never see her again.  Yes, I had my annual mammograms.

From what I understand, many women have a hard time going for mammograms.  Some women are very emotional about the experience--The Mother cries like a baby, for example.  Other women have a great deal of pain having the procedure done--my friend with the tiny boobies suffers greatly with the stretching of the skin.  For me, the entire ordeal is quite routine and I never have had an entirely negative experience.  (Now, I'm not saying that it is pleasant, by any means, it's just that I don't suffer a lot having this done.) I guess one of the things that has made this a process that I don't worry about is the fact I have only had one 'problem'* with a mammogram in all of the years I've had them done.

After having my annual 'squeeze,' I DO find myself thinking 'what if' until I get the 'all good' report.  Of course, I've never been faced with deciding what to do in the case of breast cancer--or, thank God, ANY cancer--but I think about it from time to time.  While many women tell their doctors to do everything that can be done to save their breast, I think I would go the opposite way and say "Get rid of the damn thing and make sure all of the cancer is GONE!"  I'm not afraid to die--I got into this a few posts ago--but I am terrified of dying in pain.  Cancer causes pain.

I've never sat down and had a heart-to-heart talk with a breast cancer survivor.  I admire anyone who has battled through cancer and I would never judge, but for me, I cannot understand wanting to save a body part over a fool proof complete cure.  But, some women feel as if their womanhood is somewhat diminished if some of their 'lady bits' go missing.  Again, I'm not judging, it's just that I can't comprehend that.  And I only have my own life to use as a gauge when I think about it.

At the age of 34, I decided to have a hysterectomy.  I began having periods about the age of 11 or 12 and every year brought more problems with my reproductive system.  I was the poster girl for bad, painful periods.  In high school, there were times when I had to leave school because I was in such pain--and it wasn't anything I could hide.  I would turn pale and find myself praying to the porcelain gods, heaving my guts out.  Of course, this wasn't EVERY month.  I could go several months with a fairly 'normal' period--just long enough to think I was getting better--and then I would get blasted all over again.  Going to doctors didn't help much.  I was given many different pain pills and one doctor even put me on amphetamines.  Nothing helped.  The only relief I ever got was when I'd find myself in the ER and the doctor ordered Demerol injections--that's goooood drugs.  Of course, I couldn't be on Demerol every month, so the relief was short-lived.  Finally, I was put on birth control pills.  Everything changed for me then--and the biggest change was NO PAIN!  I thought I had found the Holy Grail and I was ecstatic.  For six months.  And the pain started to come back.  Going back to what was 'normal' for me came very gradually, but it was apparent that The Pill wasn't going to be my cure-all and I decided to quit taking it.  This then brought me an entirely new set of problems.  After I went off of The Pill, I would go for three months or so at a time without a period.  To bring it on, I had to go to the doctor and get a prescription--if I wasn't pregnant, I'd get my period and if I WAS, then nothing would happen.  With The Husband away sailing the Seven Seas, there was no chance of a pregnancy, so I took the pills.  This happened to me after each of the two times in my life when I was on birth control pills--and it took me at least a year each time to get back to my 'normal' cycle after going off of the pills.  It wasn't a fun time for me, at all.

Early on, the diagnosis of 'endometriosis' was suggested by a doctor.  The only thing he told me was that everything would get better once I had gone through a pregnancy.  And nothing more was said.  I didn't think much more about this and without the interwebs available like they are now, I didn't have a place where I could do any research into this problem.  I just tried to learn to live with it.  Now, of course, I realize that all of the problems I had were because of endo.  When The Husband got out of the Navy, we settled into our lives and went about the business of making babies.  Only, I just couldn't seem to do what came naturally to most of the women I knew.  It took us five years into our marriage before we had The Oldest--partly due to the endo.  (Some of the problem was The Husband and me being apart for long periods of time, but that was only part of the problem.)  After having our first child, I didn't have ANY relief from my symptoms as the one doctor said I would.  And once again, I suffered from infertility problems--it took SIX years for The Youngest to come along.  For most of the time that we tried to get pregnant, we didn't use birth control, thus the reason I say I suffered with infertility.  As it turns out, the doctor who did my hysterectomy said I was lucky to ever have gotten pregnant even one time--infertility is one of the results many women suffer with having endometriosis.

