Throwing Away My Vote

I've spent this election cycle  feeling far more bewildered than I have during any election in my entire life.  And for the most part I've avoided talking about it and have especially avoided blogging about it.

Don't worry, this blog isn't going to suddenly be all about politics. This Political Science Major was sick of the subect by the time she graduated, became sicker of it still working at a political organization that lobbied for nuclear disarmament, and wouldn't mind never thinking of it again after this particularly odious election season.

Or now... To be totally honest, what I'd really like is to stop thinking about it Right Now... But since that isn't going to happen... Onward...

For those who don't know me, my political leanings have swung from one end of the political spectrum to the other over the years (I'm not kidding at all.. I considered myself a Communist for at least a solid year), although those silly little tests that pop up from time to time on Facebook tell me that I've landed (at the moment) somewhere solidly in the middle.  

Although that's not really true at all.  I find myself on the far right on some issues, while leaning to the left on others. I agree with my very liberal friends on some issues and with my very conservative friends on others.  

I find that my beliefs in general line up with what the Church teaches and I try not to confuse my reluctant political affiliation with my religious beliefs.

And I find the idea of either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump as president to be equally terrifying.  

You see, I do feel deep down that a vote for Hillary would be in violation of my conscience.  But I know that a vote for Trump would also involve dragging my conscience through the mud.

Yes, I've heard the arguments from my conservative friends, most of who are not particularly happy with the idea of Trump as a candidate, but who solidly believe that Hillary would be so much worse.  But I just can't talk myself into believing it.  

Not when his own words constantly expose his thoughts to the world.

I don't think that Hillary would be better.  I won't be voting for her either.  

I just know that this time I'm not going to hold my nose when I vote.  

I've been repeatedly told that I'm just listening to propaganda that's causing me to not join in the Trump fandom, but that simply isn't true.  The things that turn my stomach are his own word.  I could list all the ways that he's made it impossible for me to cast a vote for him, but Bonnie has already done a wonderful job of that here.     

And that brings me to the one phrase that I've heard bandied about all too frequently this primary season, that I really dislike.  It's the one thing I've heard repeated that makes me wince and shake my head:

"If you don't vote for one of the main candidates you're throwing away your vote."

I'm sorry.

No.  

No.

Just no.  

I think that the vast majority of people who say this, say it because they've heard it over and over again and don't realize that they sort of sound like school yard bullies trying to force people to go against their consciences, to cast a vote for someone they actively dislike and disagree with.  

No.  I will not be throwing away my vote.  I'll be voting for the person who I believe will be the best candidate for president, even if the majority of Americans don't agree with me.  

In the meantime I'll be hoping that someone doesn't get enough delegates and that we end up with a brokered convention and a candidate that I can at least stomach casting a vote for.

I'll do it while harboring a small bit of hope that maybe large numbers of people will be so disenchanted with the choices that we're being given that they'll use their votes to cry out for a better candidate.  

And I'll use my vote to tell the Republican Party that they can't ride along on the merits of past decades as the "party of life" while putting forth candidates who have been vocally for abortion, who may attempt to hit a few prolife talking points, while flipping back and forth on the issue on any given day of the week (example: Abortion is evil!  Planned Parenthood is good!  There should be criminal charges for those who've had abortions!  I won't change any laws on abortion as President!).  

I'll cast my vote and be able to sleep soundly knowing that I have't compromised myself and my beliefs by voting for the lesser of two evils.  

---------

During the Michigan primary Sadie and I spent the day talking about the political process in our country.  

"Who are you going to vote for?" she kept asking me.  I told her that I wasn't sure.  There was this guy, the guy that I actually agreed with, that I thought would be a better president.  And then there was another guy, who I don't think would be a great president, and who I disagree with quite a bit, but who I think would be way, way better than the guy that would be the worst option our party could pick.

I finally explained my predicament and she looked at me like I'd lost my mind.  How was I even thinking of voting for someone who I didn't think would do the best job?  Her little idealistic seven year old mind was obviously distressed.  She gave me a look that basically said "Mom, you know the answer to this question" and I realized that I did.  

And in that moment it became perfectly clear who I should vote for.  The person who I thought was best suited for the job.  I walked into the ballot box and checked off his name, knowing that he was a long shot, but hoping that maybe others would feel the same.  

---------

I'm not going to vote for the candidate that might not be as bad as the other candidate because I'm afraid.  

I'm not going to vote for one evil in an attempt to stop another.  

I'm going to vote for the person that I believe is the best for the job.  And I'm going to pray that others do that same.  I'll pray that others don't vote out of fear or anger, but come from a place of love for our country and for the other people who live alongside us in it.  

Maybe, just maybe, if enough people do that, we'll be able to begin to move away from a system where so many people feel that voting for the lesser of two sub par candidates is the best that we can expect on any given election year.  

Down the Rabbit Hole...

Oh yes... this deserved a Sadie Frown...

I find myself increasingly baffled by my friends who still think that Barack Obama is a good president and who post little "isn't he awesome" memes on facebook, that basically praise him for standing up to those big mean conservatives on fiscal issues.  I love you guys, but as these most recent months slip by since the reelection I find myself increasingly confused that anyone could be excited about the unrelenting one way encroachment on basic liberties that we've seen, week after week.  

Now let me say that while my political views most certainly fall on the conservative side, I'm also not the Republican parties greatest cheerleader.  I'm a Republican, but I disagree with the party line quite a bit.  But when it comes down to it, when I have to choose between one of the two parties that will be elected, the choice, for me, is easy.

In the past I've voted Republican because I choose the party that wouldn't allow an unborn child to be torn apart limb by limb in his or her mother's womb.  I don't think that that basic protection to life is trumped by any other right (and yes, I'm also against the death penalty).  

