why i'm glad i live now

being the optimist that i am, i've always found it really easy to idealize earlier decades and, growing up, wish i lived in them: the hard work and loyalty of the 30's and 40's, the idyllic 50's, energy of the 60's.  even the adventurism of the pioneers settling the west in the 1800s!  (all wars aside, of course.)  then i realized a few years ago that you don't get to pick a decade and stay there - my grandparents were married in the 40's, had my parents in the 50's, and then had to live also through the 60s, 70s, 80s, etc.  right-o.

anyway, i'm very glad that i live now, in this time.  why?

1.  modern conveniences.  washing machines, dishwashers, vacuum cleaners, cars with power steering, thanksgiving turkeys that come by the hundred, pre-cleaned and wrapped in plastic at my local grocery store, strawberries anytime of year i want them, leafblowers/mulchers, etc.

2.  technology.  laptop, ipod, tivo, cell phones, etc.  sure, they probably help in productivity to a certain extent, but they also make life really fun.  (oh, and scott doesn't have to do his financial reports at work with the use of a slide rule and a typewriter.)

3.  feminism.  yes, you heard me.  i pretty adamantly consider myself not a feminist, but i really appreciate early feminists who worked hard so that i can do things like vote, go to college, and have a job if i want one ... in short, be considered a person on equal footing with guys.  theologically, i consider myself a complementarian, which means that i believe god created men and women on an equal plane, but with different (complementary!) strengths and giftings, each with our own role to fill within life, marriage, etc.  but i don't think that means i need to spend my life barefoot and pregnant, chained to the stove, or that scott should never have to help clean or cook.  i'm grateful that i live in a time where i can have a career if i want one or can stay home with kids if i want to and each is a totally viable option.

4.  ease of travel.  i'm very grateful that i live in a time when scott and i can get married and decide we want to pick a new city to move to, literally 1000 miles away from any family, but that we can still see our families regularly.  i'll be glad when my parents eventually move out here and live 1.5 hours away rather than 15, but in the meantime, it's really nice being independent but not cut off.  (rather than the 1800s when you moved west and probably never saw your family again.)  oh, factor into this #2's technology, so that i can do things like talk (long distance for free!) to friends and family who don't live here regularly via e-mail and phone, not, you know, pony express.

5.  recreation.  probably attributable to #s 1 and 2, we have plenty of free time to do fun things that we want to do, like hang out with friends, watch football, read books, and hike - i don't have to spend hours cranking my laundry through a wringer or hanging it out on a line and baking all my bread from scratch.

6.  hygiene.  everyone has running water, toothbrushes, aisles of shampoo, body wash/soap, and facial cleanser options, and even my gym has anti-bacterial hand gel in every room.  showering and brushing your teeth daily is not only an option, it's a cultural norm (as is shaving, 1960's!).

i'm sure my list is much more extensive, but those are a few reasons that come to mind.  thank you for having me, 2010.

world cup scrooge

call me scrooge, but i don't think america should win the world cup.  (admittedly our chances aren't great, so it's kind of a moot point.)  i love living in and being from america, and when the game is on, yes i will cheer for our team.  but there are countries where people live and breath soccer year-round, and this isn't one of them.  realistically, thinking about major sports in america, soccer comes in what, fifth?  maybe?  canada may dominate us in hockey, but football, baseball, and basketball - those are OUR sports.  we cheer our usa soccer team on because we are a nation of winners and thus we want to win this world sporting event because that's awesome ... but not because we love the game of soccer.  let a country who cares about the game take the glory on this one.

relatedly, i decided today that part of the reason why we think soccer is a great sport for our kids to play is the same reason why we don't love watching the sport professionally: lack of structure.  when you're 5, it's the perfect game because you just get out there and run and kick the ball and it's all great.  to watch the game, though?  yikes.  yes, there are rules, but there are like five of them, and overall it's more about skill than play-by-play strategy.  no time limits, no special teams, no time outs, and at the end of the game, the ref adds time to the clock based on a formula known only to him!

