Fini.  I give up.

But thanks for checking in.

I think I've recovered from election-induced depression, although the confusion is still making my head hurt.  My state went with Dubya but chose a Democrat for the Senate (and a freshman at that), while choosing evenly among Representatives.  Moreover, the voters rejected a state constitutional amendment* that would have subjected contractors to liability but then approved an amendment to raise cigarette taxes for a (so we're told) state health care fund.  Basically, the voters approved one group escaping payment for its mistakes while penalizing another for an activity of personal choice and risk that doesn't drain any more resources than drunk drivers.

The deed, however, is done.  Moving forward will require an equal or greater intensity than that which went into this election, and even greater scrutiny of world and domestic affairs.  I hope that Bush -- with the help of Congress -- will indeed make his primary goal that of peacekeeping and unity rather than perpetuating the divide-and-conquer, slash-and-burn imperialism of his first term.

*It still isn't quite clear to me why these issues were proposed as constitutional amendments rather than considered as legislative matters to be written into municipal or state statutes.  Shouldn't constitutions be amended only when doing so benefits an overwhelming majority of the citizenry?

After spending the better part of the day working the campaign and canvassing neighborhoods to get out the vote, there's nothing more to do than sit back and watch the returns.  I'm a bit puzzled why the networks are televising coverage at 7:55pm Mountain Standard Time when the polls in California don't close for another five minutes, and Hawaii's don't close for another three hours and five minutes? 

The woman I was partnered with tonight wondered aloud whether our efforts made a difference.  The only sure answer to that question is this:  we'll never know whether we made a difference, but I'm happy to have done SOMETHING.  My objective was to help get people to the polls if it meant driving them myself, but the best impression we could have made was simply being involved, to be out there working the neighborhoods and knocking on one door after another for hours on end. 

I only hope that, should the race be as close as in 2000, the Supreme Court will not step in to decide.  Unfortunately, the Court not only set a dangerous precedent by deciding that election but did so wholly inappropriately.  As a judicial entity, the Court's purpose is to decide only matters of judicial or legislative import -- it is not within the Court's province to answer questions of a political nature. 

Still, I will be terribly disappointed if Bush wins a second term.  A Kerry victory won't repeal the Patriot Acts, make possible a clean exit from Iraq, or reduce the power of big business... but it may again rightfully separate organized religion from government, restore assistance to those of greatest need, and encourage a more favorable global perception of the US (starting with rejoining the Kyoto Accord). 

If nothing else, a Kerry victory will most likely ensure a Supreme Court that will leave untouched a decision (Roe v. Wade) that has nothing to do with God and everything to do with freedom of choice.

Saw "The Motorcycle Diaries" tonight with my scoot buddies... and it is a must see.  The movie is based on the journals of Ernesto "Che" Guevara and Alberto Granado as they journeyed through Latin America in 1952, and how that journey shaped them personally and politically.  It is unfortunate that more people might not see this film because of its title and characters (probably every leftist in the area saw it in its first week), because the story is so much more than eight months of Che's life before he became a revolutionary.  One can't help but leave the theatre with a clearer notion that every life -- regardless of where or how it's lived -- is somehow interconnected with every other life. 

Go see it this weekend, and tell me what you thought.  If nothing else, I hope you come away feeling inspired and empowered, knowing that one person CAN make a difference.

Having been roundly chastised for not blogging recently, I'm back.  In my defense, however, I've been a little busy getting my ass kicked in grad school  -- and although I'm having a great time, trust me when I say it's a killer.  It's been bad enough trying to acclimate from semesters (15 weeks) to quarters (10 weeks), but then they split the quarters into two sessions.  And five weeks doesn't give you a lot of time to fuck up.  The class I just finished was Social Marketing Communication, which applies the principles and concepts of commercial marketing to the social change movement.  The workload was horrific, too -- two textbooks, four papers and a group presentation.  It's a wonder I didn't kill myself.  (Note to self:  Don't take courses taught by the assistant dean.)