By the time The Youngest was five, I was not living a 'normal' life.  My monthly cycle was about 35 days long and for only a week out of those 35 days, I felt almost normal.  The rest of the time I suffered with PMS and painful periods.  And I mean SUFFERED.  With two young girls to take care of, I couldn't completely take to my bed the seven days of my period, but I came close.  Whenever K was home, he was in charge and I was in bed, in a fetal position, rocking back and forth, trying not to moan because of the pain I was in.  At times I thought I was hemorrhaging because the flow was so heavy.  I could barely walk because my thighs were so weak and sore and my lower belly was distended and throbbing.  It felt as if all of my body parts were about to be discharged from my vagina because of the pressure I experienced in my pelvic 'floor'.  And these were the 'good' days.  (joking)  During my non-period, bad days, I had breasts that swelled like footballs and felt as if they would burst open if they were touched--and they hurt.  I had a painful, bloated belly and leg pain.  My moods were extremely erratic.  PMS to the nth degree was the order of the day.  And every month, things seemed to get a little worse and I had had enough.

Finally, the pain and problems got to a point that I couldn't go on living with them, so I decided to try talking to a doctor one more time about what was going on.  I had never told my GYN the extent of my problems before because no doctor had ever done much to help me previously.  But, with this appointment, I decided I wasn't going to leave until I had some answers and a possible solution.  As I started to read down my list of symptoms, the doctor joined me and finished the list without ever having read what I had written.  He said I had a classic, text-book case of endometriosis.  To be sure, he was going to do a laparoscopy on me to make the final diagnosis, but he had no problem with diagnosing me before the surgery.  And then we discussed solutions.  He said he could put me on medication that was proving to be helpful, but the side-effects were not fun.  (Weight gain--possibly to the extreme--was only one of the side effects.)  Or he could do laser surgery to remove the 'bad' tissue--the only problem with that is he could not be sure of getting all of the endometrial tissue, as it has a tendency to travel throughout the body in women with endo.  Or he could do a hysterectomy.  This would--in all likelihood--completely cure me of my problems.  Removal of the ovaries--and the stopping of estrogen production by the body--was the only 'cure' that he would come close to guaranteeing.  (Some women don't find this as the answer to their endo--they can't tolerate the hormone replacement therapy I went on.)  Even though I left his office knowing that I would be getting a second opinion and doing some thinking about what he had to say, I knew in my heart of hearts that I WAS going to get the surgery.  As I told him during my follow-up visit, "I'm done using the lady parts, so we might as well get rid of them."

Since having this surgery done, I have become addicted to The Gore and have done a lot of research into how other women have and do cope with endo and hysterectomies.  Solutions to endo are pretty much the same as they were when I had my hysterectomy, but far fewer hysterectomies are being done--and more people are frowning on the solution.  While it IS an extreme solution to a problem that may not be life-threatening, that doesn't seem to be the reason so many are against the practice.  I guess a lot of women feel 'castrated' and less of a woman once a hysterectomy has been done.  They seem to define themselves by how many lady parts they have.  This is a mind set that I cannot understand.  I'm not condemning anyone who feels this way, it just doesn't make sense to me.  A couple of months after my surgery, when I was feeling better than I had felt at any point in my life, I told someone that I would have had the surgery done ten years earlier if it wouldn't have meant not having The Youngest.  I cannot imagine my life if I wouldn't have done the surgery--and I don't feel any less of a woman because I have no uterus or ovaries.  Yes, I've had to take a pill every day since the surgery, but as I get older, pills are just a way of life for me--as is the case with a lot of older people.  The HRT hasn't been a factor in any health issues I have and, despite what some reports MIGHT indicate, I feel as if it has helped me.  Given the chance again, I would choose to have a hysterectomy in a heartbeat--it was the best decision I ever made for my health.

I do hope that every woman faced with having to make the decision of whether to have a hysterectomy or not would do a lot of research and get both sides of the story.  Too many people are condemning hysterectomies as too extreme--even likening them to misogyny on the part of male doctors.  While I don't believe that, to each his--or her--own.  I just beg any woman to do a great amount of research before making any decisions, don't buy into any 'politically correct' ideas just because, and make up your own mind without being influenced by others.  It is YOUR body and YOU have to live with it.  And if God created you a woman, just because some of your lady parts are gone, that doesn't change who, or what, you are.




*A couple of years ago I needed to have follow-up mams and ultrasounds of my right breast.  There was a cyst--which they had been tracking for several years--that was larger than it had been and they wanted to make sure nothing was going to come of it. By the time I had my follow-up, the cyst had gone back to the size it had been and there was no need for any more action, other than some extra mams to make sure everything was status quo.  I have had no more scares since.