july commitments

for the last year or two, scott and i have instituted july as a no tv month in our house.  july's a good month for it because, well, all of our shows are on summer break and there aren't any sports scott'll be missing (although we do allow for watching major sporting events, like the world cup or olympics).  it's oddly refreshing, too.  we usually allow tv to be our relax time at home - get home from work and working out and veg on the couch watching tv for the night.  when tv's not an option, though, we talk more, read more, get more little projects done around the house, are more active, sleep more.

last july we were in the midst of our commitment to explore colorado with our vacation time, so we had a few small trips lined up that month, which made the no tv thing easier.  my favorite was a two day trip to a cabin in twin lakes, co at the base of mount elbert - no tv, just a two room cabin in the cool mountain air surrounded by aspens with a hummingbird feeder hanging in the window and a babbling brook running behind.  it was glorious and refreshing, and made us really glad we didn't have tv to distract us from relaxing and enjoying the world around us.

anyway, this july we're again doing the no tv thing.  we don't have any trips planned (i'm sure we'll come up with a few hikes to throw in), but we do have several friends coming in for a day or three at a time.  it'll be very different from last year's experience, but hopefully just as refreshing and meaningful.

in addition to no tv july, though, we're also doing no dessert july.  (this is beginning to sound like "no fun july"!)  i've been working out more regularly for the past year or two and have certainly gotten into better shape and maybe lost a pound or two but have been holding pretty steady for a while.  not that i think i have a ton of weight i need to lose, but i could stand to give it a shot.  anyway, i realized over the past month that i eat a lot of sweets.  chocolate chip cookie dough ball after i get home from work here, mid-afternoon cupcake from the denver cupcake truck (yumm) there, brownies with small group on occasion, etc.  anyway, i decided that it can't be good for me.  not in terms of the fat and sugar i'm putting into my body, and not in terms of the habits i'm getting into.  so, i'm taking a break from it.  (as is scott.)  i think i'm going to have a lot of sugar cravings at the beginning of the month, but hopefully by the end i'll be happy i did it.

my illogical brain

so (background) my laptop is making a super funky noise whenever i move it.  as i have a lot o' pictures and music on there that i'd like to not lose (as in my last laptop's 4 hard drive failures in 2005-06), i was just researching pricing on big flash drives vs. external hard drives.  yes, i do feel a little bad now that when scott wanted to get an external hard drive last fall, i said no and got him 4gb and 8gb flash drives with a giftcard.  best buy has some multi-terabyte networked external hard drives (i fully realize that i don't need that much storage, but they're so cool) which reminded me of the pioneer woman talking last year about how many external hard drives she'd gone through backing up pictures while she was shooting in RAW.  as they're pricey little suckers (but nothing compared to her amazing cameras and lenses!), that prompted me to ponder how much money she makes blogging.  that's a logical progression, right?

apparently i'm not the only person to wonder that since my google search bar filled in "how much money does the pioneer woman make" by the time i got to the "pi" part of the question - and the answer is a lot!  based solely on ad revenues from her pw site, she probably grosses around $1m/year.  not to mention her cookbook sales, endorsements, or any revenue from the tasty kitchen - but obviously she pays for her giveaways and for her contributors out of that, too.  from the same search, there's also a lot of speculation on the web about how much she and her husband are worth - estimates vary, but consensus is that they're pretty well off.  some people said $15-20m, which seems high, but if they are - hey, go them for still working and living in the middle of oklahoma and not relocating to a beach in hawaii.

speaking of pw's giveaways, though, i struggle with them and here's why: i don't want my affection to be bought.  (or feel bought to my crazy brain.)  i genuinely liked her website before i saw her first giveaway, and while i don't enter each giveaway she has, i wonder sometimes if i continue to like her website because of the possibility of winning a sweet stand mixer or a shiny new nikon d90 (which i really don't need thanks to my loving parents, but still enter giveaways for anyway).  i want to like her blog because i enjoy the recipes and pretty pictures and funny stories - and i do like it for those reasons - but i don't like feeling as though there's the possibility that my affections are being bought.

