BE RIGHTEOUS. BE KIND. IT WILL ALL BE OVER SOON.
Category: Life
First off, some good news: Ron Currie, Jr., author of the acclaimed debut novel God is Dead, has won the New York Public Library's Young Lions Fiction Award. Past winners include Colson Whitehead and Jonathan Safran Foer. A huge triumph for Mr. Currie, and a well-deserved honor.
...affluence detaches, and in time skews thinking. It gives you the illusion you're safe, and that everyone else is.
I read that line this morning in the Wall Street Journal, and it slapped me across the face. It expresses a sentiment that I've often felt but haven't really put the right words to. All too frequently it becomes a source of anger and confusion. Somehow reading the line made me think of people like Angelina Jolie. Celebrity advocates. I think it's because she's been in the news lately (again), unavoidably. The Cannes Film Festival. Brad and Angie, making everyone else look ugly and sick on the long rouge carpet.
Affluence detaches.
I've often wondered about this. You know people who are wealthy, or you see people become wealthy, and a sense of isolation from the problems of the world is often overt and easily detectable. Transformation can happen fast. A kind of numbness. A real chill. One minute, they're shopping at Old Navy; a year later, they're driving around in a Land Rover, yammering into a golden iphone. You wonder for a moment if the chill is evil, but eventually you decide that no, it's not evil, it's probably just human. These people are living the good life. They're insulated. It's easy to be hypnotized into thinking it's normal. Maybe I would be the same way. Or wait: Maybe, in certain moments, I am the same way.
In fact, it's certainly true.
Everything is relative.
The poor family living ten to an apartment in East L.A. is a thousand times wealthier than a family in blighted Myanmar. And so on.
But still: Affluence detaches, and in time skews thinking. It gives you the illusion that you're safe, and that everyone else is. Thoughts that are relevant on multiple levels. The personal: Me. The micro: So many people I know. The macro: America.
A safe argument, isn't it, that America was a wee bit detached at the turn of the millennium? Protected on two shores by vast oceans. Impenetrable.
Then: Kaboom.
Jolie is an easy figure to point out, a bit of a lightning rod because of her high public profile, her growing Benetton-ad-of-a-brood, her tendency to make natural childbirth an international event, and her outspoken charity work on behalf of displaced peoples. She appalls some; she inspires others. Others just want to squeeze her boobs and watch Tomb Raider.
At any rate, the truth about her probably falls somewhere in the wide middle, as it tends to with just about everyone. We are good, we are bad. We are selfless egomaniacs.
Jolie herself has described her transformation from hot young starlet to international matriarch and philanthropist-advocate in pretty blunt terms: First, she was a sheltered child of celebrity lineage, schooled in Beverly Hills and fast-tracked to stardom and considerable wealth. Then, about seven years ago, she paid a visit to Cambodia, and it really, really shocked the shit out of her.
From there, she contacted the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and made her first field visit to refugee camps in Sierra Leone and Tanzania. Another strong dose of reality and a searingly powerful window onto the world of human suffering.
Her response? Become more involved. Adopt children from these places. Devote a considerable portion of her time and resources to these people. Give them money. Give them a public voice. Give them assistance that they so desperately need.
A very natural response, I imagine. Only the iciest of bastards would venture into one of these ungodly hellholes and walk away unmoved and uncommitted. The problem, if that's what you want to call it, is that most of us haven't ever been close to something like that. Wouldn't have the courage (or, let's be honest, the resources) to go see it for ourselves. Most of us haven't stared an AIDS orphan in the eyes. Most of us don't want to consider it. And a lot of us, shockingly, don't have the empathy to even be able to imagine it.
I think that's what gets me the most, more than anything else---the shocking lack of empathy and basic imagination in so many people. The willful refusal to see.
Some of us sneer at the efforts of Jolie and others like her. I don't. If anything, I see the rise of celebrity advocates as a sad commentary on the state of the world, and perhaps more specifically, the state of America. Too few people are doing this stuff in the first place, and the un-famous aren't getting proper news coverage. So this is who we've got: Sean Penn, puttering through New Orleans in a motorboat, saving senior citizens after Katrina. The awful truth is, we live in a 24/7 entertainment culture, and most of our politicians are idiots---or worse.
In a place like America, where the stratification of wealth is so obscenely wide, with the one percent at the top holding onto the vast majority of the gold, while most everybody else grovels for things like a decent public education and health care, we are now in a place in time where one's best bet for any kind of help is to get a celebrity attached to your cause.
George Clooney in Darfur. Brad Pitt in New Orleans. Et cetera.
It may be sad and slightly annoying, but I can't bring myself to despise these people, as so many cynics do. I prefer to see their actions as noble and logical, and in some cases heroic.
How easy it would be for someone like George Clooney, probably worth more than $100 million, to simply sit at his lavish manse at Lake Como and forget about all the bullshit. Have some pasta. Shoot some hoops. Take a spin around the lake in a vintage ski boat.
He does some of that, to be certain, and for me, that's fine. I'm not suggesting that in order to be moral, one must turn his back on all material pleasures, or anything silly like that. I'm simply trying to point out that Clooney also spends a good portion of his time doing things like flying into Darfur at considerable personal risk, with video cameras and supplies, hoping to turn the world's attention to a brutally unholy genocide.
What a self-righteous prick, that George Clooney, smirking like he's God.
Whatever.
If Clooney is a self-righteous prick, the world could use more self-righteous pricks just like him. That's my feeling.
We could do worse. And naturally we do.
The bottom line, if there is one, is that separateness is an illusion. Safety is an illusion. We're all in this together. If you're not safe, I'm not safe. If you're suffering, I'm suffering. If you're hungry, I'm hungry. If the ocean is poisoned, I'm poisoned. Even if I don't realize it.
All phenomena are connected. Humans to humans, dogs to cats, trees to babies, water to sand. At core, it's all the same stuff. A grand cosmic tapestry, a global village, interrelated. The notion that we are individual selves, separate from other humans, isolated from other countries, is the grand illusion.
It's pretty basic stuff, but it's stunning how far away from it we have gotten.
In the wake of the past eight years, as we've suffered under the leadership insanity of a president who relishes American exceptionalism and its inherent sense of false separateness, it's easy to see why so many of us grow angry and confused when confronted with people who can't seem to give a damn about the suffering of other people, who can't seem to give a damn that we're dropping bombs on civilians in a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. And of course I'm not just talking about the president and his merry band of thugs---I'm talking about the people who fell into lockstep behind them, thumping their chests and waving the flag, detached from the reality of the horror on the ground and the bullshit at the heart of it. So many of us, it turns out, were part of the dreadful parade---and thankfully, most of us are no longer marching. Eighty percent of Americans have finally woken up, at least partially, albeit a little late.
Nobody is safe. Sorry.
Violence is cyclical. It only begets more violence.
The war in Iraq has made us less safe.
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
Fuck this fucking junta.
And with great affluence comes great responsibility.