Needless to say, personal time has come at something of a premium lately.  But it didn't prevent me from meeting my pal at a local restaurant/bar, under the guise of having a late night bite.  Turns out she wanted to introduce me to the barkeep whom I'd actually met a number of years earlier.  How pathetic is that, when your friends try to set you up with relative strangers?  Yes, her intentions were noble, but it's a sad state of affairs when the prospects considered are people of only passing familiarity even to the go-between.

Still, there must be a better way to go about this meet-and-greet business.  Bars?  No thanks.  Nothing for me to do there -- can't drink, shouldn't dance, and rather not be a wall support.  Social groups?  Too much emphasis on show-and-tell.  Internet sites?  Nah, no one seems capable of breaking the envelope of two or three email messages, nor does anyone seem to possess the fortitude required to actually meet.

Ah well.  I guess it's good that I'll be busy for the next five weeks.

While at lunch today, a friend and I ended up talking about relationships.  We were sitting outside observing passers-by, and I happened to comment on one woman in particular who appeared to be part Asian, whose overall look just struck me, and I said, "Now, she's cute."  You would've thought I'd revealed the secrets of the universe, because my friend nearly had a stroke:  apparently, she's been trying for some time to figure out what "type" of person I'm drawn to.  I guess she's puzzled as to why I've been single for a good while and, frankly, I'm mystified, too.

She asked whether I was too picky, and that led to a discussion about how very difficult it is to find people with whom we (both of us) are compatible.  Interestingly, she has been coupled for as long as I've known her, while I have remained unattached.  She asked whether I might be too picky, but I'm not certain that's the case.  It's true that there is rarely a perfect match -- but while she will have a companion for the sake of companionship, I want the whole package.  For me, there are levels of attraction, each subsequently leading to the other -- physical, emotional, intellectual and sexual.

Perhaps it's unfortunate that I wasn't blessed with the ability to engage in physical relationships without the emotional bond.  I guess that's what's called working from the inside out.  All the same, nearly every one of my friends have always been coupled in some fashion or other, whether through a monogamous relationship or steady if sporadic dating.  And I'm left wondering what qualities they possess that I do not -- or vice versa.  Maybe it's as simple as that they know how and are more than willing to play the game, while I am not.  It's too bad, because someone somewhere is missing out on a bright, active, honest, loyal, faithful and funny companion.

Good lord, I've just described a dog.

It amazes me that, as much money as I've spent on bargains found on the 'net, it has never occurred to me to look for tobacco products.  But as of today, thanks to the New York Times (registration required) and an article by Eduardo Porter, I can save money on that, too!  I intend to place an order as soon as this is posted....

The upshot of the article is that state attorneys general would like to sue the Seneca nation for mail fraud because it (and a few other Native American websites) sells tax-free tobacco products on the Internet.  The issue is, in a word, contentious because states are barred by treaties from taxing Indian tribes on sales of tobacco and fuel; so state legislators, faced with increasing budget deficits, are working feverishly to figure out how to get around those pesky treaties. 

The article reports that New York City estimates its annual revenue losses from uncollected taxes to be in the millions of dollars.  Meanwhile, lawmakers in Washington, D.C. are marshalling forces with lobbyists for anti-tobacco groups, and a convenience store trade group would like to see legislation that specifically permits states to sue Indian tribes (which, by the way, are sovereign nations).

Read between the lines, though, and you will recognize as I did that big government -- as it has before -- is helping the tobacco industry itself avoid culpability.  HELLO!?!  Where did the tribes get their tobacco from in the first place?  The article reports that 20 billion packs of cigarettes were sold in 2002; and Philip Morris Company's 2003 Financial Snapshot reflects revenue of $60.7 billion.  (In fact, I'll buy and send a carton of cigarettes to the first person who finds and posts, via "Comments," verifiable figures reporting the tax breaks that Philip Morris Company has received from our government.)

Interesting, too, that Philip Morris has sued non-tribal and foreign Internet tobacco sellers -- but no Indian sellers. 

Some things never change.  People will always use tobacco.  And big government will always protect big business and shareholder profits, targeting symptoms instead of the sources.  Lyle Beckwith, senior vice president for government relations at the National Association of Convenience Stores, articulated this principle clearly:  "If you don't deal with the Indians, you don't solve the Internet tobacco problem." 