Today, however, further cements the line between these two parties when it comes to your right to take your next breath.  Because the White House believes that it can act as judge, jury and executioner and decide who lives and dies:

“When I asked the president, ‘Can you kill an American on American soil?’ it should have been an easy answer. It’s an easy question. It should have been a resounding and unequivocal, ‘No.’ The president’s response? He hasn’t killed anyone yet. We’re supposed to be comforted by that. The president says, ‘I haven’t killed anyone yet.’ He goes on to say, ‘And I have no intention of killing Americans. But I might.’ Is that enough? Are we satisfied by that? Are we so complacent with our rights that we would allow a president to say he might kill Americans? But he will judge the circumstances, he will be the sole arbiter, he will be the sole decider, he will be the executioner in chief if he sees fit. Now, some would say he would never do this. Many people give the president the — you know, they give him consideration. They say he’s a good man. I’m not arguing he’s not. What I’m arguing is that the law is there and set in place for the day when angels don’t rule government."

I strongly suggest watching more of the speech here.  It's definitely worth spending at least a few minutes on.

This should terrify us.

We have a President who believes that he is judge and jury and holds the power of life and death over each of his citizens.  He is attempting to strip away our basic right to due process.  And we're supposed to be happy that he hasn't exercised that right "yet".  

The gun control debate has raged these past months and I'll admit that I wince when I hear people say that they have a right to guns, given by this countries founders, so that they can hunt or engage in sport.  Your right to hunt or go out shooting at the range is not why our founders made sure those rights were embedded in the bedrock of this nation.  

Our founding father's carefully placed those words, those rights, in their prominent position near the start of the bill of rights.  They knew the importance of an armed populace in protecting the basic rights of the people.  George Washington said “Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth.”

There is a reason that many in this country believe that you should have a right to own an assault weapon.  It isn't based on your right to go out shooting at the range.  It's based on the right, recognized by our founding father's, to protect ourselves from tyranny.  And no, a handful of bullets in a little gun isn't going to protect that right.  That is why the second amendment was written.  

I pray that there is never a reason for the people of this country to exercise that right.  I pray that our President sees that shredding the constitution and ordering the deaths of his citizens based only on his own judgement, or on the advice of those around him, as exactly what it is: very, very wrong.

What worries me today is that he doesn't seem to see that.  He seems to think that we should be happy he hasn't exercised this supposed power, while apparently insisting that such a power exists.  I, like, many Americans, find that sort of power, held in the hands of one branch of government, and basically in the hands of one man, incredibly frightening. 

Unfortunately, as Senator Rand Paul pointed out with his Lewis Carroll quote, it feels as if we've been plunged into the Rabbit Hole into a world where the constitution is only given lip service, and the executive branch has announced that they will play the roll of the Queen of Hearts...

Are You Ready to Sign Up For the Draft?

Deep breath.  Many of us suspected that this was coming.  I wasn't sure anyone would be prancing around proclaiming that it should happen now, but I can't say that I'm really surprised either.  

I woke up this morning to read this article about people who are fighting to make sure that the women in our country have to register for the selective service.  But don't worry, they assure us.  It's not like we'll actually call them up.  It's just fair.  I mean we're the same now.  So why wouldn't you send you're girls out to register.  Since they're the same as their brothers they have the same obligation to fight and die in the name of our country.  

Now I feel compelled to start off with a little personal history.  In 2005, shortly before I met Paul, I was thinking of joining the military.  Two things held me back at the time.  The first was that I was in the middle of a 13 month hiring process with the CIA and I was waiting to see how it would play out (where I was offered a job that was ultimately rescinded around the time I got engaged).  The second thing holding me back was this:

Ah yes... that's what you think it is.... my neck tattoo... I was a stupid kid...

I don't know what the rules are now, but back in 2005 a neck tattoo disqualified me from even enlisting in the Navy, Air Force or Marine Corps.  The Army would have taken me, but I had my little heart set on the Navy and so, when I met Paul that year, I had undergone two laser tattoo removals (let me say that taking off a tattoo is more painful than putting it on...).

And that little tattoo, that mistake that I thoroughly regret and feel idiotic about (I have other tattoos but they don't make me feel as stupid because they're not on my neck... kids take it from me and never, ever, ever get a neck tattoo...) is the main reason I was around to marry my husband and start a family with him (I guess I shouldn't hate it that much, since it, in effect, made the life that I love today possible).  

So I can understand the desire to serve one's country.  I was all for the idea of women in combat.  At the same time, other types of personal experience had to make me wonder, if I was truly honest with myself, about how capable I was of keeping up with men who I could clearly see, had a natural advantage.  I was in pretty great shape back then.  I could easily swim two miles without stopping.  I could bench press quite a bit more than my own body weight.  I worked out for hours every single day.  But I was also a black belt in karate and one thing my years of training had showed me was that men with quite a bit less experience and skill often still had the upper hand when we were training, because their natural strength and speed was superior to my own, despite my hard work.  Which was frustrating.

The thing is, no matter how much certain people wish away this fact, it still stands: men and women are inherently different.  Men generally have a great advantage when it comes to innate abilities that come in handy on the battle field.  I think it's ridiculous to expect to be able to draw from a random pool of women across the country and, even with extensive training, expect them not to hinder a combat unit.

We aren't the same.  Writing laws that say that we are won't change that simple fact.

More than that I think it's incredibly stupid to take away from women who are in their prime child bearing years, during this hypothetical future situation, and put them on birth control and put them on the front lines.  That ought to do wonders for future generations.  Especially when we're already below replacement levels.  Let's further decimate the number of children we have growing up to support our retiring workers.  That sounds like an awesome idea for economic stability.