Read More

Episodes, Shameless, and Being Human

Showtime has two new series that just began.  The first one is 'Episodes.'  This show is about a British couple who wrote/created a hit TV show in England.  A TV executive in the US buys the show for adaptation in the States--and the key word here is 'adaptation.'  The couple comes 'over the pond' and settles in LA to adapt their show to American tastes--and find that NOTHING goes their way.  The first thing to go awry is their lead actor--an overweight, older gentleman.  They find the lead of the show being taken over by actor Matt LeBlanc--much to their dismay.  And things go downhill from there.

So far, I'm okay with this show.  BUT, time will tell.  I don't know if I can handle all of the duplicity of the Hollywood types--EVERY word out of their mouths is a lie.  While I am cynical enough to believe this is the way things are handled in LaLaLand, I can't stand people like this and won't allow them in my own life, so why would I watch them as 'entertainment?'  Matt LeBlanc isn't a bad actor--I'm pleasantly surprised by his ability to change his character from one scene to another.  At one point, he is caring, pleasant, sweet, and nice and in the following scene he is crass, vitriolic, and downright mean.  He has more range than I ever thought.  He definitely isn't playing 'Joey' and I like the fact that he isn't the focus of every scene--not to say things won't change, but I hope not.  As I said, time will tell whether I will stay with this show.

**********

The second new show on Showtime is 'Shameless.'  I can't even describe this show.  On one hand, I'm loving it--and a lot has to do with the fact that I really like William H Macy as an actor--and on the other, I'm really disappointed.  My disappointment comes from what  I see as the writers saying, "We are writing this for a pay channel, so we can put in as much vulgar language, sex, and nudity as we want--so let's go WAY over the top and see what we can get away with!"  My sticking with this show completely depends on whether I can handle the sex/nudity and language.  Other than that, this show is like a train wreck:  You just can't look away!

Basically, this show is about a family that lives in Chicago.  The father is a drug-addicted alcoholic who gets his money from a bogus disability claim.  The mother is AWOL and the six kids are raising themselves, while they drink and smoke cigarettes and weed.  Add some off-the-wall neighbors, a boyfriend for the oldest daughter, and various other characters, and you have 'Shameless.'  And it is quite compelling in many ways--you just want to know what the hell is going to happen next.

Case in point for 'what is going to happen next':  The father wakes up (in the 2nd episode) in Canada, with no recollection of how he got there.  He winds up in jail and Macy gives one of the funniest monologues I have heard in a long, long time.  And here is his rant against Canada:

"How the hell did I end up in Canada?  I hate f---ing Canada!  I'm an American...apple pie, lower 48, Air Supply!"

 And a couple of minutes later:

 "Why would I want to come to Canada?  So your national health care can make me wait 60 years for a new kidney?  Whole country's a bunch of parka-wearing, draft-dodging, chickenshit cowards who didn't have the balls to stay home and fight the Vietcong and to preserve our American way of life.  No snow at the Winter Olympics?  What the hell was THAT?  It's the WINTER OLYMPICS!  What are you doing?  Holding your c----, handing out maple leaf sugarloafs?  You couldn't even get the Olympic torch to f---ing light right!"

And if this didn't come across as funny as it actually was, I apologize--but it was a great, great moment.  :D

I will be watching this again before I make my final decision on whether I continue.  But I have the feeling this WILL be a big hit for Showtime and will be on for quite a few years.

**********

The third show that I have watched recently is 'Being Human,' which is on Syfy.  This show revolves around three 20-somethings--a vampire, a werewolf, and a ghost.  They share a house and are determined to try and be as normal as possible.

With a whole lot of the world crazy about 'Twilight,' and a lot of writers/producers/etc jumping on the bandwagon and doing way too many of the same books/shows/movies, 'Being Human' could be dismissed as just 'another one of those' shows.  However, I have the feeling this one will be different.  I liked the first show and think things will just get better from here.  And from all of the traffic on Twitter about this show, I think Syfy has a hit.

Read More

Harry's Law and Another Show

It's a new year and the networks are bringing out their mid-season series--and there are quite a few I'm hoping to sample.  I already divorced 'The Cape'--actually, we didn't get to be anything beyond acquaintances before I gave up on the show.  I really think the show could possibly have been good, but the ones in charge couldn't decide just what it would be.  It was 'here's-a-joke-for-you' funny, 'over-the-top' campy, 'look-at-this-as-real' serious, and everything in between--if the show had a direction, it might have been good.  (And it has Summer Glau  as a co-star, so that was a good thing.  I LOVE her!)   Too bad the show isn't worth my time...