Because in business -- as in warfare -- the easiest (and most vulnerable) target is the little guy.

Pet Peeves.  We all have them, and I'll admit I have a couple.  One is managed fairly well because when it happens, the other person is simply reacting to their environment -- something competely out of their control.  (It kinda bugs me when I'm talking to someone and they turn to speak to someone else, do something, or point out something entirely unrelated to the conversation at hand.)  But what torques me most are inconsiderate or uninformed drivers. 

Like the ones who refuse to acknowledge that you've just let them edge their car in front of yours, because you realized that there are a shitload of cars behind you and they might not be as nice as you are.  So you let them cut in front of you... and then off they go, never breaking their chit-chat with the passenger (or the person on the other end of the phone).  And then the light changes just as they're zipping through... and now you're stuck at the light. 

Or how about those who STILL don't know that, unless posted otherwise, you can turn right on red? and left on red from a one-way to a one-way?  And while we're on the subject of turns, whatever happened to turn signals?  Are they optional equipment now??  (SUV drivers are the absolute worst for not using signals; I guess it's because that would fall under the category of multi-tasking, and everyone knows SUV drivers can't walk and chew gum at the same time.)

Then there are the drivers who've never figured out the purpose of those solid white lines that follow through the curve around a corner.  They're not solid because the cutting blade on the Public Works truck wasn't operating correctly; they're meant to direct the flow of traffic.  If you start the turn from the inside lane then you end up in the inside lane.  By the same token, if you turn from the middle lane then the solid line will direct you to the outside lane.  In other words, folks, don't cross those lines. 

But here's the biggest one.  In my day, new drivers were taught never to make a lane change without physically turning the head to look back over the shoulder and check for cars in the blind spot.  It's called a head check and, unless you're wearing a brace or have a stack of gold rings soldered around your neck, there's really no reason not to do it.  Yet I constantly see people going through wild gyrations to check their mirrors -- scrunching down to see the bottom of the side mirror, grabbing the steering wheel to lift themselves higher to see the view from the rear mirror, or leaning 'way over the steering wheel to extend their view of either side mirror.  Good grief, every one of those uses four times more muscles than just a head check.

Okay, I feel better now.  At least until tomorrow morning.  Maybe I'll drive to work pretending I'm in an SUV.

There are occasions when a photograph does so much more than freeze a moment in time.  Sometimes, they tell a story that would otherwise take 30 minutes to articulate.  A local paper printed a picture last week that captured, in a millisecond, true government hypocrisy.  It showed 627 immigrants taking their oath of citizenship in front of the state capitol building, and all manner of people were represented:  Latino/a, African, Asian, European.  Directly in the center were three men -- one from Nigeria, one from Ireland, and another from Costa Rica.  And all were wearing the uniform of the United States Army.

As I gazed at the photo, scanning the faces, I found myself wondering what each of them left behind in their countries of origin.  Perhaps the educational or job opportunities are greater here, or maybe they were drawn by a vision of owning a home made of something other than mud and straw.  Or maybe they believed the part of the Constitution that says Americans have a right to choose their religion, to express themselves through speech, to bear arms, and to cast a vote.  There's also a good chance that at least one was escaping persecution or certain death; heck, there are so many countries with US-backed guerilla forces, it's difficult to keep track.

Still, since 9/11, the War on Terrorism and the Patriot Act have made it tougher than ever to achieve American citizenship.  And as difficult as we've made it for Arabs and East Indians, we've never let up on the Hispanic immigrants.  Instead, we've done everything imaginable to further disenfranchise them, claiming that they rob Americans of jobs while draining government entitlement programs.  (Funny thing is, I have yet to see an Aryan building janitor.)

Which leads me to why I found that photo at once disturbing and supremely ironic.  The three men in the center -- the ones in uniform, who collectively represent a minimum of 20,000 air miles -- are expected to lay their lives on the line for what is turning out to be a wholly unwinnable war even though they are not citizens.  And then we have the temerity to accuse former senator Max Cleland, a citizen by birth, of being unpatriotic.

