thinking about gifts and such . . .

Amazon and similar sites (are there similar sites?) are a godsend when choosing gifts for great grandchildren but there is something so impersonal about the way we cruise along not able to keep up with the "perfect" gift for a niece, grandchild, etc. But then, was there ever a perfect gift? I don't remember getting such a thing . . . I have appreciated many of the thoughtful gifts that I have received, but (and this may be almost universal for folks over 12) the giving is more fun than the receiving. UNTIL . . . until suddenly we're inundated with "buy this" or "No! buy this" and our children (grandchildren) are exposed without our references . . . Christmas (not the religious aspects) is not living up to my expectations . . .

But, finally, it's what the family pulls together each year that makes the difference, that sets the tone for the next year, the next decade . . . I remember the Christmas mornings of my childhood (some of them) and mostly they are positive memories - mostly. Our responsibility as parents and grandparents may be to prepare out family get-to-gathers in such a way, that it can be a positive memory for our children and grandchildren.

let's drug test congress . . . not the unemployed!

Michael Ettinger has it exactly correct when he says that it is congress that needs to be tested for drugs.

The Republican leadership in the House of Representatives Thursday proposed allowing states to require drug tests for anyone receiving unemployment benefits.
I’m not sure why they think that those who have had the misfortune of losing their jobs in these difficult economic times particularly need to be tested for the use of illegal substances. But if they’re gung ho for drug testing, it seems like we ought to be sharing the blood-drawing joy. I can think of plenty of places where it would be much more useful.

It seems far more important to the nation that members of the House of Representatives be free of the influence of reality-altering substances than unemployed people. After all, when members of Congress make decisions under the influence of hallucinogens, it affects the entire country. Your average unemployed person? Not so much. And truthfully, which group of Americans demonstrates more evidence of drug-induced behavior? If you have any doubts, take a look at the House Republicans’ budget proposals.

time to get tough . . .

Jonathan Bernstein in The New Republic thinks it is time to get tough . . . He has a suggestion for President Obama . . .

Throughout 1903, the Senate minority was blocking several nominations put forth by the White House. President Roosevelt should have been able to wait for that Congressional session to adjourn and make his recess appointments before the next session was scheduled to begin, by Constitutional mandate, on December 7 of that year. However, House Speaker Joe Cannon refused to go along, keeping the House in session throughout the break.

In response, the Senate leadership concocted a plan. On the big day of December 7, the Senate convened, adjourned, and immediately began an entirely new session. As The New York Times report had it the next day:

The conclusion has been reached that between the time of the falling of President pro tempore Frye’s gavel signifying the conclusion of the extraordinary session and the calling to order of the Senate in the regular session of Congress, an appreciable lapse of time occurred. In this time the appointments technically were made. … There was but one fall of the gavel, but one stroke, and but one sound.

And in that instant, Roosevelt made 168 military promotions that normally would have to have been approved by the Senate, as well as “about 25 civilian appointees.”

Was it legal? No one knows with certainty, as it wasn’t adjudicated in the courts.

Twas the night . . .

A fun poetic parody posted at Cheers and Jeers on Daily Kos:

Twas the night before Wednesday, and all through the camp
Occupiers were settled under the glow of street lamps
Their banners were hung from their tent poles with care
Peaceable assembly is why they were there
Some slept quietly, some sawed logs,
A few were awake updating their blogs
They donned winter coats and warm winter hats
They slept on bubble wrap and flimsy foam mats

When out on the street there arose a great din
Like a band of thugs drunk on vodka and gin
The riot cops' knives were out in a flash,
Tearing open the tents, with a hack and a slash

The moon up above watched the police army grow
Illuminating the mayhem in the park down below.
When what to our bleary eyes should appear,
But Lieutenant John Pike, parachuting down in full riot gear

A goon with a goatee all scruffy and thick
We knew in a moment he must be St. Prick
More rapid than eagles the officers came,
Pike whistled, and shouted, and then he proclaimed:

Click here to read it all!

Not all Iowa Republicans are pre-neanderthal . . .?

There is a very interesting (even surprising!) post on Daily Kos (The Jed Report) about the GOP view of undocumented aliens who have been in U.S. for 25 years who "have paid taxes and not broken the law" during those years.

There's obviously a lot more to immigration policy than the issue that Romney and Gingrich battled over, and it's not like Gingrich has the world's greatest position on it. (For example, he opposes a path to citizenship for long-term immigrants who came here illegally.)