I finally got a chance to watch 'Harry's Law,' and I will say, without a doubt, David E Kelley has himself another monster hit.  Kelley DOES push his own political agenda with his shows, but the writing is so brilliant that I usually can ignore it.  (e.g., 'Boston Legal')  As long as Kelley keeps off of the political soapbox for the most part, this will become one of my favorite new shows.  The opening was hysterically funny and Kathy Bates is wonderful.  The entire show kept my attention and I really liked all of the characters.  It is quite unusual for me to like all of the characters in a show, but these are quirky and likable from the beginning.  (I'm hoping I still feel this way after a month.  ;))  Other than the opening--which had me running to the bathroom with laughter--the highlight of the show was toward the end when a character said, (talking about his mother) "She died during childbirth, when she had my older brother."  Unfortunately, when this line was said, I had a mouth FULL of water--which I proceeded to SPEW all over the kitchen!  LITERALLY!  I don't remember when I laughed so hard at a line in a show.

I'm hoping to get to 'Being Human' tonight--I have already watched 'Shameless' and 'Episodes' and should comment on them soon.  But, before then, find 'Harry's Law' and watch it RIGHT NOW!  You won't be sorry.

Read More

Curiosity

Recently, I read a 'Dear Abby' type of article.  A woman was upset and seeking advice over a dilemma she had.  A friend had been at their house helping her husband do some landscaping.  When they were done and came into the house, the friend proceeded to wash up at the kitchen sink.   The woman was horrified to think someone would wash himself at the kitchen sink where food is prepared--and the columnist was, too.  I was dumbfounded--this was something that never occurred to me as being horrifying.

The house I grew up in was an old farmhouse that had been moved into town from the farm.  It only had a tiny bathroom on the second floor--and the sink didn't work the entire time I lived there.  We had to use the bathtub to wash after using the toilet--or go downstairs and use the kitchen sink.  I grew up using the kitchen sink to brush my teeth and The Father ALWAYS washed up there when coming in from an outside job.  Actually, I don't know how much difference it would have made if the bathroom would have been fully functional.  Both The Mother and Father used outhouses at some point in their lives, so the only sink they ever had that was usable WAS the kitchen one.  (The sauna was for bathing.)  When The Parents married and rented a house, it only had an outhouse and a water pump in the kitchen.  They have lived very rustically at different times of their lives.  Growing up, the kitchen sink was regularly scrubbed and it DEFINITELY was scrubbed before any food was put into it, so there was no chance of contamination.  To this day, I don't see a problem with using the kitchen sink for other than dishes and food.

My question is this:  Do I have a wrong way of looking at this entire situation?  Do you--or have you ever--used your kitchen sink for anything that was not related to food in any way?  I'm terribly curious about this.

Read More

Just Catching Up

I put out all of my bird feeders the other day and have gotten so many more birds showing up since then.  I still have the chickadees and finches, but the juncos have now moved into the yard and the starlings are making their presence known.  The blue jays continue to strip the corn cobs in record time.  I don't know what I will feed them later in the year when the corn is finished--I guess I will have to buy cracked corn to keep them happy.  (I LOVE seeing the blue of the jays in the middle of the winter--the color stands out so beautifully on a sunny winter day.)  And today I had a cardinal at one of the feeders!  I haven't seen any of them for quite a few years--at least, not up close.  We have had a family of cardinals living in the area for years, but this is the first time in a long time since one has come in our yard.  I am really looking forward to seeing what birds we get throughout the winter.

(NOT the one that was at my feeder.  ;))

**********

And speaking of winter:  We had our first snow the other day.   I don't know if it was MEASURABLE, but it certainly was snow.  A couple of times during the day, I saw snow in the air.  I was beginning to wonder what was going on, as we hardly ever have our first snow AFTER Halloween--so, I was worried it wasn't going to happen on time this year.

**********

Our Youngest and her husband are in the beginning stages of house shopping.  She is a bit stressed and worried--thoughts I remember so well when we decided to buy this place.  I tried my hardest to reassure her that all will be well. And I truly believe it, as they are going into this with such a realistic perspective.  They have decided just how much they can afford, where they want to live (with regards to taxes, etc), and just about every other aspect that needs to be looked at.  I guess they have impressed the realtor and financial person they are talking to--not everyone goes into house buying with so much thought and preparation.  I certainly hope all goes well for them.

**********

The youngest granddaughter was weighed last week--or was it the week before?  Anyway, she has already gained over two pounds since being born--she is now 6lbs 6oz.  Things are going quite well, thank goodness.

**********

 I really am re-discovering some old music these days.  I guess it started with my getting the Robert Palmer anthology and the re-issue of John Lennon's Power to the People.  I find myself listening to music much more than watching TV--which is a bit of a change from the past few years.  I just get so tired of watching the same old tired re-runs that are on during the day or late at night.  I think I will be happy when Conan comes back on the air--at least it will be something different to watch at 11:00.

