When Barack Obama created the change.gov web site three days after the election, I was impressed that his team must have been working on it even before the election. But now the Washington Post reports that “[a] team of four dozen advisers, working for months in virtual solitude, set out to identify regulatory and policy changes Obama could implement soon after his inauguration.” In my mind, this bodes well for the Obama presidency.
This article about the Halloween candy hierarchy got me thinking about my candy preferences as I rummage through my son’s Halloween candy and through the leftover candy that coworkers have brought to the office.
This year, my son Samuel went trick-or-treating with a school friend in a nearby subdivision. The friend’s parents must have better stamina than my wife and I, as Samuel netted much more candy this year than in previous years. I’d estimate he got 8-10 pounds–so much, in fact, that he let my wife take about a third of it to campus for her college students. I didn’t witness his sorting, so I’m not sure which types of candy he deemed undesirable enough to give away to her students.
In my very subjective opinion, Samuel received a smaller percentage of chocolate this year than in years past. What does this mean? I can think of three possible explanations: 1.) it’s a sign of the overall poor state of the economy, 2.) the average income of the neighborhood in which he trick-or-treated this year is slightly lower than in our subdivision, or 3.) my observation is total bullshit.
In any case, what this big candy haul means for me: I can steal quite a bit of Samuel’s candy before my theft becomes apparent. My first choice in Halloween candy is chocolate, especially Trix, Kit Kat and Snickers. But since there is a relatively small number of these chocolate treats, I have to be careful not to eat them all, lest my theft be detected early on. Typically, I eat these chocolates in the kitchen, often with Samuel watching TV in the next room, and then I hide the wrappers down in the trash can.
My second choice of candy is Smarties and SweeTarts. I like to crunch things (peanuts, ice, etc.), so I typically take these out when I’m downstairs alone after the kids have gone to bed. I eat them slowly on the couch while I use my computer or watch television. The absence of these candies is not so obvious, so I depleted Samuel’s supply of these crunchy treats yesterday.
Things go downhill for me pretty quickly after Smarties. Last night, I found myself eating some Starburst candy, and I suddenly realized it just wasn’t worth it. This morning, I moved Samuel’s bags of candy from the kitchen counter to the pantry, so I wouldn’t start eating less desirable candy just because it was under my nose.
You know, it’s kind of scary to realize how much thought I’ve put into all this.
Gordon Atkinson has written a blessing for his fifteen-year-old daughter. As the father of a daughter who just turned fourteen, the entire blessing speaks to me. From my own experience, the following passage struck me:
Walk the halls of your school with your head held high. While others may worship at the altars of camouflage, conformity, and compromise, you stand above those shortcuts and soul slayers. Rise up, young woman, and do not be afraid. Rise up and be true to yourself. Let the strength of your presence transcend hair and clothing and music and boys. Let your true colors show in the halls and know that many in high school have scales on their eyes. They only see what they want to see. Many will not see you. There will be times when you walk the halls and feel invisible.
But here is a secret that I know. One boy will see you. He will see you in the middle of the noise and the energy and the hype and the crowds. He will see your strong walk and your eyes. He will listen to the answers you boldly call out in class. He will hear your voice and know your power. He will watch you until he knows you, and then his heart will fall into his stomach, for he will understand that there is only one like you.
Look for him. He is the only one that matters. Do not listen to boys who say they love you. Instead believe in the boy who wants to cherish you. If you hide now, ducking into the crowd like so many others, dressing and looking and acting and praying for safety, you might indeed be safe, but the only boy that matters will miss you. He will miss you because he is looking for a girl like no other. And you will have become just another girl in the crowd.
I’m extremely fortunate that I ran across this one person very early on and that we each recognized the other as the one. Thirty-some years later (24 of them married), I still consider myself blessed.
This is the local Obama supporters whom I mentioned in this blog post.
(Personally, I think the sign thing is a non-issue. Slow news day.)
This is something I haven’t seen in, oh, eight years or so: a Y2K error. Ah, the memories.
(via the Daily WTF)
In the last few days, I’ve heard two stories of friendships tested or lost because of racists who usually know better than to express their views directly who were driven to do so by the imminent possible election of Barack Obama.
In the first instance, one of the members of my mother-in-law’s long-standing bunco group was ranting yesterday about electing a black man as president. My mother-in-law, the only liberal in the group, was quite shocked both by the expressed racism and by the passivity or agreement of the other group members.
In the other instance, a woman in our neighborhood who is a vocal Obama supporter was told that a group of her friends had been mocking her “gay-and-black loving” beliefs behind her back. When she confronted one of the offenders the primary offender, the woman tried to play it all down she admitted that she didn’t like Obama because of his race. The Obama supporter told my wife that she chose to end the friendship than to remain friends with a hypocritical racist.
This is a sad state of affairs.
UPDATE: My wife received and forwarded to me the email from the Obama supporter herself. I’ve corrected one line above based on first-hand info in the email. Another point in the email is the irony that Pflugerville is probably the most racially diverse suburb in the Austin area, with a high percentage of African-Americans. The racists seem to be living in the wrong neighborhood.
Our son’s elementary school is only about three blocks away, and there is a crossing guard at the big intersection. He’s in third grade, but we still walk him at least partway because of the traffic on a side street that he has to cross (without a crossing guard). The danger in crossing this side street is caused mostly by the large number of other elementary school parents who who park in the side street in order to let their kids out or to walk them from there to the school. Because of this, there a lot of cars turning each way into and out of this street before and after school.