It remains a mystery to me why so many people still consider the United States a land of opportunity.

Isn't it interesting that, even as we're "fighting" the War on Terrorism, President Bush and the Republicans in Congress have allowed the ban on assault weapons to expire?  I know, I know -- if someone really wants an assault weapon they'll find the means to obtain one.  I guess what really troubles me is knowing that the NRA (National Rifle Association) will spend upwards of $23 million on President Bush's re-election campaign.

Good to know that Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" was so effective in opening the eyes of our erstwhile legislators.

I have a certain respect and admiration for people who have not only a good idea of their purpose but are happy with who they are.  It must be incredibly empowering to know of one's worth and value to others in their circle. 

I'm not there yet.  In fact, I'm not certain I've ever been close to it in all of my adult life.  I'm actually beginning to suspect that it's a genetic flaw, that it simply isn't possible to experience what others all around me are.

Immanuel Kant said "it is a duty to maintain one's life," but we preserve life AS duty requires -- not BECAUSE duty requires.  Does this mean, then, that there really are more unhappy people than we realize?  Kant went on to say that "if adversity and hopeless sorrow have completely taken away the relish for life, the unfortunate one, strong in mind, indignant at his fate rather than desponding or dejected, wishes for death, and yet preserves his life without loving it -- not from inclination or fear, but from duty -- then his maxim has a moral worth."  Is this why societies established the prohibition against suicide?  Do we stand upon a higher moral ground for not succumbing to the sometimes overwhelming urge to depart our stations?

There's times aplenty when I could bear abdicating my share of that real estate.

The local Pacifica Radio Network station just started broadcasting in this metropolitan area!  After a year of struggle, negotiations, and fundraising, a local signal was purchased and programming began Sunday, just in time for coverage of the Republican National Convention in New York City.  Yes, the appearance at first glance is that Pacifica's programmers must be confused.  But the coverage is not just of what's happening within the walls of Madison Square Garden; it's also giving a picture of what's taking place on the OUTSIDE, including first-hand accounts by peaceful protesters.  In other words, they're covering the stories that will never make network [read:  corporate] media.  A truly independent media outlet is a welcome addition to this market, a perfect counterbalance to National Public Radio (which is about as liberal as [John] Kerry himself).

It's been most interesting to hear the divisions that exist even within the Republican Party.  Amy Goodman (WBAI's host of Democracy Now!) interviewed a convention speaker this morning, who complained and sputtered about immigrants taking American jobs and using government resources.  But the Governator himself, Arnold Schwarzenegger, addressed the convention Tuesday night, saying that immigrants are not only welcome in this country but guaranteed to achieve exactly what they desire.  (Before Arnold decides to run for president, I hope he reads his copy of the Constitution.)  And am I the only one who remembers that W. said he would NEVER use September 11 as a campaign platform?  Republicans have some nerve calling Democrats wishy-washy....

Honestly, if I weren't so convinced that a vote for the Green Party was the same as a wasted vote, that's the direction I would go.  Whoever said that America has two parties, both right-wing, wasn't speaking a complete untruth.

New Jersey lost its governor, James McGreevey, last week when he announced that he is a "gay American," and that his infidelity violated his obligations of matrimony.  (Ah, if only every politician were so forthcoming and honor-driven.)  Unfortunately, McGreevey probably felt in his heart of hearts that by resigning after coming out, he was doing gays and lesbians everywhere a huge favor.  I have to disagree.

McGreevey did, however, obtain precisely the effect he desired.  The press and the public, rather than examining McGreevey's impropriety in giving his former lover a state job with a high degree of responsiblity (for which said lover had no experience) focused upon the issue du jour,  whether gays or lesbians can be effective elected officials.  No one seems concerned that McGreevey is just one more example of the power elite who successfully manipulated and dodged political ethics (if not policy).  And gay rights activists are, of course, all a-dither because McGreevey's announcement catapulted their cause right back onto everyone's radar screen.