Define "great affluence" for yourself.
That's my feeling.
Today.
Be righteous. Be kind. It will all be over soon.
-BL
Attention. Deficit. Disorder. - A Novel is now available in both hardcover and trade paperback in North America and the UK!
BILL O’REILLY’S DEMENTED PORN CLOSET AND OTHER RANDOM TANGENTS
Category: News and Politics
God, Bill O'Reilly has got to have some sort of demented porn closet at home. A gimp in the shed out back. A shoe box full of ball-gags under the bed.
You watch his news show with any degree of regularity, and you begin to realize just how fixated he is on teenage sex. Miley Cyrus. Urban high school students, crunking in the cafeteria. He can't get enough of this stuff. He can't stop wagging his finger in total moral outrage, showing highlights with his jaw agape.
What a buffoon.
Bright? Yes.
Wise? No, no, no.
I've been over this before.
The contrast is what makes him interesting to watch. For me, anyway. The enormity of ego. The deep and twisted anger.
There's an agony at work in the soul of Bill O'Reilly that makes him such a great comic figure. Inspiration for The Colbert Report. Hero to millions. Satan to millions more.
American Idiot.
I can't help but be convinced that somewhere down the road, O'Reilly is going to self-destruct. It seems like it's written in the stars. You can see it unfolding on the horizon. The guy is going to get busted for something ugly. Underage hookers in Cambodia. Caught on tape, harassing a female employee, talking about her lady parts in terms that'll make your stomach turn. Throwing a punch at charity luncheon. Pumping his fist at a Klan rally.
Something.
If you're one of the three people who hasn't seen it yet:
Pure comic gold.
What else?
I suppose it should be mentioned that the entire Fox News network has been ramping up the sexual content of its coverage for some time now. Part of the winning formula.
In case you haven't noticed---if you're not a shameless junkie like me---Fox in general tends to feature trashy sex as a regular staple in its daily news cycle.
Say what you will, these people sure know their audience. They know who they're dealing with, and how to manipulate them. How to sink their hooks into bloodshot eyeballs and keep them tuned in.
Check out the female anchors on Fox some time. Do a run-through. Get the Gestalt. It's easy to see what the agenda is. Watch Bill O'Reilly's show sometime. See how he surrounds himself with pliable, nubile beauties. They have a tendency to kowtow to him, to fawn over him, to bask in the glow of his glory. A prerequisite. Hilarious.
The ego, like fire, sucks the oxygen from the room.
In other news....
John Edwards has now endorsed Barack Obama. A rousing rally last night in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Obama's first appearance in Michigan during this long and grueling primary season. Michigan, of course, did not get to participate---officially---due to a rules violation. Obama needs to rally the base up there, and so he rolled out John Edwards for a surprise endorsement just one day after Hillary Clinton's impressive win in the rough and tumble state of West Virginia.
Anybody notice how badly John Edwards was sweating last night?
I couldn't help but see it. The slick sheen of sweat on his face.
Meanwhile, Obama was cool as a fan.
What does this mean?
Well, my guess is that it wasn't a matter of sweltering heat. Temperatures in Grand Rapids have been in the mid-60s all week.
Edwards was sweating because he was nervous. And emotional.
Nervous: Because he was making an endorsement and snubbing the old king and queen of the party. Nervous because he was stepping out on a limb and making a clean break.
Emotional: Because he was standing on-stage with The Chosen One. The new king of the party. Emotional because he was standing on-stage, delivering an endorsement to a man who now has the title that he badly wanted to win. Edwards is a fierce competitor. I'm sure it was not an entirely pleasant experience last night. A matter of duty more than anything else. Duty and angling for power.
Possibly vice presidential power?
Naturally there has been talk of this in the news media during the last twelve hours. Almost as soon as the endorsement rolled in, The Drudge Report was running a photo of the two men together with the words "The Ticket?" printed underneath.
The New York Times, too, has given some thought to whether Edwards might be the perfect choice for Obama in an election season that has exposed him as potentially weak among working class white voters from the back-country.
Edwards, on many counts, would appear to fit the bill:
-He's white. -He's southern. -He's from the back-country. -He's battle-tested. -He's popular within the party, particularly among working class voters. -And, as he so famously likes to say, he is the son of a meelworker from Robbins, North Carolina.
Personally, I think it could work. Yes, Edwards carries the stain of 2004 with him to some degree, but I don't think he's fatally flawed as a "candidate of yesterday" in the way that, say, Hillary Clinton or John Kerry are. Edwards, by virtue of his vice presidential candidacy in 2004 and his public mea culpa on the Iraq War resolution, has positioned himself as a viable candidate for the vice presidency. A potential unifier.
Will Obama pick him?
I have no idea. I think it will come down to their working relationship. Does Obama like Edwards? He seems to, I think. More importantly, does he believe that Edwards is the guy who will get him the most votes in the most critical states? It's possible.
Would Edwards take the job if offered? Yes. Of course he would.
There has been some talk about Edwards' strong dissatisfaction with Kerry in the doomed campaign of 2004, and vice-versa. The men did not mix well, nor did their wives. There has been talk that Edwards was really uncomfortable in the role of running mate. But Barack Obama is not John Kerry. And 2008 is a different year. And Edwards is no longer a presidential candidate. He doesn't have a ton of options, or a ton of leverage.
The fact is, John Edwards badly wants to be the president of the United States someday. He's come too close to the Grail. The obsession is there. You can see it in his eyes. No position in the world offers a better shot at becoming the commander-in-chief than the vice presidency---which is precisely why almost no one turns it down.
Who else is in the running? It's debatable, obviously. The criteria for running mate selection would appear to be pretty simple:
1.) The VP must come from a swing state or, to a lesser extent, a swing region. States like Virginia, Georgia, North Carolina, Colorado, New Mexico.
2.) The VP must be able to rally the Democratic faithful and deliver large swaths of voters.
3.) The VP must be able to step into the role of commander-in-chief in an emergency.
4.) The VP must be able to offset, to some degree, McCain's experience advantage, and it sure would be nice if the VP had some military credentials to boot.
5.) The VP must be an effective attack dog on the campaign trail so that Obama can stay, in the famous words of Joseph Biden, "clean." This, historically, is the role of the Veep in any campaign: Be the guy down in the trenches, doing the dirty work. Be able to land a punch.
6.) The VP must be in tune with the Obama campaign's core message of "Change."
So who?
First of all, not Hillary Clinton. This would be a complete disaster. I would be shocked if Obama selected her, as it would be a monumental mistake on so many levels. Most importantly, it would undercut the central tenet of his campaign---Change. You can say a lot of nice things about Hillary Clinton, but you can't say that she and her husband are symbolic of change and the "politics of tomorrow." Most Americans look at the Clintons, and they see yesterday. They see Monica. They see the Roaring '90s. Vince Foster. Susan McDougal. They see semen. They see polarization.
Adding Clinton to the ticket would rally the Republican base in ways that no other individual in American politics---John McCain included---could possibly rally them.