One woman frequently parks right smack in the crossing zone (which is not marked as a crosswalk), so that we have to walk around her car to cross the street. Yesterday, she pulled in right in front of us, so when I got across the street, I came around to the passenger side of her car and made the ‘roll down your window’ signal. Instead of doing so, she assumed what I wanted to say and pulled out to find another parking space.
Today, she was parked very close to the crossing zone. We didn’t have to go around her car, but having it right there just adds to the visual clutter of the already busy intersection. She was helping her kids out of the car as we crossed the street.
I came over to her and asked, “Excuse me, ma’am, could you please not park your car right here?” She came around to the back and noted that she was not actually in our way, to which I responded, “Yes, I understand, but I feel that it makes this intersection more dangerous to have cars parked so close to the crossing zone.
She rolled her eyes at me and went back to her kids. I was so shocked at her blowing me off that I uttered a profanity that didn’t help the problem.
Since then, I’ve been thinking about why her response upset me so much. I came to the following conclusion: I assumed that the fact that she lives in the neighborhood and that her kids go to the same school resulted in some sort of neighborly connection between us, even if we don’t exactly know each other, and that that connection would lead her to at least make an effort to be polite and pretend to show understanding for my concern.
I guess my assumption was incorrect. And that makes me sad.
And I’m even sadder when I think about the future. Because she didn’t even feel the need to pretend to understand, there will be tension every time she and I cross paths. Plus, I’ll probably escalate my concerns to the city: asking the to come a few mornings and monitor the parking and traffic around this intersection.
The current economic crisis is just a symptom of what really keeps me up at night–the trade deficit. Here’s a really clear explanation of it:
Through the quarter-century in which China has been opening to world trade, Chinese leaders have deliberately held down living standards for their own people and propped them up in the United States. This is the real meaning of the vast trade surplus—$1.4 trillion and counting, going up by about $1 billion per day—that the Chinese government has mostly parked in U.S. Treasury notes. In effect, every person in the (rich) United States has over the past 10 years or so borrowed about $4,000 from someone in the (poor) People’s Republic of China.
And why it keeps me up at night:
Like so many imbalances in economics, this one can’t go on indefinitely, and therefore won’t. But the way it ends—suddenly versus gradually, for predictable reasons versus during a panic—will make an enormous difference to the U.S. and Chinese economies over the next few years, to say nothing of bystanders in Europe and elsewhere.
The issue is finally going mainstream. See this Time Magazine article.
In the broadest sense, how did we get to the current economic crisis? This MeFi comment meshes with my general understanding:
The conversion of the financial system from wealth generation to gambling (aka wealth extraction) continues apace, to the point that they’re even backing gambling itself.
…
A large fraction of the modern financial system doesn’t create new wealth anymore. It’s not a factory that makes wealth; it’s a casino that extracts it from the economy, while giving little to nothing back. You can see it most clearly with the idea of backing gambling as an “investment”, but the system is full of ideas like these. A gambler creates no wealth, he just takes it from other players. Likewise, most hedge funds create nothing: they just take it from everyone else in the economy.
…
It’s now more profitable to manipulate other people’s wealth than it is to generate your own, so that’s where all the best and brightest minds are going — into taking whatever they can out of the economy, at your expense. Most of these are zero-sum games, and it’s the average citizens that are on the losing side.
Oh, and the Treasury.
Former publisher of the (conservative) National Review Wick Allison endorses Barack Obama. He starts off with his definition of ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’:
Conservatism to me is less a political philosophy than a stance, a recognition of the fallibility of man and of man’s institutions. Conservatives respect the past not for its antiquity but because it represents, as G.K. Chesterton said, the democracy of the dead; it gives the benefit of the doubt to customs and laws tried and tested in the crucible of time. Conservatives are skeptical of abstract theories and utopian schemes, doubtful that government is wiser than its citizens, and always ready to test any political program against actual results.
Liberalism always seemed to me to be a system of “oughts.†We ought to do this or that because it’s the right thing to do, regardless of whether it works or not. It is a doctrine based on intentions, not results, on feeling good rather than doing good.
Allison follows this with evidence that Bush and McCain do not fulfill this definition of conservatism:
But today it is so-called conservatives who are cemented to political programs when they clearly don’t work.
…
Today it is conservatives, not liberals, who talk with alarming bellicosity about making the world “safe for democracy.†It is John McCain who says America’s job is to “defeat evil,†a theological expansion of the nation’s mission that would make George Washington cough out his wooden teeth.
This kind of conservatism, which is not conservative at all, has produced financial mismanagement, the waste of human lives, the loss of moral authority, and the wreckage of our economy that McCain now threatens to make worse.
Finally, and most importantly, Allison explains how Obama exemplifies his conservative values (emphasis added):
Barack Obama is not my ideal candidate for president. . . But I now see that Obama is almost the ideal candidate for this moment in American history. I disagree with him on many issues. But those don’t matter as much as what Obama offers, which is a deeply conservative view of the world. Nobody can read Obama’s books (which, it is worth noting, he wrote himself) or listen to him speak without realizing that this is a thoughtful, pragmatic, and prudent man. It gives me comfort just to think that after eight years of George W. Bush we will have a president who has actually read the Federalist Papers.
Most important, Obama will be a realist. I doubt he will taunt Russia, as McCain has, at the very moment when our national interest requires it as an ally. The crucial distinction in my mind is that, unlike John McCain, I am convinced he will not impulsively take us into another war unless American national interests are directly threatened.
[A]s a stance, as a way of making judgments in a complex and difficult world, I believe [conservatism] is very much alive in the instincts and predispositions of a liberal named Barack Obama.
This is a view of conservatism that even this dyed-in-the-wool liberal can appreciate.
(via Dispatches from the Culture Wars)
