So I try to avoid both religion and politics for the most part on this blog. But today the news cycle caught up with me in a big way. Rick Perry pulled out of the race. I am neither surprised nor saddened by this, but here is a piece of what he said in his endorsement of candidate Newt Gingrich:
". . . . And Newt is not perfect, but who among us is? The fact is, there is forgiveness for those who seek God and I believe in the power of redemption. . . . " {I checked this quote transcript on a few sites and all seem to have it this way}
I was listening to this on the car radio (yes it was NPR). I did an immediate knee-jerk think in my head of "really? forgiveness only for those who seek God? Might it also be necessary to seek out, say, those you may have wronged and maybe ask their forgiveness?" I was in the middle of this thought when a voice piped up from the back seat:
"What's God?"
My thought: "Oh Crap." I haven't prepared for this one.
So Lucy and I had a little talk about God. Thanks, Rick Perry. Thanks, Newt!
I started by asking what Lucy already knew. Here's a rough transcript of the conversation:
Lucy: Sometimes we say "God" when we say grace before dinner.
Me: Yes, that's right. And what else have you heard about God?
Lucy: Beezus talks to God when she does the thing before bed.
[explanatory note: "Beezus" refers to a character in the Beverly Cleary Ramona series, which is very popular here. She pays very close attention to these stories; me, not so much. I need to pay a bit more attention, but I'm assuming she's not making this up.]
Me: Oh. I didn't know that. Beezus is praying. What else?
Lucy: God makes wishes come true.
Me: Oh, uh, well, not quite....
Lucy (interrupting): He has a magic wand! He makes dreams come true!
Me: Oh wow. I don't know about that. We should talk more about this.....
Thereafter ensued a lot of fumbling trying to sort out the notion of different people's beliefs and separating them from a sort of Disney fairy tale. It was all a bit awkward. And quite confusing, for both of us.
Later, we had this exchange:
Lucy: Mommy, what's a lawyer?
Me: What makes you ask that?
Lucy: Miss Judith [a teacher at school] always asks me if my mommy is a lawyer. And today she asked me if my daddy is a lawyer. But I told her that my mommy is a teacher and my daddy works at Seven, the bike place.
So I explained what a lawyer is. It was slightly easier than attempting to explain God.
I can't imagine why a teacher would think that she's related to lawyers.
Here's hoping no one has to be cross-examined by Lucy.
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Debate De-Briefing
So we usually try to steer clear of the politics here, but I just attended the Democratic Primary Debate for Massachusetts Senate (for the decision of who will go up against Scott Brown). I'm now trapped (exaggeration) in my office while I wait for the traffic to subside so I can go home, and figured there was no better time than now to put down my immediate reactions to the debate.
The debate was moderated by UML Chancellor Marty Meehan, who simply has to stop walking around all over the stage while he's listening (or more likely, not listening at all) to what the candidates are saying. Seriously. It's totally this tic that he has where he walks around the room where he's talking. I've seen it in other venues, and it's totally distracting. Maybe that's intended, but it looks ridiculous. Like maybe he has to go to the bathroom or something. I realize that typing this here may qualify as biting the hand that feeds me given my current position. But it's intended as constructive criticism. Really. You're distracting the audience from the main point of the debate: the candidates.
And while I'm making perhaps unkind comments about people I generally like, I have to pause here to say this:
Dear four students who were in the rare, pretty awesome position of getting to sit on stage and ask the candidates questions: did you really have to ask about legalizing pot? Really? Also, English major, did it have to be *you* who asked that question? Sigh. Also, the question about "which super hero would you be?" was only made even more lame when the candidates seemed to indicate no real knowledge of said superheroes. Elizabeth Warren, I'm looking at you: the most awesome thing about Wonder Woman is NOT her cool outfit. They were bad answers, but it was not a good question.
So here are my quick candidate reviews:
Marisa DeFranco: You rule. Seriously, you kicked some butt up there. I was very impressed with how she took on the questions, and was forceful and passionate in her answers. She's an immigration lawyer and she fights for foster kids. (My only concern here is that I want her to keep doing THAT job, because my god, someone has to, and please can it be her?) I had never heard of her before the debate, but she really rocked this one. She was the one who unequivocally supports the Wall Street protests, too. OK, so she reminds me *just slightly* of Amy Poehler's character on Parks & Rec, in particular in some of her enunciation and delivery of her lines. She made a great point about how we should pay those who serve in the military at the same rate we pay military contractors.
Elizabeth Warren: OK, she is the reason I went to the debate; she's the recent, high-profile addition to the race. I think she's great and has good ideas. She's wicked smart and speaks truth to power. She did well in the debate, and clearly had a lot of crowd support. She said some surprising things about changing and trimming (her word) regulation for small businesses, which I think is something people wouldn't expect from her. She also had the best line in response to the (again bad) question about "what would you do if you were caught in a mistake": she said "If I had a whole lot of microphones in my face and was being asked to explain something, I wouldn't ask anyone in my family to stand there with me." I thought this was good. But again, not a good question.