Now I'll pause so you can read some highlights from the actual article that started this rant:

"The Obama administration's recent decision to lift the ban on women in combat has opened the door for a change in the law that currently compels only men between age 18 and 25 to register for a military draft, according to legal experts and military historians.
Never before has the country drafted women into military service, and neither the administration nor Congress is in a hurry to make them register for a future call-up. But, legally, they may have no other choice..."

"...Groups that backed the end of the ban on women in combat also support including women in draft registration as a matter of basic citizenship. Women should have the same civic obligations as men, said Greg Jacob, a former Marine Corps officer and policy director for the Service Women's Action Network. "We see registration as another step forward in terms of equality and fairness," Jacob said..."

"..."You can't pick and choose when equality should apply to you," Hegar said. "Making generalized statements like, `Women are capable of being in combat' or `Women are incapable of being in combat,' are equally ignorant. People are either competent or they're not competent."..."

"...Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., has made several attempts over the past decade to reinstitute the draft on the grounds that a small fraction of U.S. citizens are bearing a disproportionate burden in fighting the nation's wars. But his bills have gone nowhere.
That hasn't stopped him from trying. Just this month, Rangel introduced another bring-back-the-draft bill that also would require women to register..."

Here we go.  Are you ready to take your girls to sign up for the selective service?  Depending on your age are you ready to sign up for yourself?  I'm certainly not.

In fact I absolutely believe that I'm innately unsuited for military service or war.

You see, I can flip through any of dozens of pictures of me standing next to my husband and it is abundantly clear that one of us would be more suited to the conditions of war:

We are of equal worth in God's eyes, but it's perfectly clear that physically we aren't the same.  And I just can't understand how anyone could think that this idea would make our military stronger.

The idea of sameness as equality has run amok.

Where My Thoughts on the Politics of the Moment Overflow: Part 2

If you don't like my politics this might be a good post to avoid.  If you scroll down past it, there are lots of cute baby pictures.  But I just need to say this, and hey... it's my blog!  I don't talk about politics a ton, but everyone once in a while I just can't help myself.

Our federal government also seems to have suddenly developed a right to come into your home and tell you whether or not its safe enough for you to live there.  At least that's a worry I have after the release of this document, which talks about the potential cost burden of unhealthy living.  Basically, from what I gather, the federal government has this new responsibility because household dangers make us sick and let's face it, with the government in charge of health care they have the right to come into our homes and make sure they're okay:

"“It is clear that unhealthy and unsafe housing has an impact on the health of millions of people in the United States, which is why we must do everything we can to ensure that individuals and families have a healthy place to call home,” said HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan. “Today’s announcement will help the federal government unify action to controlling and preventing major housing-related exposures and hazards.”" source

I'm all for people having access to safe housing.  I'm less sure that expanding federal powers is the way to do this.  I find myself worrying over how they'll tell us if our homes are safe.  Are we going to be volunteering for these evaluations?  Or are they mandatory because the document does seem to have quite a bit of "for our own good" poured into it.  And since the government coffers aren't exactly overflowing at the moment, where is the money for this huge interagency project going to come from?  

Somehow I don't think our first home after we got married
would have met government standards...
but it was home sweet home!

Oh I know, it will be the money they believe will be saved through lowered health care costs, after the fact, from the changes they've helped those of us who don't have money to pay for these changes ourselves, make.  Which, logically, would mean more government expenditures, or the requirement of people who haven't been able to make these changes themselves on their own, to find a way to come up with the money.

Of course, if we're going to make people healthy for their own good, we're probably going to have to follow New York's lead and start telling everyone what they can and can't eat.  After all food plays a major part in health too.

As you can tell, this expansion in government powers (and in what they view as their responsibility) has me worried this morning...

Where My Thoughts on the Politics of the Moment Overflow: Part 1

If you don't like my politics this might be a good post to avoid.  If you scroll down past it, there are lots of cute baby pictures.  But I just need to say this, and hey... it's my blog!

It's actually the tan and red house in the picture
that was listed for 17k...

A couple of nights ago the State of the Union Address came on.  I made it all the way until they announced: "The President of the United States, making his fifth State of the Union address..." and then flipped over to Hulu.  I couldn't take it.  After visiting over half the states this past year and talking to many people along the way, I feel like I have a pretty good idea of the actual state of our union and I wince when I hear people talk about great gains in employment and the economy's "recovery" because I have yet to actually see it in real life.  

At least in a significant way. Here and there I'm sure there are people who are doing better.  And people who are doing worse.  

The house across the street just sold for seventeen thousand dollars.  I'm standing at my kitchen window and I see houses with plywood over windows.  There's another one that have signs that say the house isn't safe for habitation.  There are at least five foreclosures if you walk a block in any direction.  

But that's not really what this post is about.  It's just the starting place for the thoughts that have been swirling around in my head.  

Over the course of the past month I've been watching a disturbing trend in our government.  So many people suggested that Obama's second term would be a massive federal government power grab, but, while I worried a huge amount about what his reelection would mean for the unborn, I worried less about any sort of power grab in other areas since of our government seems rather incapable of getting anything done these past years, or affecting any sort of real change.  At least that's how it feels sometimes.  Obviously there have been notable exceptions, like the HHS mandate, but I'm still hopeful that the courts are going to rule it an illegal law when the time for lawsuits are "ripe" as one judge said.  

This week, our attorney general said that a government isn't violating anyone's rights is they ban homeschooling altogether.  The Department of Justice's argument is this:

"There is no fundamental liberty to homeschool. So long as a government bans homeschooling broadly and equally, there is no violation of your rights. This is a view which gives some acknowledgement to the principle of equal protection but which entirely jettisons the concept of fundamental liberties."