The Obama camp knows this, and they're simply too smart to go that route. That's my feeling. Plus, I don't think they really like Hillary. I know Michelle doesn't. I suspect Barack doesn't, either.
At this point, it would take an extraordinary act of political jujitsu on the part of the Clintons to maneuver her onto the ticket. The pressure on Obama would ultimately have to come from the party faithful, internally. Howard Dean. Nancy Pelosi. Et cetera.
And who's to say if Hillary would even want to play second fiddle?
I think there's a 5 percent chance of it happening.
The rest of the main field probably goes as follows (in no particular order):
1.) Bill Richardson, governor of New Mexico.
New Mexico is a swing state, Richardson is wildly popular and has a terrific rèsumè with tons of foreign policy experience. He's also Latino, and Latinos, as a voting block, have been largely resistant to Obama's charms. Richardson would change that dynamic dramatically, delivering New Mexico and maybe even Texas to the Democrats. (Yes, Texas. Consider that nearly 50 percent of the Texas electorate is either Latino or African-American, and you begin to see how the numbers could work.) As far as the Electoral College is concerned, there is no feasible Republican victory scenario that doesn't include the Lone Star state. So maybe Obama goes here and gambles on a big Texas upset. But: Would white America vote for a ticket that includes an African-American and a Latino? I suppose this would be a serious consideration for Team Obama.
2.) Jim Webb, Senator from Virginia.
Webb is a military guy. Former Secretary of the Navy during the Reagan administration. Formerly a Republican. He defeated George "Macaca" Allen in a huge upset in 2006. Webb is a fiery, whip-smart politician who can definitely get down in the gutter and wrassle with the best of 'em. Plus, his son has served over in Iraq, and Webb really, really despises this war and can talk very eloquently and passionately about why. Could be a tough figure on the ticket, someone who could counter the McCain campaign's current military experience and "American Hero" advantage.
3.) Katherine Sibelius, governor of Kansas.
Sibelius is a popular Democratic governor in a state that bleeds red. Even she probably couldn't swing the state into Obama's column, but she's a rising star in the party whom Obama reportedly really likes. And she's a woman. So she would help to placate the party faithful who really want to see some estrogen on the ticket. And she's the kind of politician who knows how to operate in a "post-partisan" manner, reaching across the aisle. As the chief exec of Kansas, she's had to be a unifier. And people have responded well to her, by and large. This is in tune with Obama's vision for how he would like to govern.
3.) General Wesley Clark.
Long a supporter of Team Clinton, General Clark would bring obvious military credentials to the ticket, and he could help to rally some of the Clinton faithful. The perfect clean-cut general, straight outta central casting.
And somewhere in the middle of it all is John Edwards, I suppose. He could very well wind up at the top of the list. Some people have even thrown John Kerry's name around. Doubtful that Barack would pick him, but I suppose he does have the military credentials and the experience factor.
I've heard talk of Tim Kaine, governor of Virginia. I've heard talk of Ted Strickland, governor of Ohio. Ed Rendell, governor of Pennsylvania. Evan Bayh, the Senator from Indiana. I've heard talk of Joseph Biden (who just used the word "bullshit" in a public statement yesterday), and Christopher Dodd, both of whom would add "seasoning" to the ticket in the way that Lyndon Johnson did for JFK. I don't see either of these guys happening, either. Biden is from Delaware, Dodd from Connecticut. Neither of those two states does much for Obama in the general.
I guess in the end it's going to come down to basic math, to who Obama thinks will help him the most in the general election. Who is going to deliver the most votes, and the most critical votes.
My guess?
The more I think about it, the more I think that it may well be Edwards.
He's seasoned enough, Southern enough, presidential enough, working class enough, swing-statey enough, and young enough. (Yes, young enough. Obama is too savvy not to be considering what kind of transition might be made at the end of an eight-year run. Choose an elder like Biden or Dodd, and you could be staring at a Democratic candidate of McCain's age in 2016. Not a good recipe for the legacy run.)
So yeah...Today I'm betting on Edwards.
But it's anybody's best guess.
As for McCain: Tim Pawlenty, young governor of Minnesota, seems like the right fit. Popular leader in a swing state.
And you?
-BL
Attention. Deficit. Disorder. - A Novel is now available in both hardcover and trade paperback in North America and the UK!
THAT WAVE OF DESTRUCTION OVER THERE IS REALLY HARSHING MY MELLOW
Category: Life
I'm telling you, these photos from China are killing me. I keep looking at them. They keep popping up on the news, in the paper, on the Internet, everywhere. Earthquake pictures. Children trapped in rubble. Parents huddled in bunches around the ruins of a school.
Perspective. This is supposed to bring me perspective.
An opportune moment for reflection. An opportune moment for a charitable donation.
I woke up this morning at 5 a.m., worrying about bullshit. Writing bullshit. Financial bullshit. Future bullshit. Work bullshit.
Bullshit.
I got up. Walked outside. Sun was rising. Birds were chirping.
And I think I have it bad?
Everyday something like this happens. It's too much to digest. I know it's too much to digest. I know that if I were to get upset every time something terrible happens, I'd be upset every moment of my life.
There are limits to empathy sympathy, and there must be.
Something terrible is always happening.
But why is it always happening in Asia?
No infrastructure. That's what my wife and I decided over breakfast this morning. No infrastructure. Bad roads. Bad emergency services. Bad sanitation. Low rates of inoculation. Buildings not built to withstand the monumental shock of a tremor registering 7.9 on the Richter scale.
"Like Katrina," said my wife. "It's a lot like New Orleans and Katrina."
"Exactly," I said.
But even worse.
Over there, it's even worse.
(Can it get worse?)
(Yes, it can.)
Think of the tsunami. Think of Indonesia. Think of Thailand. Think of Petra Nimcova, clinging to a palm tree, naked, on a beach in Thailand. Think of finding Petra Nimcova, naked in a palm tree.
The force of the tsunami tore her clothes off.
Think of the scope of this shit.
230,000 people died in the tsunami of 2004.
They are now estimating that 130,000 may die as a result of the Myanmar cyclone. And another storm is coming. The skies are turning ominous, and the winds are picking up. And the junta is blocking the distribution of aid. The junta is battening the hatches. The junta is tangled in its own paranoia. The junta is worried about itself, its power, its vice grip on the populace.
The junta is evil.
Fuck this fucking junta.
And an earthquake registering 7.9 on the Richter just hit the Szechuan province in China.
People felt it in Pakistan.
And the polar bear was just declared an endangered species.
I can't watch videos of the polar bears, either. The ones where they're marooned on diminishing icebergs. Stranded in the middle of the arctic sea. Starving.
Fuck.
This is why I like comedy. This is why comedy is important. This is the kind of thought train that leads me to the epiphany that comedy is the only sane response to a world gone mad. To a bad (good) and dangerous world.
Merde.
That's all you can say.
Merde.