But it's important to recognize that even among Republicans, Mitt Romney's decision to side with the neanderthal extreme backfired. As you'll see later today when we release national results on the same question, Republicans across the nation are even more strongly opposed to Romney's stance than they were in Iowa. That's actually good news for America: unlike Mitt Romney, most Republicans think immigrants should be treated like human beings.

no matter the reality . . .

Here is a story worth reading about how the scientific method works - some of the people not so well, but the result gives us hope but also a warning about how some of us want what we want no matter the reality . . .

In 2006, scientists announced a provocative finding: a retrovirus called XMRV, closely related to a known virus from mice, was associated with cases of prostate cancer. But other labs, using different sets of patients, found no evidence of a viral infection. Before the controversy could be sorted out, another research group published a 2009 paper containing an even more intriguing claim. XMRV, it said, was associated with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), a disorder that some had claimed was purely psychosomatic.

Reaction came quickly. The CFS community, viewing a viral cause as a validation of their malady, embraced the finding. One author of the XMRV/CFS paper, Judy Mikovits, landed a position as research director of a private foundation dedicated to CFS. A company associated with the foundation started offering tests for infections.

...

It's no surprise that patients who frequently had their disorder treated with dismissiveness would respond positively to indications that it had a concrete, biological cause. But demonizing scientists who don't support something that appeals to you is never going to end well, especially when all indications are that the scientists are being careful and thorough. Unfortunately, we're now seeing more of this sort of behavior in areas as diverse as climate change, vaccine safety, and animal research.

protecting the one-percenters . . .

The Baltimore Sun talks economic pig-heaven.

Much of the GOP counter-proposal seems to have been fashioned for political effect — including a prohibition on millionaires and billionaires receiving food stamps (now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program). We don't know what budget documents Republicans have been t studying, but when last we looked, Warren Buffett's SNAP card wasn't one of the bigger drivers of the nation's deficit.

To be charitable, it's good that Republicans have at least shown some interest in extending the payroll tax break. It's the kind of policy that they've endorsed in the past, but Mr. Obama's interest in it (as part of his jobs bill) initially cooled theirs.

Still, what's maddening about their counter-proposal is not simply that Republicans would hold the well-being of millionaires over all others but that they would do so under the guise that they are looking out for "job creators," as if the rich were chiefly responsible for growing the economy.

Here's a news flash: The wealthy don't drive the economy. Job creation depends on both investment and consumption. The payroll tax can stimulate both sides of that equation, but keeping down taxes for the rich has little bearing on either. If it did, the country would be in economic pig-heaven, as effective tax rates on the highest earners among us haven't been lower in 30 years.

spot on . . .

Chuck Raasch on permanent campaigning.

The Republicans are paying the costs of the permanent campaign. President Barack Obama is reaping its benefits.

But ultimately, the permanent campaign hurts everyone by valuing ambition over governing competency, by exposing governance to the corrosive effects of constantly negative messaging and by giving leaders excuses for postponing big decisions. The length of our campaigns for president should cause Americans to again ask if the process produces the best nominees and presidents.

2011 should tell us that the answer is no.

community gardening . . .

Many of my favorite stories end up in a garden. This story from The Arizona Republic of a homeless man who found a backpack containing $3,300 and searched for the owner is no exception.

Tally says that he now has his dream career.

"I'm blessed," he said, adding that he hopes to return to school to further his horticulture studies.

He is in the garden almost every day planting, digging and cultivating food that is distributed to community volunteers and to the food pantry.

"I just don't want anybody to have to take something out of the garbage to eat," Tally said, explaining why he spends so much time in the garden.

Recently, he started managing an internship program that allows people who are homeless to volunteer in the garden.



Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/community/tempe/articles/2011/11/25/20111125tempe-man-good-deed-lifetime-making.html#ixzz1fCXNC5D3

testing the media waters . . .

I agree with Arianna Huffington.

Mitt Romney's brazenly dishonest ad is far from the garden-variety truth stretching we're used to in political campaigns. It is so breathtakingly cynical it should cause us to question whether a candidate that would put it forth is fit for any public office -- let alone the presidency. Along with being deceitful, the ad is also a challenge to the media. It's like when a toddler looks right at you and slowly and deliberately spills a glass of milk. The child wants to see the reaction. It's a test of boundaries. If there's no reaction, then the message is that it's okay. That Mitt Romney hasn't been forced to apologize for this ad, that he hasn't been forced to fire the team responsible for it, isn't just a failure of Romney's -- it's a failure of our media culture.