This is in regard to a German family who sought and was granted asylum in the United States since homeschooling is illegal in Germany for all but a few (if you travel constantly you might get away with it).  Attorney General Eric Holder filed to have them shipped right back to Germany with part of their argument being that not every Christian family believes their children must be home schooled.  

This is slightly reminiscent of the whole "but not all Catholic women believe contraception is wrong" so it must be okay for Catholics to pay for it.  Apparently if not every single member of a religious group makes a choice, the choice to freely exercise what they believe is best for their spiritual growth is then invalid and not protected by our right to the free exercise of our religion.

I'm also unclear on what part of the Constitution gives the government the right to declare that banning homeschooling isn't a violation of rights.  Which part of the Constitution tells Mr. Holder that he can force me to send my children to school in a city with a 51% graduation rate (the local news last night talked about how it was so exciting that graduation rates were rising in Michigan and then gave the statistics which were downright depressing).    

So I have the right to what?  Watch half of my children not graduate high school if they fit into the average here?

I remember an anthropology course that I took back in college where we talked about the indoctrination of the young as a way to change any community.  Sure, the professor said, you would fight for what you believed in but your children?  They could be bought off like that.  I think she snapped her fingers when she said it.    

Many parents are turning to homeschooling because they want to avoid any form of political indoctrination that might occur there.  As someone who drank the kool-aid at my Catholic college and self identified as a communist while working for a non-profit in Berkeley I can honestly say that it can be very effective.  

And while I've never been one of those people who says: "If so and so gets elected we're leaving the country" I'll admit that I absolutely am thinking more about where on earth we would go if homeschooling is outlawed here.  I have lived outside the US, so I do have an idea of what that would entail... but I'm clinging to the hope that our courts would smack down any of this nonsense before it gets that far.  

Homeschooling, however, isn't the only thing on my mind of late...

To be continued... because apparently I have so much to say this morning that it won't fit into a single post.

And in Michigan... Craziness Reigns...

Back in my communist college student days one of my main interests was labor politics.  You can guess what side I would have been on in any debate.

In the past years I've been far more divided when the issue has come up.  I'm sure that in part it's because it becomes far harder to sympathize with what sometimes are absolutely exorbitant demands after enduring this recession.  When there have been conflicts of late and the media covers what the union workers have and what they want I find myself shaking my head a bit, because it tends to be over the top (or at least the stuff that makes the news does).

I'm far more torn over the issue when it comes to public sector jobs that involve education or safety, or when I see interviews with the nurses at the hospital that I recently spent so much time in talking about how important their union is because it protects people if they have to report an abuse.

So basically this is one of those rare instances where I'm in the middle on an issue... and yet... there is on aspect of the labor issue that pushes me in a certain direction (and makes me instinctively feel like siding with the governor on the recent debate in our state):

The screaming, ranting mobs really do nothing to tell me that unions are really awesome.  The fact that we need to stay clear of the capital, which is fairly close to our house, because I wouldn't feel safe over there right now, doesn't give me warm fuzzies about the unions either.  Sadie's "let's walk to the capital" (because she thinks the building is awesome) is met with an adamant "no" these days.

And then there's this video (it does have extremely coarse language in it, so be warned)... of the union guys attacking a blogger who tried to stop them from pulling down a tent filled with women and elderly people.

These guys don't seem to realize that acting like bullies, in an age of social media where there's a good chance everyone is going to see what you're doing, doesn't really win people over to your side.

A Painful Night...

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.  The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.” 
- Alexis de Tocqueville

Mae woke up last night at 3 am screaming in terror and, even awake, continued to scream and scream at the top of her lungs, even as I held her close and kissed her little forehead over and over again.  

After the election results last night, I couldn't help but kind of feel the same way.  I say "kind of" because I'm used to being disappointed in political election results, especially at the national level, and while I do feel like this election was more important than many of the others we have seen, you can only have your hope crushed so many times before it doesn't quite rebound in the same way.  Sure I still find myself hoping... I went to bed praying that Romney wouldn't concede, what with a 200,000 person lead at that point, although the electoral college already looked like a hopeless loss (and yes, I understand how it works... I understand that we're a republic and not a democracy, my $100,000+ political science degree is not a complete and utter waist...).

I was hopeful that I wouldn't be raising daughters in a country with a president whose election runs crude campaign ads and tells women to vote with their lady parts.  I was hoping for a president that didn't act as if he believed that the exercise of one's religious liberty was something that desperately needed to be scrapped off of the first amendment, like gum off the bottom of his shoe.  And most of all, I hoped that we would have a president that hadn't repeatedly promoted the slaughter of the unborn up to birth, and including making sure that any little life that was born alive could be squashed so that the mother wouldn't be "burdened" in any way with her "mistake."

Four more years.  The idea of where we will be frightens me, even with the checks and balances.  Supreme court appointments are incredibly important.  We've already seen what he can do with his executive powers.  We've seen where four years takes us when he's worried about being reelected.

In my most pessimistic moments I feel like our nation voted for the future that we deserve and we will reap what we've sown now.  And in life sometimes the most frightening outcomes are when we get exactly what we deserve (although sadly I don't think the unborn are getting what they deserve at all... just us voting age Americans who've remained silent, or voted for a few more free handouts because we don't think Romney would have been quite so quick redistributing wealth...).

If the majority of Americans feel like the last four years were a disappointment I can't imagine what they think that the next four are going to be like.

As a Catholic I can't help feel that the idea is especially frightening.  As a small business owner trying to make ends meet I feel a bit hopeless.