And you try to do something. Something positive. With limited means. Somewhere.
And you try to have a laugh. You cannot lose your sense of humor. It is so easy to lose your sense of humor.
How can you keep your sense of humor when you're standing on the beach, watching a tidal wave roll in?
That's a hell of a trick to pull. A monumental feat.
It's absurd.
It really is.
It's absurd.
We look at people who run naked through the streets, and we say to ourselves, That is absurd.
But no: We are absurd for not joining them. Or at least we are absurd for not considering it. For not applauding it. For not recognizing it as a defensible response to the shit-storm.
There are worse things you could do. And there are better things you could do, too. More productive things. More constructive things. Less abstract. Less symbolic. More tangible. More concrete.
I'm not making all that much sense here.
But regardless.
You might get the gist of my point.
More comedy.
That's really the thing.
I have no answers other than that.
More comedy.
More whoopee cushions.
More animal love.
More kindness to animals.
I'm caffeinated.
-BL
Attention. Deficit. Disorder. - A Novel is now available in both hardcover and trade paperback in North America and the UK!
No time to post today, but here's an interesting op-ed from Bob Herbert over at the New York Times....
Here Come the Millennials
By BOB HERBERT Published: May 13, 2008
An important aspect of the presidential race so far has been the generational divide, with Barack Obama doing very well with younger voters and Hillary Clinton drawing strong support from those who are older. A similar split can be expected in a general election race between Senator Obama and John McCain.
However the election ultimately turns out, the Obama campaign has tapped into a constituency that holds powerful implications for the future of American politics. The youngest of these voters, those ranging in age from roughly the late teens to the early 30s, are part of the so-called millennial generation.
This is a generation that is in danger of being left out of the American dream — the first American generation to do less well economically than their parents. And that economic uncertainty appears to have played a big role in shaping their views of government and politics.
A number of studies, including new ones by the Center for American Progress in Washington and by Demos, a progressive think tank in New York, have shown that Americans in this age group are faced with a variety of challenges that are tougher than those faced by young adults over the past few decades. Among the challenges are worsening job prospects, lower rates of health insurance coverage and higher levels of debt.
We know that the generation immediately preceding the Millennials is struggling. Men who are now in their 30s, the prime age for raising a family, earn less money than members of their fathers' generation did at the same age. In 1974, the median income for men in their 30s (using today's inflation-adjusted dollars) was about $40,000. The figure for men in their 30s now is $35,000.
It's not hard to understand why surveys show that overwhelming percentages of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track. The American dream is on life support. Polls show that dwindling numbers of Americans (in some cases as few as a third of all respondents) believe their children will end up better off than they are.
The upshot of all this is ominous for conservatives. The number of young people in the millennial generation (loosely defined as those born in the 1980s and 90s) is somewhere between 80 million and 95 million. That represents a ton of potential votes — in this election and years to come. And the American Progress study shows that those young people do not feel that they have been treated kindly by conservative policies or principles.
According to the study: "Millennials mostly reject the conservative viewpoint that government is the problem, and that free markets always produce the best results for society. Indeed, Millennials' views are more progressive than those of other age groups today, and are more progressive than previous generations when they were younger."
The Demos study pointed to the very difficult employment environment confronting young adults. Fewer jobs offer the benefits of paid vacations, health coverage or pensions. And moving up the employment ladder is much harder.
As the study noted, "The well-paying middle-management jobs that characterized the work force up to the late-1970s have been eviscerated."
The longer-term outlook is depressing.
Except for the expected continuing demand for registered nurses, the occupations projected to add the most jobs over the next several years do not offer much in the way of pay, benefits or career advancement. Demos listed the top five occupations in terms of anticipated job growth: registered nurses, retail sales, customer service reps, food preparers and office clerks.
Often saddled with debt, and with their job prospects gloomy, young Americans feel their government ought to be doing more to enhance their prospects. They want increased investments in education, health care and initiatives aimed at expanding the economy and fostering the growth of good jobs.
The American Progress study found that Millennials are more likely to support universal health coverage than any other age group over the past 30 years. By huge percentages, they want improvements in health coverage and support for education, even if it means increases in taxes.
The landscape is changing before our eyes. Younger voters struggling with the enormous costs of a college education, or trying to raise families in a bleak employment environment, or using their credit cards to cover everyday expenses like food or energy costs are not much interested in hearing that the government to which they pay taxes can do little or nothing to help them.
Whether young Americans can shift the balance of the presidential election is an open question. But there is very little doubt that over the next several years they are capable of loosening the tremendous grip that conservatives have had on the levers of American power.
This one has always puzzled me. I saw a guy this morning up in the canyon, he was wearing blue jeans, running up the hill. Tall guy. Thin. Normal. All-American. Running up a mountain in blue jeans.
I don't get it.
I don't get why you wouldn't just throw on a pair of shorts. Some sweatpants. Something.
I see people jogging in polo shirts, khakis. Baffles me.
Who wants to sweat bullets in a pair of blue jeans?
I'm not a person who cares what other people wear, generally speaking. And at the end of the day, you can wear whatever you damn well please while exercising. I'm just saying that I notice it. Even collared shirts puzzle me. Shorts, running shoes, and a collared shirt. And you're doing the clean-and-jerk. Why?
It confuses me.
2.) People who take their shoes off on airplanes (*during flights lasting five hours or less).
Quickly: What is your f---ing problem?
Do you hear me? You. The one on my left. The one who just got up in the middle of the flight and walked to the lavatory in your bare feet. You disgust me. You have no manners. You have no self-respect. You have no respect for your fellow passengers.
First of all, who goes to the bathroom on an airplane in their bare feet? Or even in socks?
Second of all, how old are you? Four? Five? How infantile? You can't sit there for three hours on an airplane and read a magazine in silence without first taking your shoes off?
I mean, if you're wearing sandals, fine. If you're wearing flip-flops or clogs or crocks or whatever---fine, of course, whatever. But if you're wearing smelly running shoes, old brown loafers, anything with laces, anything closed, anything that makes your feet hot---why must you insist on taking your shoes off while sitting in a foul, enclosed metal tube? We're breathing recycled air here, you dumb, inconsiderate bastard. We can smell you. You're not in your living room. You're in a public space. Have some fucking respect. You wretched cocksucker.
3.) People who pierce their infant's ears.
Again, I'm generally blind to fashion choices, choices of a cosmetic nature. I don't care if you're tattooed, if your hair is blue, if you're wearing saran wrap and a cowboy hat.
But piercing your kid's ears when she's six months old? Really? Is that really necessary?
I'm assuming these kids scream bloody murder during the procedure. I'm assuming they have no say in the matter. I'm assuming this is purely a case of parental projection, some sort of tacky style choice made on behalf of an innocent baby.
You want to pierce an infant's ears, get a baby doll. Get a Cabbage Patch kid and a staple gun. But leave your actual child out of it. Don't treat your actual child like some sort of sexualized doll baby that you dress up as a way of expressing your own enormously grating personality.