soapbox

so we were taking a lunch break from housework, flipping through the channels to find something to watch and there is seriously some crappy tv on.  we watched a show called "basketball wives" on vh1 for a few minutes, and the wives are just so catty and trying to create crazy drama!  they were talking about the tiger woods scandal, saying that they find it hard to believe that there is any professional athlete who remains faithful to his wife (these are nba wives saying this - yikes!).  anyway, it reminded me of one of my latest soapbox thoughts: can we please stop making women famous for having sex with married celebrity men (john edwards and tiger woods' mistresses, i mean you)?  i'm sure there are plenty of famous men who are out there propositioning women with no provocation, but sadly i'm also quite sure that there are women who see a guy like tiger woods come into a bar, think, "hmm, he's married ... but he's also famous and if i get with him i could totally sell my story someday and be famous too!" and go for it.  (maybe tiger woods is a bad example here ...)  it is ridiculous, and makes me sad for the state of marriage in our culture.

granola

i think colorado is making me granola-y.  (or maybe the world is more granola-y and i'm catching the vibe at a point in my life where i happen to live in colorado.)  cases in point:

• i love craigslist not only because it allows me to be more frugal than buying all-new stuff at stores, but also because it keeps some older-but-still-useable stuff out of landfills.
• i'm not pregnant, but have already firmly decided that i will be using cloth diapers, and have contemplated how to let people know that it's okay with me for them to get (nice) second-hand stuff for my future baby showers.
• when our washing machine broke, we got a high efficiency model not only because of the sweet water rebate, but also because we liked the idea of using less water and less electricity to wash our clothes.
• i just spent the past hour researching local grass fed beef ranches, comparing quarter-share prices, looking up chest freezers on consumer reports (to hold the hundred pounds of beef) and debating whether i'd rather spend less on a slightly less energy efficient freezer, or slightly more on a freezer with an "excellent" energy efficiency rating.  then i realized that i might should start out with buying non-bulk grass fed beef that would fit in our current freezer to make sure we like it before dropping that kind of money on meat.  right-o.  i'm smart like that.
• i drive a subaru and own chacos.
• i think it's absurd that people don't recycle solely because it costs $4/month, and made scott take our old gutters to a recycling place rather than tossing them in the dumpster.  i thought they were aluminum, but apparently they weren't, so we only ended up getting about $15 for them ... oh well - still recycled, and still $15 we didn't have before.
• i saw an article on easy composting using a rubbermaid tote and got really excited.  then i realized that i think we already have a little composting area next to our house, behind our little storage shed, and got less excited because there are thistles and spiders back there and as such i have yet to brave it (two years after moving into our house).  but i think i'll have scott go back with me and help me clean it out later this spring, so that we can compost our yard waste and banana peels and whatnot at the very least.

lest you think i'm bragging about my green-ness, i'm not - i happily use paper plates and plastic utensils when we have groups of people over, i eat kraft mac n cheese with hot dogs on a regular basis, i bought the car i like rather than the one with the best gas mileage, and i willfully have trees in my yard chopped down without necessarily having an immediate plan to replace them.  i appreciate that the culture in colorado makes me think about how my actions and food choices impact the environment and my own future, though. 

p-dub

apparently the pioneer woman was on fox's morning show today - she just posted the video of it on facebook and seriously, how cute is she?  i just watched the entire 8 minute video and had a smile on my face through all of it.

my friend anna asked me a few months ago why i (and people in general) like the pioneer woman so much when she writes all about country life and i am clearly a very suburban gal.  i think it's because her blog is so optimistic and simple and homey and cheerful.  it's light, it's humorous, it's about family and cooking and making memories, and that's something that pretty much anybody can relate to.  plus, as we've clearly already established, i like happy endings - i know that bad stuff is out there and i can (and do) read about it and see it anywhere, but i don't want to dwell on it.  the pioneer woman's blog is sort of like one big ongoing happy ending.

okay, i need to go finish up my grocery list so that i can get shopping done and hunker down on the couch in my snowflake covered flannel pj's and watch figure skating on tivo.  i would put grocery shopping off until tomorrow, but that's been my philosophy since the beginning of the month and the pantry situation is getting a little desparate.  plus sunflower has sirloin steaks on sale for $2.97/lb ending tonight, and i'd like to stock up while i can.  mm, steak.