Alan Khazei: Has done a ton of great work for City Year and other public/community-service organizations. I believe his heart and head are in the right place. He had a great moment where, in response to a question (I think the one about Wall Street) he suggested that he would appoint Elizabeth Warren to a position to deal with it. Nice. He strikes me as serious and teacher-ly. Like he can explain things in a very clear and explicit way.
Bob Massie: For about the first three quarters of the debate, I had little to no impression of him. He wasn't all that exciting in his answers, until (and I'm forgetting which question he was supposed to be answering) he said "I'm going to take this in a different direction" and then busted out with "we need to reverse the Citizens United decision," then went on to challenge the other candidates (esp. Warren) to refuse PAC money. The crowd went pretty wild, and that seemed to change his tone for the rest; he was stronger in his answers. He also had an impressive answer on the question about women's health and healthcare issues (he has a long backstory of illness & recovery), which made him that much more interesting. I thought his final statement was a bit weak, though, with this kind of weird "we're America and we're great" motif that was a bit off.
Tom Conroy: This guy reminds me of a guy I went to high school with named "Chip." He looks like he could be named "Chip." I should pause here in my cattiness to say that I know I shouldn't judge him based on this, but he just looks too pretty. I would totally smack someone for saying this if he were a female candidate, but that's where it is. He's the rep for Lincoln/Sudbury/Wayland. He's done this big campaign thing he's called the "Town to Town Walk" where he went 650 miles around to talk to people all over the state. I suppose this is a good thing, but the way he markets it (or the way his campaign markets it) it seems oddly resonant of Sarah Palin driving her bus covered with the constitution and her signature all over the country. It's like this weird "of the people" move that ultimately (to me) serves to point out that someone's NOT of the people. He referred a couple times to "on my walk," and this whole manufactured narrative/photo op just doesn't quite sit right.
Herbert William Robinson: Herbert is this race's Jimmy McMillan of the "Rent is Too Damn High Party." Upon looking at the pictures in the program (before the candidates arrived on stage), my friend sitting next to me said, "wow, that guy looks like a real Maine mountain man." He was pretty right-on. Here is an excerpt from what his bio in the debate program says:
"While earning his bachelor's in electrical engineering from Cornell University, Robinson worked as a musician and belonged to Local 132 of the American Federation of Musicians. In partnership with Margo Granfors under the name Towering Pretzels, he recorded a CD."
Herbert leaned heavily on the response "I was an engineer for 30 years and..." He did have the charming habit of having the shortest answers of any of the candidates, but that was because they were often "yes, what the last candidate said, too." He seemed to get a lot of crowd support. One of the (particularly awful) questions was "Have you ever driven under the influence of alcohol?" and every candidate said "no"; Herbert said: "not according to the legal definition." Awesome.
That's all for tonight -- looks like the parking lot has cleared out. Further updates as events warrant. FYI, you can check out coverage (including a video interview w/ one of my colleagues!) at the Boston Herald.
The debate was moderated by UML Chancellor Marty Meehan, who simply has to stop walking around all over the stage while he's listening (or more likely, not listening at all) to what the candidates are saying. Seriously. It's totally this tic that he has where he walks around the room where he's talking. I've seen it in other venues, and it's totally distracting. Maybe that's intended, but it looks ridiculous. Like maybe he has to go to the bathroom or something. I realize that typing this here may qualify as biting the hand that feeds me given my current position. But it's intended as constructive criticism. Really. You're distracting the audience from the main point of the debate: the candidates.
And while I'm making perhaps unkind comments about people I generally like, I have to pause here to say this:
Dear four students who were in the rare, pretty awesome position of getting to sit on stage and ask the candidates questions: did you really have to ask about legalizing pot? Really? Also, English major, did it have to be *you* who asked that question? Sigh. Also, the question about "which super hero would you be?" was only made even more lame when the candidates seemed to indicate no real knowledge of said superheroes. Elizabeth Warren, I'm looking at you: the most awesome thing about Wonder Woman is NOT her cool outfit. They were bad answers, but it was not a good question.
So here are my quick candidate reviews:
Marisa DeFranco: You rule. Seriously, you kicked some butt up there. I was very impressed with how she took on the questions, and was forceful and passionate in her answers. She's an immigration lawyer and she fights for foster kids. (My only concern here is that I want her to keep doing THAT job, because my god, someone has to, and please can it be her?) I had never heard of her before the debate, but she really rocked this one. She was the one who unequivocally supports the Wall Street protests, too. OK, so she reminds me *just slightly* of Amy Poehler's character on Parks & Rec, in particular in some of her enunciation and delivery of her lines. She made a great point about how we should pay those who serve in the military at the same rate we pay military contractors.