4.) People who cut coupons.
I know I'm probably gonna get killed on this one. People who cut coupons are often cutting coupons because they have to cut coupons. I get it. Don't throw a fit. Some people need to save twenty-three cents on a loaf of bread. I'm not trying to denigrate people who are merely fighting to subsist.
But seriously: I've been pretty poor in my time. My first job out of college paid me $18,000 a year. And I survived just fine. I went out. I bought clothes at thrift stores. I grocery-shopped. And I never cut a single coupon.
I'm consistently baffled by the existence of coupons. The coupon section in the newspaper. Hundreds of coupons. Endless coupons.
OMG.
WTF?
Years ago I was with a buddy of mine. We went to the grocery store, and he insisted on paying for individual groceries with coupons. I was appalled.
I was like, "Just pay for the fucking milk already."
And he was like, "No. I'm using my coupons."
I couldn't believe he'd actually taken the time to sit there and stare at coupons and cut them out and file them away. I'm simply too lazy for that shit. I'd rather be broke, I guess.
Fact of the matter is, I don't know a single person (aside from this buddy of mine) who has ever cut coupons with regularity. Unless this is the sort of thing that people don't share with me. Maybe they do it in private. Maybe they know it will upset me.
5.) People who don't like Alec Baldwin.
I think I want to start a church and make Alec Baldwin the primary deity. The guy is bat-shit crazy. He married Kim Basinger, for godsakes. There are rumors and stories of wild, erratic behavior.
My wife and I watched him on 60 Minutes last night, and we were both like, "I love the guy."
My wife was like, "He's completely crazy."
And I was like, "Yeah, but it's good crazy. We need more Alec Baldwin craziness in the world."
It's not the political stuff, either. It's just the anger. The expression of anger. The poetry of it. The art. And the performances on-screen.
How can you not like Alec Baldwin?
How can you not want to invite him to your fantasy barbecue and watch him go ape shit on the patio?
Quite simply, the guy is brilliant. Makes me laugh. Almost anything he says is funny. Even the un-funny stuff seems funny to me. Even the infamous voicemail message he left for his daughter---I thought that was funny, too. I'm in the extreme minority here. I realize that. Most decent people were appalled by it. People with good hearts thought it was a grand domestic tragedy.
I laughed my ass off.
Why?
Because I'm detached from reality, and I'm heartless and cruel. And because it was Alec Baldwin. I simply couldn't separate. I couldn't see the terrible side of it. I could only see the funny. I could only see my hero. I could only hear the voice of a loving God.
-BL
Attention. Deficit. Disorder. - A Novel is now available in both hardcover and trade paperback in North America and the UK!
DO WE REALLY NEED TO BE TALKING ABOUT THIS RIGHT NOW?
Category: Life
I got my haircut this morning. I take Walter. We walk over there. It's kinda gay. My wife makes fun of me for it.
"Taking your Frenchie to the thalon?" she said.
It's good for training. You have a puppy, you take him out in public as often as possible. To cafes. To the barber shop. You get him used to being among crowds. That way he learns how to behave himself. That way you can take him more places, and he doesn't have to be left home alone. It's good for the dog. Walter likes it. He sits there and watches me get my haircut. Father-son bonding time.
So I'm sitting there in the chair, getting my haircut, and one of the other stylists starts talking about anal sacs, how you have to drain a dog's anal sac with regularity or risk significant health problems.
"You have to drain his anal sac," she says.
And I'm thinking, Do we really need to be talking about this right now?
Janet, the girl who cuts my hair, was like, "I almost got into dog grooming until I learned that you have to drain the anal sac. And then I was like, 'No way.'"
And then she told me that she almost took a job as a mortician beautician. She almost took a job at a funeral home, where she would do hair and make-up on corpses. She went in for the interview, she told me, and she felt pretty confident that it would be no big deal. The money is big in this line of work. You get paid, like, $500 per corpse.
"And then," she said, "after the sit-down portion of the interview was done, they were like, 'Come on back to where the corpses are.'"
And she chickened out. Did a U-turn. Couldn't go back there. Couldn't look at the strange dead bodies.
She was like, "No fuckin' way."
It was a weird conversation. Anal sacs and corpse make-up.
And then I told a story that I heard when my wife and I were up in Minneapolis last December. A friend of my brother-in-law. He works as a paramedic. First-responder. He's on call one night, and they have an emergency at some girl's apartment. 911. They drive over there. Turns out it's a beautiful young girl. They walk in. And she's standing there with her pants around her ankles, and she's holding onto a tapeworm. The tapeworm is hanging out of her ass, and she holding onto it so that it won't crawl back up inside her. It looks like a slimy string of Chiclets.
It's actually a funny story, when you hear this guy from Minnesota tell it.
Or maybe I was just drunk.
And then I see this story in the news this morning.
Kingwood, Texas.
Three teenage boys stand accused of decapitating a corpse and using the skull as a marijuana bong.
From the Houston Chronicle:
The Kingwood teenager's story of decapitating a corpse and using the head to smoke marijuana was so outlandish that at first Houston Police Department senior police officer Jim Adkins did not believe it.
Yet, Kevin Wade Jones Jr., 17, appeared almost indifferent as he relayed the bizarre description of his and two friends' activities at an Humble area graveyard, Adkins said.
"I just doubted it because it's very morbid, and I couldn't see anybody doing something like this," Adkins said Thursday.
Not until police went to the home of another Kingwood 17-year-old, Matthew Richard Gonzalez, did the officer believe the tale.
"He regurgitated in his plate of food when I asked him about it," Adkins said. "So I knew there was some truth to the story."
Apparently the suspects violated the grave of an 11-year-old boy who died in 1921. The kid was buried at an unmarked cemetery believed to be reserved for black veterans and their families. As of yet, the skull has not been found.
"The teens first came to the police's attention during a vehicle burglary investigation," according to the Chronicle. "While being questioned, Jones told of desecrating the gravesite a month or two ago. Adkins said he believes the tale was intended to distract police from the vehicle break-in.
"Jones claimed he and his friends used shovels to dig up the body and removed the corpse's head with a garden tool, Adkins said. Jones also revealed he and the other two boys took the severed head to the juvenile's home, where they used the skull as a "bong" to smoke marijuana, the officer said."
Remember that story from years ago, the one about the American kid who got busted over in, like, Singapore or something? And he was gonna get caned? Lashed with a cane? Beaten within an inch of his life?
I think they should cane these assholes. I really do. Fifty lashes with a cane. In public.
And for community service, they should have to do hair and makeup on corpses. And they should have to drain the anal sacs of angry pit-bulls.
A slimy string of Chiclets.
The poor broad.
-BL
Attention. Deficit. Disorder. - A Novel is now available in both hardcover and trade paperback in North America and the UK!
One in three employees admits they have been to work with a hangover and more than one in 10 has been drunk at their desk, a study suggests.