Now to head to the hospital to have this baby.  I can't help but think that today won't be nearly as painful as yesterday... and that even this hopefully painkiller free birth won't be as painful as what we'll be facing in the next four years on a day to day basis.

Sadly Alexis de Tocqueville's words seem especially fitting this morning...

Let us pray and pray and pray... that we may have the courage and strength to stand up for what is right and to face the persecutions that are to come...

Why I'm Not Voting: An Unhappy Confession

I'm not voting today.

Not because I don't want to or don't know who I would vote for.  No, I wouldn't have a moral dilemma when it came to pulling the lever, pressing the touch screen or filling in a little bubble with a number two pencil.

You see, I really, really, really wish I had an assigned precinct and was heading off to the polls this icy, frost covered morning.

But I'm not.

I'm actually incredibly embarrassed to even be admitting this, so bear with me.

With the husband in school he's generally gone, Monday through Thursday from early in the morning until very, very late at night.  He comes home at dinner time and helps with bedtime and then is off to study again.  I tried to figure it out last week and between studying and classes I would say he's doing school stuff a solid 14 hours a day.

I look forward to Friday all week long.  Or at least I did.  The truth is that these past weeks, with the huge amount of work he's had, Friday's and any other weekend days have been erased, so that when I say:  "I really need to go grocery shopping on Friday because the cupboards are empty"  he persistently responds with: "I told you that I have a memo due," which basically means "I might be able to pencil you in around dinner time after it's been sent off, but I can't really guarantee you'll be seeing me before midnight.").

And that leaves me imagining myself fainting while waiting in line at the grocery store, because whenever I stand still fainting is a very real possibility (hence pretty much not going anywhere along at this point).

Still, I didn't think I was being completely irresponsible as those early weeks after the move went by and I still hadn't registered.  I knew that we needed to get down the the Secretary of State's Office and I had the day at the beginning of October that we needed to be there by memorized.  We'd do it.  I still had time.

But then oh, how those Fridays' flew by.

Since I haven't been able to lift Mae for more than 10 seconds without ending up in the hospital spotting, we've been a little homebound during the week for much of the time since our move and it wasn't just limited to grocery shopping.  And to be honest, even if I could lift her I'd be intimidated about leaving the house, in my gigantic slow moving state, with my little "runner."  Once I can actually move freely again it won't be a problem, but for now?  It's not a safety risk I want to take.  So Friday's are jammed packed.  We get up and load up the car and do all the errands that have accumulated in the previous six days all at once.

As most of you know, doing errands with a 2 year old and a 4 year old can be rather slow.  The girls and I look look forward to the days as time with Daddy, but let's face it, by 2 pm everyone is a little cranky and in need of a nap.  But still I thought we'd get it done, right?

Except that somehow the weeks after we moved here kept on slipping by until there was only one Friday left.  Worse than that, there was only one day left.  

We could do this, I told myself.  It was my number one priority.  I studied the Secretary of State website the night before.  I went around the house and collected the many documents we would need to prove that we had recently moved.  I grumbled when I realized that a) we do online banking and have no banking statements that prove that we live here and that b) my name isn't on a single utility bill for our house.

Finally I had everything we needed.  I put it in an envelope.

A Sadie Frown for Mommy...

The next morning we bundled the girls into the car and set off on our adventure.  There were a few other things to do first.  We paid a bill.  We did the necessary, keep the house up and running, errands.  And then we followed the directions to the address I'd written down for the Secretary of States office.  It took us about a half hour to get there and we circled the block while I read off the number and scanned the busy down town district for a sign.  No luck.

We parked and paid for parking.  Paul got out with his paper work and agreed to find the office, while I waited in the car with the two, now grumpy, girls, having the fun contractions I'd been having for the previous two months that reminded over the course of the entire third trimester that yes indeed, I was gigantically pregnant and that The Boy could try to arrive at any time.  I watched the minutes on the clock tick by.  Where had the day gone?  The office would close in an hour and a half.  But we'd made it, right?

Half an hour later Paul returned to the car, shaking his head.  This particular Secretary of State office had been turned into a hookah bar.  He'd been directed by a waiter at the restaurant next door to head over to a nearby shopping center where another office was located.

There was more driving.  We circled the parking lot, looking for the office amid the dozens of shops.  The tension level in the car was growing.  I began to think that we should have done this separately while the girls were at home, but I'd started this whole registering to vote thing naively... in the past I've done it when we've moved, and it's never taken more than five minutes.  You fill out a paper and hand it in.  That's it.  And while I can totally understand having more checks to make sure we have actually moved here, I also completely underestimated what went in to registering in our new home state.

We were running out of time.

After stopping again to ask for directions we found it in a different shopping center, with a few other stores, and a shockingly full parking lot.  Paul walked in.  A few minutes passed.  He walked back out, along with another young man who'd just walked in and I almost cheered.  Look at how quick that was.  And then he shook his head again.

"There's a line of about two hundred people packed in there.  See this parking lot?" I glanced around, wondering if the jammed lot really was for the specialized empty looking stores around us, and realizing that it was unlikely.  He continued: "all the people from those cars are waiting in there for their turn."  My eyes returned to the clock.  An hour until the office closed.  There was no way we'd make it and we both knew it.

"Fine."  I said, feeling irresponsible and grumpy and guilty, all at the same time.

The feeling has persisted and grown in the weeks that have followed as I've read and heartily agreed with the posts I've read about how important it is to get out and vote and have felt like a big loser as I've made excuses for myself like:  "Well you did just move here and have kind of had your hands full, what being sick so much..." but still...  do I feel guilty?  Absolutely.  And irresponsible.  Yup.  Especially when I occasionally see a poll that shows Michigan as possibly undecided (I am pretty skeptical of it being anything other than "light blue" in reality... what with all the Obama lawn signs that have recently sprung up, defacing our beautiful city...).