processing

the haiti earthquake was precisely a week ago today, and they're still finding bodies in the rubble.  apparently there are 72,000 confirmed deaths so far, but death toll estimates range from 100-150,000.  to put that in context, the 2004 tsunami in south asia killed 250,000, hurricane katrina killed 1,800.  the entirety of my hometown is 110,000 people. (!!!)  five years post-katrina, new orleans is still struggling to put itself back together; haiti is the poorest nation in the western hemisphere.

the daily telegraph out of london had an interesting op-ed piece about differing responses by world superpowers to the the earthquake, and in essence commended america for quickly and decisively choosing to help this poverty stricken nation in its time of great need.  i think that i found it particularly interesting because my own first reaction to hearing that president obama had pledged $100m to the relief effort was, "do we have $100m to give?" - chiding my government for its debt rather than commending it for its call to action.  on facebook, when a friend posted a link to the telegraph's article, someone posted the quote by alexis de tocqueville, "america is great because she is good.  if america ceases to be good, america will cease to be great."  yes, "good" is a relative term and i don't know the context for de tocqueville making that statement, but still, i found it poignant.  doing good in the financial sense needs, i think, to be balanced with a good budget, but when we see a need we need to find out what we can do to help it - whether that help be by praying, giving, or going.  cnn.com says that just over $220m has been raised by nonprofit relief groups for the earthquake, and if you are able to give but have not yet done so, i heartily encourage you to do so.  america's goodness comes from her people as much as it does from her government.  there are plenty of organizations lobbying for your dollars right now, but i'll put in my two cents for compassion international.  haiti needs food, shelter, and hope in god right now, and compassion can help provide all three.

the dump

a few weeks ago, after finishing trimming our bushes for the fall, we loaded up all of our yard refuse and a few old sections of fencing that were laying around the yard from when we had the wall redone, i think, into scott's truck and headed to the dump.  (which, by the way, is not cheap - $45 for us to unload our bed full of bush trimmings.)

anyway, it was my first time being even remotely near a dump, and i have to say, it's probably one of the more humbling experiences i've had in my life.  from the outside, driving up, it almost looks like a ranch - rolling grassy hills surrounded by fencing.  once you get inside, driving back on the dirt roads toward the dumping point, it still almost looks like a ranch, but with much taller grassy hills.  i commented on how pretty it was, then realized, oh wait, that hill is probably made of trash - just older trash that's been covered and seeded.  we drove up to the dumping area and parked alongside 4-5 other pickups (with a line of trucks waiting for us to vacate our spots).  you get out, and you're standing on dirt, but if you look, you can see plastic grocery sacks mixed in with the dirt, and pieces of trash sticking out the top.  there are giant machines with enormous spiked tools on the front churning up dirt to break down and cover the trash as people dump it.  then you drive away and realize that the dumping area is itself on top of a hill, and that hill is probably made up entirely of trash mixed with churned up dirt.

garbage seems very sanitary when you throw it away at home.  put it in a plastic bag in the cupboard, when it gets too full, move it to the canister behind the garage, take the outside cans to the curb once a week and it disappears while you're gone at work.  put most of your recyclables in the green tubs in the garage, except when it's a margarine container and you don't feel like cleaning out the bits of margarine left on the sides of the plastic tub so you just throw it in the trash, or the junk mail when you're cleaning off the counter and the tiny recycle bin in the cupboard is pushed to the back and you don't want to kneel down and retrieve it - then you just put those in the trash.

somehow actually seeing the landfill and realizing that your curbside bags of trash combine with the other 2.3 million people in the metro area's trash puts it into perspective, though.  the stuff i throw out is actual trash, does go to a real landfill, and will sit there for a long long time, making giant hills while it decomposes.  i'm trying to get better about actually putting recyclables in the recycling bin, but it's a little frustrating that there's really only so much that you can do - part of being a consumer is that you consume things, and unfortunately, a lot of things right now have giant plastic cases and styrofoam included.

the high school movie

scott had a bad cold last week and was still feeling sicky this weekend, so in addition to our previously planned tailgating prior to going to the airforce v. wyoming game with friends on saturday and yardwork on sunday, we ended up chilling and watching movies.  since we'd already rented two redboxes, scott consented to watching 10 things i hate about you (the fabulous 1999 teen movie, not the undoubtedly trashy new tv show that i haven't actually watched) on saturday night, and it got us to thinking - what happened to the high school movie?