Staff said they made mistakes, struggled to concentrate and had to go home early as a result of drinking.
Four out of five employers say alcohol is the biggest threat to the well-being of their staff, according to a survey for Norwich Union Healthcare.
Alcohol Concern said bosses needed to be aware of symptoms of alcohol abuse.
One thousand people and 250 businesses were interviewed about drinking habits for the survey.
Of those who had had a hangover or been drunk at work, 85% confirmed it affected their performance or mood.
More than a third (36%) found it hard to concentrate, 35% were less productive, 42% felt tired to the point of being sleepy and 25% did the minimum amount of work and went home as soon as possible.
Some occupations are worse than others with regard to drinking and the workplace.
Forty-one per cent of people working in media and creative jobs said they had been to work while still drunk---four times the average.
The number who admitted to have been drunk at work was also high in the construction industry (24%), professional and business services (23%), and information technology (15%).
I have no reason to question these numbers. They sound believable. Maybe they're actually a little lower; maybe they're actually a little higher.
I remember in my first job out of college, there was this company party. There was a screening in the office conference room with food and wine. And then afterwards everyone kept drinking. I was an underling and wasn't really involved. I was there in a service capacity. I was everybody's bitch. (Cruditè, anyone?) I actually had to stay late and help clean up afterwards. A couple of company elders got wasted and stayed late, too. They wound up having sex in the woman's office. It was sloppy and loud and a little bit scandalous.
I'm sure I went to work hungover a few times. I don't remember any particular episodes that were wretchedly bad. But I'm sure it happened.
In fact, I don't think I know anyone who hasn't been to work hungover.
Drunk at your desk? No. But hungover, sure.
I never went to work drunk. And I never drink and write. It doesn't work for me.
I never have drinks after lunch, or anything like that. I don't like to drink during the day unless I'm on vacation or something. And even then it's not all that appealing.
That said, I usually have one or two drinks every night. Almost always red wine.
It's kind of funny that I've turned into a wine lover. I've never been cultured, and I've always felt uncomfortable around people of advanced maturity who nurture tastes and affectations that are beyond their years. There's something ridiculous about a 24-year-old who's a wine aficionado. But I guess as you get older it starts to seem less ridiculous. Maybe I was just immature.
Really I just like wine because it just works for me the best. I like that it's meant to be consumed with food. It's about mealtime. It's relaxing.
Sure, there are fine whiskeys that you can sip after dinner or whatever, but I don't know too many whiskey drinkers who drink whiskey for the exquisite bouquet.
I love how the British have a group called "Alcohol Concern."
And I love how 42 percent of those interviewed said they had felt "tired to the point of being sleepy" due to alcohol consumption.
Tired to the point of being sleepy?
What the fuck does that mean?
Anyway.
Curious to know if you're drunk right now. I think at least a few of you out there are bona fide alcoholics who sit around drinking and MySpacing during the day. And some of you are in recovery, which is good.
Anyone out there shit-faced right now?
Anyone out there got a funny drunk-at-work story?
Anyone out there been so hungover at work that you puked in your trashcan?
Anyone hungover right now?
Anyone drunk at the office right now?
Please: Share with the group.
Exorcise your demons.
Enter the circle of trust.
We only mock you because we love you.
We're not laughing with you, we're laughing at you.
-BL
Attention. Deficit. Disorder. - A Novel is now available in both hardcover and trade paperback in North America and the UK!
So: Big night for Obama. Better than expected. Finally, finally---this thing appears to be over. The punditry is hammering nails into her coffin. George McGovern has switched allegiances. Tim Russert and George Stephanopoulos have performed official funereal rights.
We're going to get to see the full breadth and depth of the Clintons' denial in the coming days. It's kind of a national fascination at this point, a sort of horror show. How deep are their delusions? How low are they willing to go? We gawk at our televisions through splayed fingers, wondering.
Everybody was talking about the "valedictory tone" of Hillary's concession victory speech last night in Indiana. But we've heard this kind of thing before. And then she comes back, swinging an axe, like Jason Voorhees.
It's entirely possible that Hillary will bow out gracefully sometime between now and June 3rd; it's entirely possible that she will continue to fight on like a rabid wolverine in heat. I could see her Tracy Flicking this thing in a major way, making wild declarations of "fighting on to the convention" while the superdelegates flock en masse to Obama, and the S.S. Clinton goes down, down, down.
Any Obama supporters who were hoping for her to drop out today, tomorrow, or sometime in the next week---hold your horses. McGovern's call for Hillary to step aside was a little bit premature and ill-considered from a strategic perspective.
Why?
Because of Kentucky and West Virginia. Both states are strongly in Clinton's column. Both states have a big redneck base that is currently scared of the brown man. Sorry to say it, but it's true.
If Hillary were to drop out today, and Obama were to lose two states next week by a wide margin, it wouldn't look good for the Democrats' nominee. It would be an ugly moment, strategically unwise. The Obama camp almost certainly doesn't want this.
What you'll see instead is a continued battle (though a bit less heated) between now and May 20th. May 20th is when the battle moves out west, to Oregon. Obama does well in western states. Oregon is squarely in his column.
This date is also significant because this is the day that Barack will secure, unequivocally, the majority of pledged delegates in the Democratic contest. Provided things go as planned, this is the day that you will see Obama make his official victory speech. This is the day that the party leaders and the superdelegates will unify around him and push him past 2,025, once and for all. At that point he will have done what was asked of him. Against considerable odds, he will have slayed the dragon. He will have won the nomination, fair and square.
Hillary will probably continue to make the bogus argument that Florida and Michigan should count. She will also continue to talk about how she "would have already won the nomination if the Democrats selected their nominee according to Republican rules."
This is classic Clintonian bullshit. Revisionist history at its finest. What she's basically saying is that the rules need to change at the end of the game---rules she agreed to at the outset---because the results didn't fall in her favor. It's a losing argument, and it only makes her look bad.
With victory secure, the first big job for the Obama campaign, and for the Democratic Party at large, will be to unify. The wounds inside the party are overstated in my view, but I think they do exist on some level. Barack is going to need party bigwigs to go out into battleground states like Pennsylvania and Ohio, and he's going to need them to make the case for him in strong, emphatic, articulate terms.
He's going to need to pick a VP who helps him with the blue collar folk.
Poetically, perhaps, he's going to need Bill Clinton to really go to bat for him. He's going to need Hillary. He's going to need them to reach out to their base---and particularly the white, blue-collar, low-income, low-education folks, and the senior citizens---and he's going to need them to make the case for his candidacy.
Oddly enough, this situation presents a good opportunity for all parties involved. Obviously it helps Barack in a number of ways with voting blocks that he'll need to carry in November. And it gives Bill and Hill a chance to resuscitate their reputations in the black community, reputations that has suffered grave damage during a wickedly ugly campaign season. It helps them restore a badly damaged legacy among a community that once supported them in huge numbers. If the black community sees Bill and Hillary really roll up their sleeves and start fighting for Barack, it will go a long way toward healing the divide.