Anyways that's confession on why I won't be voting today, and will be missing an election for the first time in my adult life.

Last night I kept hoping labor would start today, and then it would seem like I hadn't voted because I was, you know, in the hospital giving birth.  And besides, maybe watching the election coverage from my hospital bed would make the whole, being in labor thing, less painful.

Sigh.

It's not a mistake I'll be making again.  But I really, really wish that I hadn't made it during this election.

So I'll keep telling myself that either way, by tomorrow both the election and the pregnancy, will have come (or in the pregnancies case, be coming) to an end.  The induction is scheduled for 9 am.  And the race... well... if it's like last time we'll probably hear the projected winner the moment the polls close on the East Coast (as a native Californian it's always annoyed me how, with the polls open for hours longer, we're being told who's won... I can't imagine what it's like for those who live in Hawaii!).

Anyways... have a Happy Election Day!  Go out and vote!  The choice of our leader for the next four years depends on those of you who were responsible enough to actually register, so go make the most of it!

And if you're Catholic and trying to figure out who you're voting for or why this election is important... here is an awesome post.  And here's another!

On Guilt, Budgeting and Scraping By...

Do you know, I was actually hesitant to mention that we have cable here?  Really, I was.  Maybe it's I have a tiny bit of guilt, because it's a non-necessary expense, but it was also because I knew that inevitably there was likely to be a comment expressing shock at how we could possibly afford it and then I would feel guilty about spending money on a "luxury item," despite the fact that a great deal of the rest of my time is spent figuring out ways to not spend money and make things myself.

And of course, after spending an hour waiting in line with a two year old and a four year old at the comcast building, and finally getting things worked out, I returned home to just such a comment, which I'm sure was written in the nicest possible anonymous way (but then again, it can be hard for a blogger to attribute niceness to a questionable comment when it's anonymous... I do tend to give posters who leave a name more of the benefit of the doubt when it comes to that sort of thing), but that offered food for the thought for the rest of the day, ultimately culminating in this post as an explanation of sorts.  Forgive me if the explanation is somewhat jumbled.  

Tone is hard to decipher online in a comment box, and there's certainly a good chance that aforementioned anonymous commenter doesn't fall into the category that I'm about to describe, but the comment did bring to mind a trend that I've seen more and more of late, that I find... disheartening.  Again, yesterdays comment didn't directly embody this sentiment, but it got me thinking about it and in that way inspired this morning's post.

You see, in comment boxes around the web, articles, and facebook status updates, I see a tendency to rant about the choices that we see other people making as we go about our daily lives.  The comments I'm thinking of usually involve a certain measure of self righteousness, that make us feel good about our own choices, while expressing disgust over what someone else is spending their money on.  "Can you believe that that obviously poor family with little kids was wasting their money eating fast food?  Don't they know that they can buy nutritionally rich items at a grocery store for much less and make much healthier meals, that will last much longer, for the same price?"  Or "Today I saw a poor family with a shopping cart full of junk!" which seems to be a frequent point of commiseration I see in comments on political articles.

I understand that many of us are frustrated about what's going on politically in our country right now.  We're frustrated because there are people who take advantage of the system.  We're frustrated because the system is broken and no one seems to know how to fix it and because "make it bigger" doesn't seem like an awesome fix for repairing deep underlying flaws and that the problems will likely be magnified if we handle them by throwing money at them and hoping they go away.  I get that.  I really do.

Yet, at the same time, my soul feels sick when I see the lack of charity which seems to be the go-to emotion when observing our fellow man these days.  It's almost like we go out looking for the worst in the people around us, hoping they'll confirm our outrage at a system that is far from perfect and justify the anger that we feel with the politicians who will likely amplify the problem.  

So worry about what's going on in our country.  Pray.  Speak out.  Rally.  Vote.  Offer your fellow man a hand up and show him that "charity" doesn't have to come from the government.  And the next time you see someone who's making a spending decision that you think is unwise, pause, say a little prayer for them and for yourself, and try not to rush to a conclusion that might be true, but just as well, may not be.  Maybe that mom taking her kids out to fast food slaves over a hot stove all month and now they're going out for a treat.

The other half of my reaction to yesterday's comment, was an inspiration to start writing more again on frugal living and what I do around here to scrimp and save.  I used to write about it quite a bit more when I regularly posted my "living on a little" series, but the last year or so has been so hectic that all of my formerly "regularly scheduled posts" have disappeared.  I think at least trying to pick up where I left off would be helpful... although I'm not sure how consistent any regular post will be at the moment since things are going to be a little bit crazy around here in the coming months.  

And to answer the question of "how can you afford a luxury item like cable..."  Here goes... because for some reason, I do feel compelled to justify the expense and explain how it came about:

I scrimp and save and clip coupons and spend hours online looking at sales so that, when I go to the store, I can knock a $600 bill down to $20 (although our stockpile was so big when we left California that I was able to take a year off of couponing and even after giving away 3/4 of my stash to charity and yet we were able to live of the remnants until now.. and so two weeks ago I began buying papers again).  

I make much of what we need: knitting, crocheting and sewing whenever my hands aren't busy cooking and cleaning and wiping little faces.  The girls both need new sweaters and long sleeved shirts and I'm scavenging material from old sweaters that I haven't fit into in years to make them, rather than paying $17 for the ones on sale at the local store.  And when it was time to buy baby boy clothes?  I went to Once Upon a Child during one of their super sales and bought an entire baby boy wardrobe for $80 (which filled a dresser with outfits that were 0-9 months).  