the eighties had a zillion amazing high school movies, from the breakfast club to sixteen candles to say anything.  the nineties had instant classics like clueless, can't hardly wait, and she's all that.  this decade has had ... what, high school musical?  does that even count?  i guess bring it on was technically made in 2000, but come on, today's high school seniors were going into 4th grade when it came out.  yes, mean girls was made in '04, and it was a fabulous example of a high school movie until lindsay lohan turned into a trainwreck and most likely a "mean girl" herself ... it's just not so amusing anymore.  superbad?  yikes.  it just makes me feel bad for the current generation of high schoolers.

glee and marriage philosophy

[quick preface: if you only read my blog via reader or e-mail, please go to my real blog site now to ooh and aah over my new format.  i'm very proud - i found the background through a blog, then decided i wanted to change the fonts, so i went to kevinandamanda.com, downloaded and installed her super cute free (free!) fonts, used her tutorial on how to change the font for the sidebar and post titles, and then used microsoft word and irfanview to create the text picture for the header.  it's way easier than you'd think to put the words on a transparent background - when you're saving as a gif, there's an option on the right to set a color as transparent.  anyway, go check it out - i like it a lot, and i'm quite pleased with myself that i was able to figure out how to do all that.]

 

so we were watching glee last night, loving it as usual, but at the end of the episode i found it really troubling that the main character is a married man, but you're completely rooting for him to not be with his wife.  i'm clearly anti-affair, and as a general principle don't think that divorce is a good option ... and yet when it comes to will schuester and his conniving wife terri and sweet co-worker emma - i want him to leave his jerk of a wife and go be happy with emma!  yes, it is just a show and they're just fictional characters, but i do think that the media we consume can shape our views and thoughts.  i don't know.  i like the show, and i have no plans of cancelling my tivo season pass for it (especially since it's not necessarily any "worse" morally than any other show on tv, and a lot better than many), it just made me stop and think.

food for thought: 

• does empathizing with a fictional character who you think "should" leave or cheat on his wife make a person more likely to consider the same behavior in real life?
• as a christian, i hold to the bible's teaching that divorce should really only be an option in instances of adultery (and, i'll add, abuse).  (disclaimer: clearly plenty of christians get divorced every day for reasons beyond those two, and while it makes me sad, i'm not going to condemn them for it.)  should marriages between non-christian hold to that standard as well?
• what is the purpose of marriage in a society where 50% of marriages end in divorce?
• for non-christians, is there any real difference between marriage and committed co-habitation?  which is preferable?
• realistically, are there any differences between the marriages of non-believers and those of christ-followers?  (here, i mean real, legitimate christians who are actively following christ - not people who claim the title christian but show no life change.)  what about non-believers and christians (by which i mean people who claim the title and may or may not actually put any belief behind it)?

revision of opinion

i stand corrected: apparently mackenzie phillips speaking out about the completely icky nature of her relationship with her father has led to an increased number of people calling into sexual abuse hotlines - which hopefully means that more abusive relationships are being reported and stopped. in that case, while i'm still super grossed out by the story, well done, mackenzie phillips.

bow ties revisited

so i was alone on the elevator with the bow tie wearer from across the hall just now, we exchanged hello's, and i then spent the next 45 seconds trying to figure out how to ask him how he decided upon bow ties. today's casual day at their office, though, so he was wearing jeans, a purple striped shirt, and a blazer - and no tie - and i just couldn't figure out how to phrase the question without making him think that i was a) stalking, or b) flirting with him. perfect opportunity lost; now the world will never know.

h1n1

h1n1 is closing in. hearing about it on the news, it's easy to think that i'll be able to get through this flu season without getting sick - but in the past day, goo told me that her roomie likely has h1n1 and so asked if she can camp out at our place this weekend, and our building managment sent out an e-mail that someone in the building got h1n1 this week. plus, whiz kids starts on monday so i'll be around 22 grade schoolers once a week every week, and we all know what a breeding ground that is. *sigh. i'm trying to resign myself to the fact that i'm almost definitely going to get sick, and i am not a fan of that. i hate puking and fevers and using personal days at work just to lay in bed sick.