Anyway, while I was listening to the Lennon CD, it occurred to me that I think he did his best work after The Beatles broke up.  The CD is just full of great songs:  Woman, Power to the People, Instant Karma, Imagine, Mind Games--as I said, some of his best work.  And personally, I think McCartney did lousy work after the break up.  I mean really, Silly Love Songs and Ebony and Ivory!?!?  The only reason Wings was a success was because he rode his Beatles fame.  (Okay, just my own opinion--but it's my blog, so I can have that.  ;))

**********

While I try very hard not to think about it, we do have only about two months before Christmas.  So, I guess I need to get started on some gifts that I plan to make.  Last night I went into the sewing room to straighten up--a task made a lot easier to do now that I have a TV in there to watch games, I might add.  Anyway, while I was looking through the absolute mess that I had going in there, I found some material that I had bought for the purpose of making gifts.  One thing that I'm planning on making are bowl and cake pan covers--you know, like the thin plastic ones you can buy, only reusable.  I made the patterns tonight, but will have to buy more material, as some of the pieces I bought already aren't nearly big enough for what I'm doing.  I guess this gives me a reason to go to Jo-Ann's the next time we do a road trip.  :)

**********

Not much planned for this coming week.  K is working night shift for the beginning of the week and might do a few overtime shifts later.  We don't have any appointments coming up--unlike the last two weeks--so all I have to look forward to are the games on Thursday and Saturday.  And that I can handle--a fairly lazy week.

Read More

More Government At Work

Our house was moved to this lot from another place in the city, well over 40 years ago.  I believe the people who moved the house also owned many of the lots to the east of us--and that is why our house is 'illegally' positioned on our lot.  We are just a couple of feet from the eastern-most lot line--a situation that is only allowed because we were 'grandfathered' in when laws/ordinances were put into place.  So, this was why our neighbor's driveway was directly under my bedroom window.  As a matter of fact, if they parked at the very edge of their driveway, I could have (almost) reached out and touched their vehicle from my window.  While it wasn't ideal--and it could be a bit noisy, at times--over the course of 30+ years, I learned to live with the way things were.  Our street steadily declines from west to east, so the neighbors were able to put up a retaining wall on the other side of the narrow driveway and put another driveway directly in front of their house--on a level with their basement.  With multiple vehicles and parking ordinances, all vehicles have to be off of the streets at night during the winter, so the added driveway was a necessity for them.  And this summer, things changed and that is why I am using the past tense.  So, on to the rest of the story...

After all of these years, the neighbors finally decided to put up a garage.  They own the lots to their east, so the garage was built on the side away from our house.  They got the proper permits, etc, so the city was well aware of what they were doing.  Because our neighbor did the work himself, it took most of the summer to complete the building.  About a month ago, the city was called to come and do the final inspection.  That was when the 'wisdom' of our government shone so very brightly--as happens so very often.

With the building of the garage, a new driveway was put into place.  This meant that the property--THREE lots wide--now had three driveways.  And the city had a meltdown over this.  How DARE our neighbors try to have THREE driveways on their property--which just happens to border up against the dead end street we live on.  They were told that one of the driveways MUST be DESTROYED and grass MUST be planted and growing before the snow falls.  NO discussion, NO exception.  Our neighbors' protestations and explanations meant nothing.  They asked if, at the very least, they could keep the curbing from having to be placed in front of the space where the driveway was closest to us.  As they explained, the door on this side of the house is 36"--the width needed to bring an appliance or over-sized piece of furniture into their house--and the door on the other side was only 32".  This argument fell on deaf ears--as the city told them, "Those moving trucks have NO problem driving over the curb, so it must be installed."  Unbelievable.

As far as I know, there was no good explanation as to why they were not allowed to have three driveways.  If they own that many lots, why CAN'T they?  If they wanted to pave over their entire property, why not let them?  It is getting too sad when EVERYTHING is so regulated--and yet, the entire country seems to be going into the dumper.  I don't have answers to how things could be changed for the better, but I certainly don't think regulating such piddly things is going to make things better any time soon.

Read More

Saving Money With Guilt

One industry that has done quite well with the whole 'global warming' and 'save the planet' movement is the hotel/motel one.  Anyone who has been in a hotel within the last 5-10 years knows what I'm talking about.