The elderly resist Obama for two reasons:
The first is that he's young. I think there is a generational divide here. Older voters are innately reluctant to pass the torch to a younger generation. Why? Because it reminds them of death. It underscores their increasing irrelevance, the unstoppable passage of time, the inevitability of change, and the imminent arrival of the Grim Reaper. No fun.
Also: Older people tend to be more racist. More attached to old, dumb prejudices. Obama is an "exotic" candidate in their eyes. They fear exotic.
Same thing goes for the blue collar Dems in, say, the Rust Belt. Obama will have to overcome prejudices and reluctances there. He will need help in making his case.
It can get frustrating that the uneducated voters of America don't use common sense and listen to the educated voters. It is frustrating to think that such a concept would be deemed "elitist" by certain segments of the population.
"You're educated. You actually read about this stuff and give it real depth of thought. You went to college and majored in political science. You read three newspapers a day. What do you know?"
Bananas.
It goes back to this whole bogus "elitist" argument, which seeks to paint the educated and the intellectually formidable as impotent candidates, woefully out of touch with "ordinary" folk.
This is American stupidity at its finest.
As a country, we've elected the guy we'd rather have a beer with...we've done that one before, in 2000 and 2004. That one didn't work out too well. This time around, let's hope that the less educated elements of our society have learned their lesson.
When in doubt, go with the smart guy.
We want our president to be elite.
We want him to be the smartest guy in the room.
We want him to be better than we are.
Anyway. Assuming everything unfolds as planned, today is a good day in America.
McCain vs. Obama.
I got the race I wanted. I'm happy. I can't complain.
On many levels, and in many ways, the country has already won.
No matter what happens in November, I won't be savagely depressed and thinking about fleeing to the Yukon Territory.
The policy differences are vast, yes. There will be ugly, predictable political battles ahead. We will witness a forceful debate and a mighty struggle for power.
But my gut tells me that at the bottom of it all, this will be a good race between two good men.
We could do a helluva lot worse.
-BL
Attention. Deficit. Disorder. - A Novel is now available in both hardcover and trade paperback in North America and the UK!
DEMOCRATS FALL IN LOVE, REPUBLICANS FALL IN LINE?
Category: News and Politics
So Indiana and North Carolina go to the polls today. This is the last "real" contest between Obama and Clinton. The delegates at stake comprise the bulk of the undecideds between now and June 3rd. Yes, we still have Kentucky, West Virginia, Oregon, Montana. But those states, combined, have fewer delegates in play than Indiana and North Carolina, when you add it all up. And the number of undecided elected delegates in these remaining states is smaller than the number of undeclared superdelegates still in play. (Undeclared is much different than undecided.)
So what will happen today?
Who knows?
The smart money right now is on a split. Hillary takes Indiana; Obama takes North Carolina.
Remember, these are open primaries, so Republicans and Independents can vote along with the Dems.
Independents and a few disenchanted Republicans have gone strongly to Obama in past open primaries. These are the folks who will presumably decide the election in November, and historically, these have been Obama's bread and butter.
But:
Rush Limbaugh has been urging his lock-step listeners to get out and vote for Hillary. This has been the Republican strategy for a while now. They want to see a continued fight. They want to see Hillary as the nominee. Or, short of that, they want Obama to be bloodied and tired by the time he gets to the convention in late August.
What this will mean to today's overall numbers is anybody's best guess. Having spent my formative years in Indiana, I can tell you that the state is pretty rigidly conservative---or it was when I was there. "The Utah of the Midwest," as I like to call it. The Righties over there will fall into line if Rush tells them to go vote for Clinton.
Democrats fall in love. Republicans fall in line.
Chris Matthews said that.
Electoral discipline.
So regardless of what happens today, what is significant about the moment is the fact that major campaigning is now done. The whistle stop train tours, the endless rallies, the stultifying "debates"---most of that stuff is finished now---until, of course, we get to the general election, when it starts all over again.
Why?
Once again: Because the delegates at stake in the remaining primary states----Kentucky, West Virginia, Oregon, etc.---are fewer in number than the number of remaining undeclared superdelegates. This is the critical point. After today, the superdelegates are where it's at.
Obama and Clinton will leave the campaign trail, in a sense. After today, they go to battle in smoke-filled back rooms for the next month, trying to secure the support of the remaining supers.
Mathematically, Hillary will play hell winning the nomination on fair-and-square terms, even if she wins both of today's primaries. She would have to run the table and then some in order to overtake Obama in popular vote and elected delegates. And she can't catch him in overall number of states won.
So if he beats her in all three major metrics---elected delegates, states won, and popular vote---it would take a monumentally ugly feat of political jujitsu in order for Hillary to win. The Clinton camp would have to find a way to retroactively count the illegitimate primary votes in Florida and Michigan in order to wrest the nomination away---and even then the math would be questionable. I have a hard time seeing how this would happen, even in the rank and disgusting world of major American politics.
So let's say that Obama does end up winning the nomination. Or let's say he gets to June 3rd, the official end of primary season, and he's still winning in all three major metrics. But he has not yet secured the necessary 2,025 delegates and superdelegates needed in order to officially secure the nomination. Or let's say he does, but Hillary's camp declares that it will fight on into the convention anyway, hoping to somehow get Michigan and Florida to overturn the process.
Why would she do something like that? (Because it almost certainly wouldn't work.)
The answer: To weaken Obama further and give McCain a better shot at beating him in November.
The Clintons, remember, are in the Clinton business.
Should Hillary lose the nomination on numbers as of June 3rd, her behavior in the aftermath will tell you a lot about her mindset and her core decency (or lack thereof).
If she concedes graciously and rallies her supporters to Obama's cause, then she's a bigger person than many of us might think.
If she vows to fight to the convention, or she offers tepid support in the ensuing weeks and months, while her operatives quietly tell her supporters to sit this one out (or vote McCain in protest), then we can assume she has her own best interest ahead of the party's (and the country's) best interest, and she's quietly working to ensure that A.) Obama loses in 2008, and B.) She is the clear frontrunner for the Democratic nomination in 2012, at which point she'll be 66 years old.
In other words, we're about to see Hillary's true-true colors.
If I were you, I'd set my expectations pathetically low and hope to be pleasantly surprised.
Anyway.
That's the state of things, as I see it. And it'll be interesting to see how everything shakes out.
The sad truth is, we have a helluva long way to go, and anything could happen.
People who are trying to make official predictions about November right this second are seeing the playing field through a warped lens. Their predictions are expressions of hope, not calculations based on fact.
Jeremiah Wright, many say, has really weakened Obama's chances. McCain is gonna roll.
To that I say: Big maybe.
And I also say: Jeremiah Wright would be a far more significant problem had he been revealed in, say, September 2008, rather than during a protracted intra-party primary battle over the course of the spring.