I've learned to use many, many different kinds of beans in unusual ways so that my family doesn't even realize that they aren't eating meat unless it's pointed out (the right seasonings can go a long way!).   And I cook gigantic batches of food (often bulking said food up by adding beans to it) to save money.  I grate and mix and blend and make our own cleaning supplies.  I make nearly all the gifts we give the girls.  And over the course of our marriage I've grown hundreds of vegetable plants so that we were giving away vegetables by the bag full, even when we were scrimping and saving to get by, because we couldn't keep up with our gardens bounty (and thankfully, with a yard again, I'll be able to kick start growing our own food after winter again).  

I run three stores and stay up late working on them Every.  Single.  Night.  I can literally count the days I've "taken off" from "work" in the past five months on one hand, although this pregnancy does mean I'm working around 30-40 hours a week instead of 50-60 (my body just won't buy that I don't need sleep these days).  And, yes, I look around the house at night and wonder if I'll ever catch up and make it the way I'd like it to be from the picture that I've somehow come up with in my head (usually one room matches... and I give the others up as a loss until the next day, when said clean room is messy and another room gets to be clean...).

I guess you could say that I do more than some to get by, but far less than others.  I certainly see ways that I could cut back... and struggle with feeling guilty about not mustering the energy to do more or with having the self control to say "no" more often when I buy something that is a treat of some kind.  

But the thing is, when I knew that my husband, who generally asks for nothing for himself, really, really wanted cable so that he could see the local games and the Red Sox and Patriots games that he'd be missing without it I thought... yeah... you know what... I'll make a few more snoods each month.  I mean, the guy leaves in the morning, comes home for dinner and then studies until midnight, pretty much every single night.  Maybe it would be nice if he could take two hours off to watch a game on Saturday... And hey, it will help distract me when I'm tired and sore and everyone is in bed or studying and I still have four more hours of work to do... And so I suggested that it was his birthday present, since much of the time we don't do presents for the adults in our little family.  I'll admit it...  splurged on something entirely unnecessary. 

And yes... I still felt guilty about buying it, which was probably why yesterday's comment did bother me and why I wrote this post today... because it is "a luxury" that we could do without.  But sometimes, when you spend the rest of the time getting by, one little unnecessary "luxury" can really mean a lot.

Dear Mr. Romney

I just had to get this post out of my system... afterwards I will go back to unhappily watching politics as it is in America, unfold, and supporting the Republican candidate.  But as I began to see agreement with the sentiment that 47% of Americans are just lazy slobs, I had to put my two cents out there:

Oh Mr. Romney,

Perhaps I should preface these rambling thoughts by saying that I’m voting for you.  There’s very little on earth, short of you announcing that you’d sign the Freedom of Choice Act and referring to babies as “born fetuses” that would change that fact at this point of time. 

But could you perhaps ease up on the statements that make me feel like I’ll be holding my nose as I waddle into the voting booth (elections are within a week of my due date)?

I really wanted to not be offended when I heard that a shocking secretly recorded video had been released.  After all, we’re seen the press sound byte speeches to death, twisting what was actually said into something unrecognizable after a few minutes of editing.  The local news, however, announced late last night that they would be showing the video as a whole, and so I settled in, eyes tired after a long day of being a wife, a mom and a small business owner. 

And was I offended? 

Despite my best efforts to give the man that I hope will be our next President the benefit of the doubt, I couldn’t help but liking him significantly less than I did at the beginning of the speech.  You see, Romney began to win me over in Tampa.  I actually stopped hating the idea of voting for him for a couple of weeks.  I'm back to be being less than enthusiastic about my options.  

And so yes, I guess you could say that I was offended by the content of the secretly recorded video.

I couldn’t help but feel that Mr. Romney didn’t quite understand quite a few of his supporters, in that unfortunate moment, and was insulting them directly.

Here’s my problem Mr. Romney:  My family has been part of the 47% who don’t pay taxes for quite some time now.  We make about a third of what we made in 2008. 

I’ll freely admit that I would love to make enough to give something back to our country.  I really would.  I’ve worked my hands raw for the last years trying to do just that.  I stay up late at night, after everyone is asleep, doing my level best.  I’ve been seriously stressed out these last months because in this third trimester of pregnancy I find myself needing slightly more sleep to function, and so I can’t stay up until 2 am with my back killing me, pinning and cutting and sewing so that I have new items to add to my shop every single day, knowing that I’m going to have to be up with the little ones in a few hours and need to be ready for another long, energetic day. 

My husband applied for some forty jobs before he found part time work in our old county, where actual unemployment always seems to be lingering around 20%.  His employers were careful to cut him back from 35 hours a week to 16 hours a week whenever he got close to qualifying for benefits.  Still, we shuffled through, month to month on around $10,000 a year and didn’t think of ourselves as “victims.”  After all, we could see that we were much better off than a lot of people and felt kind of lucky for our lot in life.  I clipped coupons and scanned sales and opened three online shops where I sold the crafts I made to help make ends meet, although an emergency like a car in need of repair was a near insurmountable obstacle.

We knew we needed to make a change and that my BA in Politics and his BA in History weren’t hot commodities in the job market anywhere on earth.  So we moved across the country so that he could begin law school, praying that at the end of the three years, there would be job opportunities in the field that genuinely interests him.   

I knew that now that he was in school or studying pretty much all day every day I would need to work harder and so I did, although 10 trips to the hospital last year after doctors flubbed my diagnosis certainly made even moderate success more difficult. 

Still ,we’ve kept on pushing on, because that’s what life requires…  and two nights ago I was even thinking about heading on over to your website and donating a small amount to your campaign.  We couldn't give much but I wanted to show our families support by giving what we could to show that we believe in you.  