And what's with calling himself a "gay American," as though it were the latest chic ethnic identity?  Looking at it from my own generally accepted standard (to borrow a term of legal import) of race-based perspective, I sort of resent the implication that I/we should acknowledge a previously unclaimed heritage -- as if to do so would confer certain entitlements.

I found myself agreeing with an advisor of McGreevey who urged him not to resign.  By framing his resignation as the result of a conflict of moral/matrimonial obligations, and employing the same as subterfuge for his ethical and administrative violations, McGreevey cheapened the very real internal conflict that every gay and lesbian grapples with in questioning whether to remain in the closet. 

Reports from observers and monitors in Venezuela indicate that populist president Hugo Chavez overwhelmingly and fairly won re-election last Sunday.  It is an interesting result, in light of information that at least one payment was made by the US government to backers of Venezuela's opposition party -- which purchased records of voter information from ChoicePoint, a US identity verification service.  ChoicePoint was also involved in the 2000 Florida election snafu, providing information that led to the [illegal] purge of that state's voter rolls.  The company apparently did such a splendid job domestically that the Justice Department offered it $67 million for information on voters in Brazil and Mexico, too.

Do you detect a pattern here?  It appears that US-backed forces in these countries simply haven't been able to meet government mandates, requiring an escalation in tactics by attempting to engineer election outcomes.  Indeed, the election was done by computer.  (Bonus question:  Guess the manufacturer of the electronic voting machines used in Sunday's election.) 

My worry is that the outcome of the election will be used as ammunition to defend the use of electronic, paperless voting in our November presidential election.  It isn't a stretch to speculate that proponents of paperless voting will tout the veracity of the system by holding up Venezuela's election results as an example.  In the meantime, I'm certain that Bush is clinging to the hope of re-election and more opportunities to oust the popular Venezuelan (and Brazilian, and Mexican, and so forth) president -- if not with guns, then with computers.

UPDATE [8/18/04]:  Excellent column by Medea Benjamin, at alternet.org, defining at least part of the reason Chavez soundly defeated the opposition.  His administration's willingness to fund expansive social programs for Venezuela's underserved -- with income derived from sales of the country's oil -- has earned the majority's loyalty.  No wonder the opposition is pissed; when poor people have access to (free) health care, education and job training, it's a step toward equality.

Hello again to any who may have missed my banal musings.  In the two months since my last post, my work status changed quite dramatically from two shifts per week (less than part-time) to five (really full-time).  While that's been nice in terms of money (treating myself to a very nice birthday present as well as acquiring a more powerful scooter), it threw my circadian rhythm (assuming I ever had one) into an endless loop.  I think I'm finally adjusted ... but the cat is still really pissed.  Oliver is a thirteen-pound orange tabby with one helluva case of separation anxiety.  He insists on being in the same room with me even if it's the smallest one in the house (i.e., the bathroom), and his preferred method of demonstrating his dislike for my increased absence is to lunge at my feet as I swing them into bed at night.  It's gotten so bad that I now take a squirt gun to bed with me.  I hope I don't die in my sleep because the newspapers will have a field day --"Woman found dead in home next to Super Soaker."

The new scoot's been nice, too (when it's not being towed away -- long story, another time).  It's a 2003 Piaggio (division of Vespa) BV200, in platinum, with side and top cases.  Purist riders who favor the vintage look won't like it but it's definitely for the progressive modernists.  It is such a blast, I never want to quit riding!  I picked it up June 26 with 15 miles on it, and it now has 500; and I can't wait to blow through the break-in period to get it to top speed (book claims 76, I've hit 60 once or twice).  And it's already been to its first scooter rally, Mile High Mayhem, in Denver.  For all you scooterists who've never made it there, I highly recommend the event; lots of scoots, lots of quirky folks, and something for everyone.

          

* * * * *

Let's change gears now.  If your state held a primary last Tuesday, did you vote?  Did the election turn out the way you wanted it to? 