In many ways, the vetting process that Obama has had to undergo over the past several weeks might well strengthen him for the battles ahead, simply because the Republicans will have less ammunition for the general. A smaller amount of fresh meat and dirt.
Remember: A week is a month in American politics, and a month is a year.
By the time we get to September and October, Jeremiah Wright is gonna be old news.
Maybe---gasp!---we might actually get to hear the two candidates debate the actual issues by then.
Heh.
Doubtful.
Let me put it another way---and this will both depress you and help you to put it all into perspective:
The Iowa caucuses were held on January 3, 2008. Almost exactly four months ago.
The first contest of this seemingly interminable primary season was held only four months ago.
Election Day?
November 4, 2008.
This is the day that Americans will finally go to the polls to select the successor to George W. Bush.
Translation: Election Day is six months away.
So you take what we just went through, and you add 50 percent. And that's how much time we have before all of this bullshit is decided.
The moral of the story (if there is one), is that nothing is decided yet, and anything is possible.
If you start feeling too good about yourself (or your candidate) at this stage of the game, you're running a fool's errand, and then some.
Take a deep breath.
And grab your barf bag.
-BL
Attention. Deficit. Disorder. - A Novel is now available in both hardcover and trade paperback in North America and the UK!
I KNOW A GIRL WHO SNORTED VIAGRA ONCE, ET CETERA
Category: Life
Got a letter last week from a woman with a kid who has attention deficit disorder. I get letters like this sometimes. People thinking I'm an expert on A.D.D. because of the title of my novel. Happens on MySpace a lot. I try to answer politely, explain to these people that I'm a novelist, not a doctor.
What I don't understand is this: You're writing to me asking for advice on, say, how to medicate your children.
If you're going to email some stranger and ask questions about what pills to feed your kid, don't you think you should do at least a little bit of background research first? A cursory glance at my MySpace page would let you know that my book is a novel, that I write fiction, that I'm not a medical expert, that I have no authority to answer such questions.
American doctors are over-prescribing this stuff. That's my gut feeling, for whatever it's worth. For every one kid who actually needs anti-psychotic medication, there are five who are needlessly pumped full of scary little pills.
Here's what I would ask myself first: What is my kid eating? Chances are, most kids who are "A.D.D." are eating shitty food. Diets rich in processed food, refined sugar, artificial ingredients. And they're not engaging in enough physical activity.
Food.
It's either medicine or it's poison.
I'm not saying the kid should never have a Twinkie, but Jesus.
I know a girl who snorted a Viagra once.
And by "girl," I mean young woman.
She did not get a boner.
But Jesus.
You guys know who Chris Matthews is? The NBC political commentator. Talks over everybody.
A couple of weeks ago, the Pennsylvania primary, he's on the screen. Live television. And right in the middle of a rant, his face contorts and he sneezes. A messy sneeze. Snot flies.
Strangely: The first time I can recall seeing that kind of thing on television news.
A 17-year-old California girl gave birth to an 8-lb. baby boy in the shower. Then she jogged to the hospital.
Heard about it on the radio this morning. The Howard Stern Show.
This girl sits down in the shower and pushes the kid out, then jogs to the hospital, holding on to the umbilical cord.
Her name is Xochitl Parra.
From the Associated Press:
"I started walking and jogging to the hospital," she said.
The teen came into the hospital lobby and asked for help, [Dr. Jose] Perez said.
"She still had the placenta and the baby was still attached, so of course everyone said, 'Don't move!"' he said.
Perez praised the girl for taking quick action.
"They could have bled to death; thank God that didn't happen," the doctor said. "She was very clever. She knew what to do. She wrapped the baby up and walked over here."
Parra, a sophomore at Long Beach Poly High, said she had kept her pregnancy a secret because she was afraid her mother would "kick me out of the house." Her mother has now accepted the situation and is going to help the teen care for the baby so she can continue attending school, Parra said.
Perez called the outcome "heartwarming."
She was very clever. She knew what to do.
You've just pushed a kid out in the shower, and you're bleeding everywhere. So you jog to the hospital, holding the kid and the umbilical cord.
Clever.
Yes, she's clever. But only because she was in her third trimester, and somehow her mother had no idea.
That takes some skill.
Prehistoric man. What did they do about the umbilical cord?
They chewed through it.
How can your kid be pregnant, and you have no idea?
I can't do the splits. Never have been able to do the splits. Never will be able to do the splits.
Maybe I could do the splits if I really and truly practiced every single day, trying to build up my flexibility and make it happen.
But I doubt it will happen.
I doubt I'll do it.
I doubt I'll put in the work.
There are just some things some bodies aren't meant to do.
Most men can't do the splits.
It's actually kind of weird when a man can do the splits.
I don't really know if I would want to be able to do the splits.
What good would it do me?
What would I really get out of it?
I think I would probably freak people out.
Maybe if I were a martial artist or something.
In that context, okay.
My wife was in the car with me when we were listening to the bit about the girl giving birth in the shower. She gets queasy thinking about that kind of stuff. She had to turn the volume down.
My wife called me into the living room a few days ago and was like, "Tom Cruise is on Oprah."
I watched it for about ninety seconds, and then I had to walk out of the room. I couldn't take it. It was making me feel freakishly uneasy.
I get queasy thinking about that kind of stuff.
I think it would be pretty interesting to create a video installation of famous people sneezing in super-slow-motion.
-BL
Attention. Deficit. Disorder. - A Novel is now available in both hardcover and trade paperback in North America and the UK!
Under the apt headline "You Can't Make This Up," Mark Halperin dishes the following bit of poetic news over at The Page:
Hillary Clinton enthusiastically picked a filly named Eight Belles to win the Kentucky Derby and compared herself to the horse. Eight Belles finished second. The winner was the favorite, Big Brown. Eight Belles collapsed immediately after crossing the finish line, and was euthanized shortly thereafter.
EVERY LITTLE HUNGRY SCHOOLGIRL’S PRIDE AND JOY
Category: Music
I used to think George Michael pulled a lot of chicks. That was my mindset in high school. My buddies and I, we used to sit around watching the "Freedom-90" video, thinking to ourselves: This guy really knows what he's doing.
He was every little hungry school girl's pride and joy. We took these lyrics literally. We thought we were decoding him. We thought he was trying to tell us something.
We were convinced that George Michael was screwing at least half of the supermodels in the video. We couldn't believe the talent he was surrounding himself with...the sheer numbers.
Cindy Crawford in a bathtub.
This guy really knows what he's doing.
It's a good song, anyway.
David Fincher directed the video.
High school.
Pride and joy.
I was not the pride and joy of hungry little schoolgirls.
I didn't know my ass from my elbow in high school. I was playing tag in shopping malls. I was listening to Supertramp's greatest hits in my basement. I thought George Michael was pulling chicks. I watched his videos, looking for answers.
School food.
What disgusting stuff most school food is. Public high school food. Jesus Christ. What garbage. Prison grade. Cafeteria ladies in hairnets. Salisbury steak.