also, i'm very sad to report that chicago did not win the olympic bid for 2016. scott had promised me that if the olympics go to chicago, we can make a special trip back for it. yes, that's in 7 years, but let's face it, it's a good excuse to see chicago in the summer and actually spend time in the city, not just drive by on the way to see friends out in the burbs at snowy chilly christmastime. so, i guess i'll need to think of another reason to get back to lovely chicago. i was reflecting yesterday that my whole childhood, i dreamed of either growing up and moving to chicago, or of growing up and living on top of a mountain (inspired by our two trips to colorado as a kid - was it two? or just 1?). overall, while denver is NOTHING like chicago, i think denver's a good mixture of the two. i've got the mountains, i've got the city. maybe the only thing better would be living in chicago, and then having a home on a mountain with a private jet to fly in anytime i want. i'll work on that.

bow ties, etc.

how does one become a bow tie wearer? i was just in the elevator with a guy who couldn't be much older than me in a bow tie. definitely under 35, and i hesitate to use that as an upper limit because he looks under 30, wearing tasseled loafers, gray suit pants, white shirt ... and a pink bow tie with a gray/black pattern. hmm. for the 50+ age group, it still looks a little odd in daily business, but it's a little bit more understandable - it's just so confusing on a person who's more or less my age. primarily because i'm just not sure how or when that develops - do you graduate from college, buy your first real business suit, and say, "you know what? bow tie," or what?

in other news, saturn is being shut down for good, and i feel oddly triumphant. i feel very unpatriotic saying that, but it's true. i do feel bad for the people who worked at saturn ... but as a brand, oh well.

i finished reading wasted this afternoon - wow, what an intense book. it's hard to believe the author was only 23 at the time she wrote it. at that point, she was 4 years into recovery, and by age 19 had struggled with full-blown anorexia and bulimia, substance abuse, extreme promiscuity, had been hospitalized and institutionalized multiple times, and weighed as little as 52 pounds. sheesh. like i said, intense. she apparently also wrote another memoir about her bipolar disorder, as she was diagnosed with that once the eating disorder stuff subsided. i have it on hold at the library; i feel so voyeuristic. (in the commonly used sense, not in the traditional sexual sense - ick.)

also, i remember today why i do not typically wear dress pants. well, okay, a) because i don't have to. but b) because the ones i own come up way too high on me and dig into my stomach. not a comfy feeling. could be remedied by purchasing low-mid rise dress pants ... or by wearing my comfy jeans to work and yoga/pajama pants at home. stacy and clinton on what not to wear always say that they hate hearing people use the word "comfort" in relation to deciding what to wear, and i get that, really i do, but it's kind of a major player in my wardrobe choices. i try to look decent in my comfort, though - no flannel pants with cartoon characters here.

omega

i found this article on omega-3s vs omega-6s, today, and i thought it was super interesting. basically, the premise is that omega-3s are fats that animals tend to consume in the spring that lead to high energy, whereas omega-6s are fats that animals consume in the fall that aid in hibernation. the modern diet is far richer in omega-6s than it is in omega-3s, thus our bodies are storing more fat and slowing down which is causing our obesity epidemic. he even links the food that animals are fed to the problem - cows used to graze on grass, which is high in omega-3s, thus they produced milk, cheese, and meat that's high in omega-3; now they're fed grains, which are higher in omega-6s, so our consumables are high in omega-6. fascinating, no?

tmi

what is up with the american need to have everything in our lives out in the open? i'm on facebook and i blog, clearly, but that doesn't mean i post every detail of our lives - there are certain things i'll talk about with friends and family that will never be published on ye olde www.

mackenzie phillips, on the other hand ... wow. things i have learned about her this morning include: her dad got her into drugs, she had sex with mick jagger at a currently undisclosed age, and she was raped by her father the night before her first wedding, resulting in her having an affair with him for 10 years. EWWWWW. eew eew eew. why did i need to know any of those things, mackenzie phillips? you go to therapy to discuss these things, not try to re-launch your career by writing it all down in a book that will be a bestseller simply because it's too sensational not to. other than shifting some of the blame for her drug problems off of herself and onto her now dead father, i don't think the world knowing the sordid details of your severely screwed up life will solve anything.