Somewhere in (almost) every hotel room is a card--maybe two--that will ask for 'your' help in saving the earth.  And just how are we to do this?  By allowing the hotel to NOT wash bedding and linens daily.  The card will say something along these lines:  "Please help us in our effort to save our planet and save water by using your towels more than once.  By hanging your towels, you let us know that you want to save the earth and will help us do it.  If you want your towels washed, leave them on the floor."  The other card that will be displayed says this:  "If you stay here long-term, we will--in an effort to save our planet and save water--only change the bedding every third day.  If you want your bedding changed more frequently, let us know by placing this card on your bed.  Thank you for helping us save the planet."  HORSE HOCKEY!  Let me tell you what REALLY is happening here--or what I IMAGINE happened.

Several years ago, hotel owners saw a drop in their profits due to a bad economy and rising costs.  At some owners' convention somewhere, someone came up with the idea of how to cut services, save money, and be APPLAUDED for it:  Use global warming/saving our planet to guilt their customers into accepting less services, while paying more.  Quite ingenious, actually.  Every time I put the card on my bed for clean bedding, I really do feel guilty--and the same goes for asking for clean towels daily.

I don't have the money to overspend on hotel rooms whenever we go out of town, so I have no way of proving this statement that I will make next.  LUXURY HOTELS THAT CATER TO THE VERY WEALTHY DON'T ASK THEIR CUSTOMERS TO RE-USE TOWELS OR GO WITHOUT CLEAN BEDDING DAILY.  Really now, do you think that (insert celebrity's name here) would spend $1500 a night at the Ritz-Carlton near Central Park--or more at some other luxury hotel--and NOT expect clean linens all the way around, daily--if not two or more times a day?  The 'environmentally sound' thinking of the chain hotels is ONLY a cost-saving measure--nothing more, nothing less.

One of the reasons I enjoy staying in hotels is the feeling of having a small bit of luxury in my life.  I love not having to fix my own bed or hang my towels in the bathroom or do laundry--the hotel staff does all of this for me.  I pay for this privilege and I expect it--so don't ask me to give it up to save the planet.  NOT going to happen.

Read More

NOT A Vacation Post

I'm really feeling tired tonight, so I will continue with the rest of my vacation pictures tomorrow.  But, I HAD to write about this.

Tonight I went to do some shopping and while I was at Walmart, there was a kid in the middle of the store having the worlds worst tantrum.  This kid was screaming and stomping and the whole nine yards.  And even though I didn't know the particulars about what set him off, I wanted to beat him to within an inch of his life! And then I wanted to beat his mother!

Okay, I realize kids have meltdowns all the time for different reasons.  And I can understand and sympathize.  However, this kid had a voice that came close to fingernails on a chalkboard in terms of being annoying.  He kept screaming that he didn't want to leave the store because he was hungry.  At one point I believe he screamed at his mother that she was being mean to him and that he would 'tell' on her to someone.  And this went on for 15 minutes, at least.  And what was the mother trying to do about the situation?  She was trying to reason with the kid.  She did NOT physically remove him from the store, she did NOT sternly tell him to shut the f*** up, she did NOT swat his butt.  I know, I know, if she would have done any of those things, she probably would have been arrested.  But still, she needed to deal with this situation in a much better way than trying to 'reason' with the kid.  The kid had no desire to be reasoned with and it was doing no amount of good.  Actually, the more the mother tried 'talking' to him, the worse he got.  The whole thing gave me a massive headache.

Now, all of us who have kids have been through similar situations--there is no avoiding it.  But, I sometimes think that many people could completely avoid these things if they planned ahead.  First, DON'T take your kid shopping too late at night.  They probably are tired and WILL misbehave.  (It was almost 10:00 PM, on a school night, when this one took place.)  Second, DON'T take your kid shopping when he/she is hungry.  Feed them a meal before leaving the house.  (Obviously, this kid was hungry, because he kept screaming it to his mother.)  And DON'T keep them shopping for things they have no interest in for too long.  Kids have short attention spans and they WILL let you know, loudly, that they are bored and not pleased.  But I think the best piece of advice I could give to a parent is this:  KNOW that this will happen and be prepared.  Figure out ahead of time what you will do when your kid has a meltdown--and then follow your plan when 'it' happens.

Read More

Political Correctness

I remember, a little bit ago, how we would laugh over the politically correct terms we were to use instead of what were common--and we would make jokes.  Of course, one of the jokes was that the politically correct term for 'short' was 'vertically challenged.'  'Bald' men were 'follicle-ly challenged.'  And so on.  Now, I'm not, by any means, trying to say we should go back to the days when 'those words' were used commonly--and we all know what 'those words' were--but it is getting a bit ridiculous.

