O' the day - 6.28.07

An unexpected bonus to parenting, and one I'm really loving, has arisen in the past few years -- my kids are developing their taste in music. I grew up with one parent heavily ensconced in folk and one with little interest, but realized early on that music was one of the defining points of my life. My tastes have become a bit more discriminating over the years, but have developed into an openness for music as a whole -- I'll listen to folk as easily as country and bluegrass and reggae and classical and funk and disco and rock. Maybe it's that my criteria for good music has changed -- good music can be found in any genre, irrespective of roots. And this is what I have always taught my children, to have an open mind and ear and truly listen to the bones of the music before deciding blindly that a certain band or type of music isn't for them. I'm thrilled to hear the kids loving CCR and the Byrds as well as Travis and the Stills, and I only hope my influence continues to push their range farther and farther.

O' the day - 6.27.07

Having had a background in newspaper journalism, I'm a bit confused by the recent outcry about Rupert Murdoch and his pending purchase of Dow Jones, the company that owns the Wall Street Journal. The main concern on NPR this morning was that the WSJ needed to continue to be independently owned, because only then could the editorial leanings of the paper stand firmly in the middle. Unfortunately for NPR, they didn't bother reporting that there is no such thing as a truly non-political newspaper. Every journalist, every editor, and every owner has preconceived ideas that will come across in their writing, no matter how carefully they try to keep from doing so. This is human nature; to report on a story with absolutely no spin is beyond the best of us. The issue, then, seems that he might turn the liberal bent of the paper to a conservative tone, much in common with his Fox news channel, etc. At times I wish NPR would simply say so, rather than trying to create hue and cry where there should be other, more pressing concerns.

O' the day - 6.25.07

The so-called debate about immigration, and all its attendant liberal moaning, has really made me angry (no surprise there). Yet another story on NPR this morning about how the U.S. cracking down on undocumented workers is causing "undue" hardship on families back in Mexico has shown me how once again, no stone will be left unturned to show how the current regime is a government of the rich over the downtrodden, unlucky masses (whether American or not). An interview was held with one woman in Mexico who was lamenting the fact that since the U.S. companies were being punished for hiring illegals, the companies weren't "giving" her husband work, and thus her family was suffering. Her husband hasn't yet been caught in the last 20 years that he's been traveling for illegal work; should that mean I should feel sorry for him when he is? Somehow the mentality has become "how dare you punish me for breaking the law!", and I'm not sure where in history we reached that point.

O' the day - 6.20.07

I woke up this morning from a dream, for the first time in weeks. While the sleeping pills I've been taking certainly promote sleep, they most definitely do not promote dreaming, and thus I've led a very un-colorful somnolent life lately. Funny thing about dreaming, though -- I've always been a heavy dreamer (due to light sleeping, no doubt), and the recent lack of the subconscious otherworld has really affected me, especially in the mornings. To wake with no memory of having lived another life, seen through another's eyes, or having touched unreality is beyond bizarre; it borders on the nightmarish. Dreams have always been a way of keeping in touch with my inner self, the depths from which I draw inspiration and ideas, and the lack of dreams lately has left me feeling a bit out of myself. Here's to dreaming and lack of medication.

O' the day - 6.19.07

Maybe I'm just cynical and too partisan, but does anything seem to have really changed since the Democrats took control of both the Senate and the House? The entire campaign season was about how things would be different, more open and more honest, if we'd only elect the Democrats; now there are 32,000 items of pork on the table to be passed and only a handful of Congressmen will own up to the projects. Somehow that doesn't seem open and honest; rather, it seems a continuation of the same old story we've seen for years -- "I have the power so I'll make the decisions." No openness, no honesty, and no information for those of us at home who are simply being represented.

O' the day - 6.15.07

I feel pretty out of it today -- may be the legacy of so many Lortab in my system the last week; could be that I'm just out of routine and feeling lazy and sleepy. I hate the aftermath of surgeries -- not just the pain, which you come to expect (but has been worse than imagined this time around), but the logy feeling and the constant inquiries about the state of one's health and the inability to do exactly what it is one wants to do. Maybe it's the control freak side of myself, but it frustrates me greatly to be confined to certain movements and activities; although I know it's for the better in the long run, in the short run it certainly sucks.

O' the day - 6.6.07

The fear of pain is very bad; the anticipation of pain is worse. Not that I won't have pain meds post-surgery, but one never knows the amount of pain that can come after a certain event until after that certain event happens. For instance, I know the level of pain post-knee surgery; will that compare equally with shoulder surgery? Will it be less, or more? Talking to others that have gone through similar surgeries also doesn't help a tremendous amount; my pain threshold is so much higher than most other's that I'm not sure how to relate their levels to mine. Even with a high threshold, though, I still fear the anticipation -- the thoughts of what's to come that make one's stomach roil and muscles knot and head pound.

Wish me luck, y'all.

O' the day - 6.4.07

Absolutely infuriated at a story I heard this morning -- there's a suit against a soldier who feels it's his right to protest at anti-war meetings, while wearing his combat fatigues. He's done a year or so tour in Iraq, and is on a ready-reserve program; while not actively on duty, he's subject to being called up at any time. The military is looking to cancel his health benefits (paid for 100% by taxpayer money) and force him to repay his GI Bill grants (again, paid for 100% by taxpayer money) -- and he has the nerve to say that it's his right to protest. Yes, free speech extends even to the military, but not while wearing a uniform that I bought and paid for. Far as I remember, you don't pay to serve, so that uniform isn't even one that belongs to him. Patriotism (or lack of it) aside, this represents the larger issue of wanting something for nothing; protest the war all you'd like, but don't expect to have your schooling paid for by the same entities that run the war. Go AWOL -- but don't expect your health insurance to be covered. You can't have it both ways; either lick the hand that feeds you, or find another hand.