I voted, but the results were a GIGANTIC disappointment.  My state is one where the Congressional race was a hot contest, since a Republican senator is stepping down.  The Democratic candidate I liked was defeated, the Republican candidate I most despised won, an initiative that would have prevented the circus from coming to this city went down to defeat, and the biggest weasel among the District Attorney candidates won in a landslide.  But more than anything I was disappointed that, in this city of a million and a-half people, barely fifteen percent could be bothered to actually get out and vote.  Basically, 15% of the population decided how the other 85% will live during the next four years ... and even beyond. 

Meanwhile, polls have George W. at his highest approval rating ever.  (How's that for a poll that has "skewed" written all over it?)  This, even as he invokes memories of September 11th in his latest nationwide television commercial, an appeal he pledged to never use.  I just wonder how much influence The Heritage Foundation has over this president; is it as much, or more, as was exercised over President Reagan? 

And speaking of The Heritage Foundation ... nothing scares me more than a Republican of color.  (Actually, gay Republicans are scary, too.)  If W is re-elected, keep an eye out for conservative (Filipina) columnist Michelle Malkin to be appointed to a Cabinet position.  Malkin is currently promoting her new book that defends America's World War  II internment of Japanese Americans, and advocates racial profiling in the name of national security.  (For a terrific blog entry discussing Malkin and her book, see Matt Stoller's August 7th entry at The Blogging of the President.)  Malkin probably also thinks Amadou Diallo was a gangleader in the making and it was better to remove his potential influence before it was too late.  The interesting thing about Malkin's position is that she once decried the internment -- until The Heritage Foundation took her under its wing and turned her into a hugely successful and syndicated columnist.

          

* * * * *

Finally, one more chance for audience participation.  Did you ever have an attraction to someone that you just couldn't shake, no matter what you tried?  On the other hand, do you know of some secret technique that will do the trick?  If the answer is "yes," do tell because I could certainly use some suggestions.  There's nothing more annoying than wanting something which you have no hope in the universe of getting.  And it's not as though I don't have any experience with it.  The same thing happened about six years ago (turned out to be a miserable failure) and it took two years to get past it -- I can't waste that much time again.  Maybe someday I'll recount the details here; for now, I just want to get past it.

Until next time ... peace.

Walking out of the therapist's office for the last time, it felt bittersweet; desperation drove me there searching for solace, self-assurance ushered me out to find purpose.  I'm not entirely certain where my next stop will be or the road I'll take to get there, but I'll arrive much sooner having shed much baggage. 

Leave a light on for me.

Once again, America has proven that its cultural memory is about as long as its fuse.  Accolades and praise are gushing forth from the media and the public, calling former president Ronald Reagan a true American patriot.

Indeed, Reagan's "legacy" is being compared to that of Abraham Lincoln, and there are suggestions afloat that he be immortalized at Mount Rushmore or on US currency.  In reality Ronald Reagan was, despite his popularity and movie-star appeal, one of the most calculating, ruthless, conniving, non-egalitarian, secretive and elitist Presidents ever to occupy the Oval Office.  His administration's policy of "low-intensity warfare" killed thousands in places such as El Salvador, Mozambique and Angola, and doomed US troops in Lebanon and Grenada.  (Never mind that he once declared that ketchup should be reclassified from condiment to vegetable and admitted that he relied upon the advice of wife Nancy's personal astrologer.)

Even before his election Reagan's party was operating to ensure a successful bid for office.  Jimmy Carter, Reagan's predecessor, was saddled with soaring inflation, a budget deficit, and the hostage crisis in Iran.  The miserable failure of the two hostage rescue attempts was brought about at least in part with the assistance of CIA and other cooperatives -- and was the nail in Carter's presidential coffin.  In fact, the agenda for Reagan's administration was mapped out well in advance by conservative business leaders and campaign supporters who would become part of his famous "Kitchen Cabinet."  One of the cabinet members would be Joseph Coors, whose Heritage Foundation published for Reagan two Mandates for Leadership, one for each of his terms.  The mandates called for tax cuts for the wealthy and credits for segregated schools, dramatic cutbacks in subsidies for public housing, food stamps and education, and policies supporting the US military's suppression of democratic movements in third-world countries. 