I recently read an article that had a list of 'correct' words as opposed to the 'incorrect' ones.  To say I was appalled, is putting it mildly.  Really now, just WHAT is wrong with some of these 'incorrect' words?  And here is part of the list:

            WRONG word/term---CORRECT word/term

• disabled person, crippled---person with a disability
• confined to a wheelchair---person who has a mobility impairment
• quadriplegic/paraplegic---person who is paralyzed
• stroke victim/suffered from stroke---person who has had a stroke
• epilectic---person who has epilepsy
• mute---person without speech

I don't know, but this seems a bit over the top.  It is getting to the point where you are afraid to wish someone a good day, for fear they'll sue you after having the lousiest day of their life!  Other than saying 'hello,' if you are unfamiliar with a person, you have to watch every word you utter so closely, that conversation is difficult, at best.  That place north of the Arctic Circle that I continually threaten to move to, is starting to sound more and more welcoming every day.

Read More

To Bra, Or Not To Bra, That Is The Question

My oldest, dearest friend and I wouldn't seem to have enough in common to be as good friends as we are.  We are quite different, in fact.  She is tall(er), I am barely taller than someone who would be called a 'little person.' She has always been quite thin, I have always struggled with weight.  She doesn't cook very often and I was always 'Suzy Homemaker.'  She struggled a little with school work and it always came pretty easy to me.  She was a 'wild child' in high school and I was the 'perfect, good girl'--or tried to be.  She is the youngest child, I am the oldest.  She gets periodic Botox injections and I have never seriously considered doing anything cosmetically to make myself appear younger.  (Full disclosure:  I color my hair.  NOT so much to cover the grey--of which mine is NOT pretty--but to keep me blond.  Blond just looks better with my skin tones.)  She was more athletic and I was always "WHY would I get off of the couch when I have a book to read?"  And the difference we discuss on a semi-regular basis, our boobs.  Her girls look like fried eggs on a flat plate.  Mine would do a nice job of filling a champagne glass when I was in high school--these days, after my weight gain, I am more in the "Lady, put those things away!  You're going to put someone's eye out!!!" category.  But we agree on one thing:  the SECOND we walk into the house, we shed our bras.  Home=bra-freedom to the two of us.

Last week during one of our conversations, we started talking about how much we hated to wear bras.  It isn't just a dislike for either of us, it is as if we are being tortured whenever we have to wear the contraptions.  Out daughters don't seem to have the same dislike that we do, however.  My Oldest barely takes hers off whenever she showers--that's how much she wears one.  Of course, she is quite well-endowed and pregnant, but that isn't/wasn't any different when she isn't pregnant or when she was young.  My Youngest--and my friend's daughter--don't have quite so much to cover, but neither one of them would ever dream of NOT wearing a bra.  And this got us to thinking:  Is the hatred of bras generation-specific?  We both know of others in our age-group who hate the OSBH (over shoulder boulder holder) as much as we do, so we wondered if it had anything to do with the time period we grew up in.  We were part of the 'burn the bra' generation and threw ours away when everyone else did--and we never got back to wearing bras until we were told we HAVE to when we got pregnant.  So this is the question:  Do most/all women despise wearing bras or was the 'burn the bra' generation just trained to hate them?  What do you all have to say?

Read More

Yeah, More Politics

When I was young, about the only woman politician girls could look up to was Margaret Chase Smith.  And she was pretty much it.  I, of course, have lived through the 'burn the bra' and 'you've come a long way, baby' movements--a push for women to show what they can do--so I have seen things change.  The Vietnam War was a time when so many people--women especially--started to say "women should be in power--they would do things differently."  And many listened.  Today, we have quite a few--some would say not enough, however--women in positions of power.  And we see more and more getting into power every year.

And yet, nothing has changed.

The women who have come into power were supposed to try and change things--to do things differently.  This has not been the case--we see things going on as they always have.  Women have talked about 'the old boy's club,' but the 'old girls' have joined the same club.  It is business as usual--and things don't seem to be getting any better.  Actually, a lot of the women in power seem to be more masculine than the men--and that is one scary thought.  So, we are NOT getting any different perspectives on any of the problems this country faces.

I believe one of the reasons Sarah Palin was so popular with so many people--and why she SCARED so many others--was because she was different.  Now, depending on what side of the like/hate fence you were/are on with her, this was either a good thing or a bad thing.  But, a lot of people liked the fact that she WAS different than the same old, same old.  And this is what is going to get some people elected in the coming years--being different.  After all, how else can you explain Minnesota electing Jesse Ventura?  He CERTAINLY brought something different to the table.

Many people have called on Ted Nugent to run for office here in the state of Michigan.  He has the same mindset--on gun control, hunting, natural resources--as many citizens of this state, and I could see him winning if he ran.  He wouldn't necessarily be saying things that differ from what many believe, it's just that he would do it in a manner that hasn't been seen before.  And that alone could win him an election.