You see, there are people out there who are part of the 47% who don’t pay taxes (despite filing every year, like we do), who do take responsibility for their lives.  Recently we’ve moved to Michigan and I would say that there are quite a few people who really just want to get back to work, rather than playing the part of “victim” as your speech stated.  These people aren’t paying taxes because they hardly make enough to put food on their tables… and they certainly aren’t the lazy slackers that you seemed to be referring to in your speech. 

Hard working people around the country support you.  Of course, they weren’t the people you were speaking to at your $50,000 a plate fundraiser… but I think you can manage at least basic respect even when you’re behind closed doors…. Or maybe you can pretend to… so that it’s a little less painful for those of us who refuse to settle for the alternative, to vote for you. 

Your opponent has fumbled the job he’s been given, but even if he hadn't I would not be able to vote for a man who has such a fundamentally different view of the value of human life.  He’s made it impossible for many of us to vote for him.  In the wake of his first four years, many have turned to you for leadership.  So lead us, without insulting us or assuming that being unable to rise above the poverty level in this economy is some sort of character flaw that we’re joyfully embracing. 

Stick to the values that draw so many hearts and minds to your party and leave the insulting condescension for those who believe that we really do need a nanny state to help us make it through the years, both good and bad.  Tell us what you believe that we are capable of, and not that you don’t think that we’re even willing to try.  

And please remember that even behind closed doors there's a chance that what you're saying will be heard by the world at large.  This is an ugly campaign and there are people who are determined to twist whatever you say and do.  Don't hand them ammo on a silver, $50,000 a plate, platter.

Edited to add:  This is the quote that I found so troubling.  The entire video is actually quite long.  This was the intro to the part that I found so troubling, because it isn't clear, at the start of this tirade, that he's only speaking about Obama supporters:  "And I mean the president starts of with 48, 49... he starts off with a huge number. These are people who pay no income tax. Forty seven percent of Americans pay no income tax. So our message of low taxes doesn't connect." 

The Death of Satire?

Nearly every time I read a satire piece that someone has written or created online, I find myself shaking my head.  Now I should be clear, it's not because of the work itself... it's the nearly inevitable flood of comments that will follow from those who think that the author is clearly serious and insane or evil (since satire is over the top:  "How on Earth could you think that that is even vaguely amusing?!?!?!").

I can clearly remember the first time I encountered this particular literary comprehension problem (or at least severe misreading of the author's intended message).  I was in a freshman english class and we were reading a short essay called Paradigm for a Dime.  In it, the author, a liberal feminist, wrote about how she was "selling out" to the conservative establishment because that's where the money was.

I'd liked the essay at the time, and had thought that it was quite funny.  We sat down with our class of twenty something students and the Professor asked what we'd thought of the essay.  "I thought she was a sell out!" one student quickly volunteered.  There was a chorus of agreement.  Ten minutes passed as students one by one talked about how awful this woman was, for giving up her values for "fine china" (which she mentioned in the essay) and nice meals.

I sat in my chair, feeling rather dumb.  I must have totally missed the point of the essay.  Was it another late night reading, when my eyes were already beginning to blur with sleep?   I'd been silent the whole time.  Then I noticed our professor.  He had a slightly horrified look on his face as he said my name and asked me what I thought (I avoided talking in class at all costs, but went to one of those schools where talking is an unfortunately large part of your grade).  I really would have rather not said.  But taking a deep breath I began:  "I guess I got it all wrong and missed the entire point... because I thought she was being completely sarcastic.  I didn't think she meant it literally at all."  He suddenly looked relieved and the discussion turned to satire.

The memory came back earlier in the year when I stumbled across this article, chuckled because it was certainly a reminder of Paul's previous years at a certain graduate school on the west coast and his alma mater's seeming dedication to finding inappropriate speakers, and posted it on the blog's facebook page.  I didn't think much more of it until I came back and found that a number of people had most definitely not found it funny.  One reader had taken the opportunity to tell me that this was why I shouldn't trust in institutions built by men (which turned into a nice theological discussion).  Another simply didn't see how I could think that sharing a universities downfall was amusing.

Face palm.

Maybe it's because the news these days, on all sides, is so outrageous and so we no longer recognize a satirical criticism of the way things are, because we can really imagine someone writing something so outrageous in all seriousness.  I mean, I've read articles and wished that they were satire, knowing that the author was writing in earnest (and some readers could probably say the same thing about posts I've written!).  Or maybe we just aren't seeing as much satire out there these days, pointing towards our culture's cherished flaws and so we don't know what we've encountered when it bops us on the nose.

I'm not sure what the cause is.  But I know that I have to shake my head when I see a meme like this on facebook and a number of commentors accuse the poster of being "pro-Obama" in horror:

And I feel almost like I'm back in that classroom, wondering what on Earth is going on.

It makes me want to post a definition right here to link to the next time someone accuses me of delighting in some evil happening for posting "LOL" next to a satire piece (and let's face it folks, sometimes it's just better to laugh at what's going on to keep from crying about it!): 

Satire is primarily a literary genre or form, although in practice it can also be found in the graphic and performing arts. In satire, vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement.^[1] Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, usingwit as a weapon.

A common feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—"in satire, irony is militant"^[2]—but parody, burlesque, exaggeration, juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. This "militant" irony or sarcasm often professes to approve of (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to attack. from Wikipedia

I guess in these confusing times, when satire and real life seem to be so close that we can't identify the difference, looking at the source of whatever work we're looking at can help.  Or we can just give the author the benefit of the doubt and really hope that it's satire.  Sometimes it might be better to read a political piece in that light.  It might make the world feel a little less crazy, regardless of what side of the aisle you're on...