plot generator

i love online generators. i was just reading a review of dan brown's latest book on the slate online, and at the bottom there was a link to an interactive dan brown plot generator. i was intrigued, and i think it's hilarious. you can choose a city and a group - say, chicago and the boy scouts of america, and you get a plot line about an ancient and secret branch of the boy scouts and their plot against their mortal enemy, the vatican, involving lake michigan, the art institute, the clothier of the swiss guard, and davy crockett. it's pretty fabulous.

i think dan brown writes really good fun fiction, but as i was describing angels and demons to scott and started with, "so this researcher in switzerland has discovered antimatter and someone steals it to destroy the vatican," he just started laughing.

i also saw a generator last week for a kanye apology (in light of him stealing the mic from taylor swift during her acceptance speech at the vma's and saying that beyonce's video was way better than taylor's, then giving a really half-aced apology), but it wasn't quite as well constructed, so i won't bother with a link to that. the concept made me laugh, though.

blowin' in the wind

we took flitty back to the airport last night, and it's once again officially just us at home. that may not sound all that unusual, except that scott's parents got into town two weeks ago yesterday, and with the exception of two nights, we've either been with his family at home or elsewhere, or sharing a hotel room with a friend ever since then. i almost don't know what to do with myself ... but then i formulated this lovely plan for this evening: 1) workout, 2) laundry, 3) tivo. doesn't it sound nice? three things that i haven't really gotten to do in the last two weeks - and since shows like glee and biggest loser have now started and are taking up valuable room on my tivo's harddrive, i feel it's only right.

also, last night we were discussing patrick swayze's death, and goo pondered who the other two celebrity deaths would be, since as we all know, celebrities die in threes. this morning, npr informed me that henry gibson and mary of peter, paul and mary are the other two. (p.s., i am a strong proponent of the oxford comma, and it kind of bugs me that peter, paul and mary don't use it in their name.)

my monthly personal responsibility rant

msn had a story this morning about a woman who has decided to spark a revolution against credit card companies - by not paying her bill. i get that she's now unemployed and frustrated that her credit card company has apparently raised her interest rate to 30% despite her working with them to try to lower the rate, and her always paying the minimum payment on time ... but here's the thing:

1. you can't NOT pay your bill. you just can't. when you get a credit card, you sign an agreement that for the privilege of using the cc company's money to buy things that you cannot currently afford, that you will pay them back in a timely manner at the rate that they set. emphasis on "the rate that they set" - not the rate that you think is fair.
2. one of the commenters at the bottom of the article said, "the bank has made its profit on her card use many times over," as a justification for why she should not have to continue to pay. right, because she agreed to let them profit off of her card use! that is the point of credit card companies offering the services they do - visa is not a non-profit company.
3. 30% is an absurd rate, and so is the 12.99% she was paying before, for that matter, which leads me to believe that a) she must be maxing out her card regularly, b) she's not in fact paying on time every month, c) she is an incredibly unwise person for finding such a high rate card, or d) she has a history of credit problems. yes, scott and i have excellent credit, but we were approved for an 8% card in the last six months or so. if you're frustrated with your card company for raising your rates, check out the competition - there are PLENTY of other lenders out there.

one of the other commenters (stlmo), left this note, which i think summarizes my thoughts nicely: "Ann Minch knowingly ran up her credit card bill, spent years making only minimum payments, then decides to protest the interest rate by NOT PAYING AT ALL. And this makes her a hero? I don't think so. If she really wants to protest the ungodly profit, then she should STOP LIVING ON CREDIT CARDS and PAY THE DEBT. PERIOD. If she can't, then she needs to see a debt counselor or see a lawyer about bankruptcy. And if she won't do that, then she's no better than the credit card companies she's protesting."

in her defense, i do think 30% is completely outrageous and unacceptable, particularly as she is unemployed and thus in financial hardship. credit card companies should have policies in place to work with the people they are lending to - i'm sure many card users are currently in states of financial hardship, but a 30% interest rate is not going to help them. personal finance classes will. and, you know, learning to live within their means. if your means don't provide much room for living, i'm pretty sure i pay taxes for a reason and that there are programs in place to help you until you can provide for yourself.