While 'change' and 'different' could possibly be a good thing, it also could blow up in our faces.  We are comfortable with what we know and are scared of the unknown--and it may not be a bad thing to feel that way.  On the other hand, we may be limiting the possibilities by not trying something different.  Hmmm, I will have to think on that for a while...

Read More

Let's Do It The 'Easy' Way

Recently, my weight has been on my mind--a lot.  I am very near my highest-ever weight and I need to do something about dropping some poundage very, very soon.  So, within the next few weeks, I will probably be doing some sort of 'diet' or 'eating program.'  yippee.  If only there was an easier way...

A few years ago, our local hospital got a resident gastric bypass specialty physician.  And the number of people who went through this surgery just skyrocketed.  Personally, I now know of (at least) four people who have had this surgery.  And, unless it was medically necessary, I don't  know if I would have this done.  Frankly, I haven't seen much in the way of great results.

Two or three years ago, our next door neighbor began to look like 'death warmed over.'  Frankly, I was very concerned because I thought he was battling cancer--and losing the fight.  I came to find out that he was losing weight because of gastric bypass surgery.  Several months later, he had more surgery to remove the excess skin from his body.  Finally, he leveled out and began to look much better.  Today, he has gained back 1/4th to 1/2 of all the weight he had lost.

A year or so ago, I commented to The Youngest that our neighbor across the street was losing weight.  I said that he must be making his move to try for another elected office and then forgot about it all.  He never got to a point where I even dreamed he had surgery, but I was informed yesterday that he DID have it.  Since noticing his weight loss, he too, has gained back up to 1/2 of the weight he lost.

The Oldest knows an acquaintance of mine who had this same surgery.  After losing over half his body weight, he now has gained back MORE than what he lost.

Our niece-in-law also had surgery.  She lost quite a bit of weight, but never got that terrible look that so many get.  At least, not that I know of--we don't see her or her husband that often.  I'm not sure whether she has kept her weight off, but she seemed to have leveled off before losing everything she needed to.  I do remember her telling me that she was not able to eat sugar or fatty foods without getting VERY physically sick every time.  She had to watch what she ate very carefully.

From everything I have read or been told, after having gastric bypass surgery, you have to be very careful about what and how much you eat.  You have to exercise and change your eating habits from what they had been.  You have to completely change the way you think about food and how you approach eating.  You have to change your mindset.  So, where does this differ from going on a 'diet' and exercise program?  Other than the rate of weight loss, I see no difference.  And, then you have the possible side-effects from the surgery, so why go through with it?  I will never say never--we don't know what direction any of our lives will take--but I don't think I would willingly go through with this myself.  It is a bit of a scary thought.

Read More

Politically Speaking

I don't really do politics.  I find most politics/politicians petty and childish and I avoid it/them like the plague.  While I make sure I vote, I usually don't even think about who or what I'm voting for until just before the November election.  Until then, I just want to be left alone--which definitely doesn't happen.

A couple of weeks ago, I was bombarded with the fact that we are having primary elections with a front page story in our newspaper.  And the story was revisited the other day.  And frankly, I find it quite unbelievable on some level.

If Jimmy Carter decided to make another run at being president, in the state of Michigan he wouldn't be allowed to put the term 're-elect' on his posters/signs--it is against the law.*  We have a guy that is seeking office--an office he has held twice before.  He does NOT hold the office presently, but his signs read "Re-elect John Doe."  This is against the law--and the signs were 'reported.'  So, he went around and put duct tape over the 'Re' on the signs so that he would be in compliance with the law.  All of this is just absolutely ridiculous, as far as I'm concerned.  (And I'm not even sure if I would/will vote for 'John Doe.'  I believe I may NOT be one of his supporters.)  Politics and the absurd--a match made in heaven.

*I don't know if this law is for federal elections or just state/local ones.  Also, I have no idea if this is a law in every state, or not.

Read More

Working On It...

I have been working on a 'review' of the NOOK and plan on posting it within a day or two.  If you are interested, stay tuned...

In other news...our town has been buzzing because we have had another celebrity in town.  The actor John Stamos has been here for a few days and testified in the trial against the people who allegedly tried to extort money from him today.  The trial should be done tomorrow and then the jury will find these people guilty--I see no other outcome.  Whether they are telling the truth or not, I think the jury probably was too star struck to disbelieve anything told to them that would put Stamos in a bad light.  Just my opinion.  So, if you want to find out more of what I'm talking about, here is where you can read more of the story.

Read More