Elizabeth Warren: OK, she is the reason I went to the debate; she's the recent, high-profile addition to the race. I think she's great and has good ideas. She's wicked smart and speaks truth to power. She did well in the debate, and clearly had a lot of crowd support. She said some surprising things about changing and trimming (her word) regulation for small businesses, which I think is something people wouldn't expect from her. She also had the best line in response to the (again bad) question about "what would you do if you were caught in a mistake": she said "If I had a whole lot of microphones in my face and was being asked to explain something, I wouldn't ask anyone in my family to stand there with me." I thought this was good. But again, not a good question.
Alan Khazei: Has done a ton of great work for City Year and other public/community-service organizations. I believe his heart and head are in the right place. He had a great moment where, in response to a question (I think the one about Wall Street) he suggested that he would appoint Elizabeth Warren to a position to deal with it. Nice. He strikes me as serious and teacher-ly. Like he can explain things in a very clear and explicit way.
Bob Massie: For about the first three quarters of the debate, I had little to no impression of him. He wasn't all that exciting in his answers, until (and I'm forgetting which question he was supposed to be answering) he said "I'm going to take this in a different direction" and then busted out with "we need to reverse the Citizens United decision," then went on to challenge the other candidates (esp. Warren) to refuse PAC money. The crowd went pretty wild, and that seemed to change his tone for the rest; he was stronger in his answers. He also had an impressive answer on the question about women's health and healthcare issues (he has a long backstory of illness & recovery), which made him that much more interesting. I thought his final statement was a bit weak, though, with this kind of weird "we're America and we're great" motif that was a bit off.
Tom Conroy: This guy reminds me of a guy I went to high school with named "Chip." He looks like he could be named "Chip." I should pause here in my cattiness to say that I know I shouldn't judge him based on this, but he just looks too pretty. I would totally smack someone for saying this if he were a female candidate, but that's where it is. He's the rep for Lincoln/Sudbury/Wayland. He's done this big campaign thing he's called the "Town to Town Walk" where he went 650 miles around to talk to people all over the state. I suppose this is a good thing, but the way he markets it (or the way his campaign markets it) it seems oddly resonant of Sarah Palin driving her bus covered with the constitution and her signature all over the country. It's like this weird "of the people" move that ultimately (to me) serves to point out that someone's NOT of the people. He referred a couple times to "on my walk," and this whole manufactured narrative/photo op just doesn't quite sit right.
Herbert William Robinson: Herbert is this race's Jimmy McMillan of the "Rent is Too Damn High Party." Upon looking at the pictures in the program (before the candidates arrived on stage), my friend sitting next to me said, "wow, that guy looks like a real Maine mountain man." He was pretty right-on. Here is an excerpt from what his bio in the debate program says:
"While earning his bachelor's in electrical engineering from Cornell University, Robinson worked as a musician and belonged to Local 132 of the American Federation of Musicians. In partnership with Margo Granfors under the name Towering Pretzels, he recorded a CD."
Herbert leaned heavily on the response "I was an engineer for 30 years and..." He did have the charming habit of having the shortest answers of any of the candidates, but that was because they were often "yes, what the last candidate said, too." He seemed to get a lot of crowd support. One of the (particularly awful) questions was "Have you ever driven under the influence of alcohol?" and every candidate said "no"; Herbert said: "not according to the legal definition." Awesome.
That's all for tonight -- looks like the parking lot has cleared out. Further updates as events warrant. FYI, you can check out coverage (including a video interview w/ one of my colleagues!) at the Boston Herald.
Project Plans
Check out the new delivery in our dining room:
Yup, that's a new toilet. Not, it's not going to stay in the dining room. It will replace the one in the downstairs bathroom that was damaged in our mini-tornado (also, it wasn't very water-usage-efficient, so it seems a good thing to replace in any case). Jake ordered it online, and we hope to install it soon. Or at the very least before, say, we host a large dinner party in the dining room. You may recall some of our previous plumbing adventures (just click on the "plumbing" tag for the blog and all the lovely stories will appear); we're hopeful that we can accomplish this one in-house. Perhaps with the assistance of Master Plumber John? Or Local Expert on All House Things, Matt?
Other than that, we're in the middle of the seasonal transition period. Jake has taken out the downstairs air conditioners (upstairs ones, too, soon!). The grass in the back yard has started to sprout, too!
In other news totally not related to plumbing or our house at all, tonight I'm going to my first debate! Exciting. It's the Democratic Primary debate for our U.S. Senate seat (the one currently held by Scott Brown). We're particularly excited about Elizabeth Warren. I'll try to post after the debate with some reflections.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)