* * *

Reagan once declared that it was "morning in America"; what he meant was that it was morning for wealthy America.  But it was the beginning of a long sunset for supporters of free and democratic societies.

Okay, so I've pulled my head out of the sand and am ready to roll once again.  Actually, I've been in a transition mode for the past few weeks, getting my shit together in preparation for a couple of major life changes (which, I hope, were not over-rated).  Significant change number one will be rotating to days after working six years of nights and weekends, and most of that at a part-time pace.  Initially, it was a bummer working nights and weekends because all my pals' activities -- and volleyball tournaments -- took place on (what else?) nights and weekends.  But it afforded me the opportunity to finish my undergraduate degree (first-generation college graduate, I am), and gave me a good dose of life on "the other side."  I must say grocery shopping at three in the morning has its privileges (no lines), but there are disadvantages, too (no one to wrap the crab legs or slice the roast beef).  And I could drive to the mountains in record time to watch the moon and stars, as I did a few nights ago when the moon was its fullest and closest.  I also had plenty of time for things like haircuts (a biweekly necessity), talks with the therapist, trips to the bank (to withdraw the part-time pittance I'd earned), skiing on snow instead of other people's skiis and, oh yes, blogging.  Now, I get to do these things at the same time as the rest of the million and a-half people in this city.  And it's not such a bad job, anyway.  I wouldn't consider it a life career, but it certainly pays the bills and keeps the cat in kibble.

It's the other significant change that I'm most excited about -- acceptance to a local private university's graduate program to study a new, rather innovative program that will bring together elements of the public, private and non-profit sectors.  Imagine that, getting excited over school at 43 years of age.  The key, I am told, is that (unlike undergraduate programs) graduate school programs truly want their students to succeed; you're not simply a number and a source of revenue, and the instructors aren't there because they never made it through their doctoral programs.  And, I have to admit, I'm most ecstatic that my degree will come from this institution of high repute rather than the local state university which has hosted its share of controversies and zealously religious wingnuts (not to mention the largesse of at least a few generations of a family that made its name in beer).  I went to pick up my student ID today and was compelled to enter the bookstore; it was like walking into another dimension.  I browsed through the racks of school-name sweatshirts, tank tops, T-shirts and shorts, and finally chose a baseball cap (handy to hide the helmet hair after you've been riding the scooter a couple hours) ... and a lapel pin.  Although I'm not ordinarily a lapel pin sort, I do have two that I'm very proud of:  my honor society pin and, now, my graduate school pin.  I plan to put the latter on my briefcase, the one I take to work, so that I'll always be reminded of what I'm working toward.

In all of the furor over American Nick Berg's (videotaped) beheading, it is nearly comical that the talking heads and patriots who didn't want the world to condemn a few rogue American soldiers at Abu Ghraib prison now demand annihilation of anyone who is (or appears to be) Muslim ... or Iraqi ... or Arab ...

I would like for someone to please explain the phrase "That's so gay." 

Once, while I was waiting to check in at a volleyball tournament, one guy walked over to another standing behind me.  There was first the typical guy talk ("Hey, what's up," "Yo dude, how's it going," "Who won the game last night"), then one asked the other if they were planning to do some upcoming race.  The other said, "no way, that's stupid ... that's gay."  I let a couple moments pass, then turned and asked whether the race was gay because it was stupid, or the other way around.  Actually, it was two-part question: the second part was, "And, am I stupid because I happen to be gay?"  The dude didn't even have the balls to give me an answer, weaseling out of a confrontation by saying "I don't want to discuss it right now."

That happened a year ago.  Well, tonight a similar thing happened -- at the same tournament -- only it was a different guy.  The guy in front of me in the hitting line was talking shit with the setter, the content of which I didn't catch until I heard him say, "That's so gay."  I assume the phrase is derogatory, because I've heard it uttered only within the context of something deemed distasteful (and bloggers use it in the same context).  I guess a better person could blow off such an experience as nothing more than a close encounter with ignorance.

Nevertheless, I wish I could invent an equally derisive phrase to use with flippant disregard around and toward straight people.