i am a liberal

A self-admitted conservative (and yes, a friend of mine) wrote “common sense, morals, responsibility, hard working...so glad Mitt went with Paul Ryan”.  To me, this implies these words only refer to the conservative persuasion. Ergo...

I am a liberal.  I am not a party voter, but if you checked my voting record, I vote Democrat 95% of the time.

I am a hard-working individual, having been in the workforce since I was sixteen. I will be happy to share my tax returns with you to prove it.

Alternatively, I have also collected unemployment in the course of my life.  This does not make me a bottom-feeder or a detriment to society.  I worked my ass off looking for a job during my four months off. I believe that welfare should only be a stage in life, not a way of life.

I am pro-choice. This does not make me immoral. Every person and every situation is different. While I likely would not encourage abortion, it’s not my body or my life.  Furthermore, it should be a viable (and safe) option in the cases of rape & incest, the health of the mother and/or the quality of life of the unborn.

I possess common sense.  Even my conservative friends will agree, penning me a “common sense liberal”. Why?  I understand that the budget needs to be balanced and the country as a whole needs to curb spending. I just disagree in HOW they want to balance the budget – largely on the backs of the middle class, poor and elderly.

I am a liberal. And I’m damn proud of it.

dating...

I apologize to you if I don't seem real eager to jump into a forced awkward intimate situation that people like to call dating. 

I don't like the feeling. You're sitting there you're wondering "Do I have food on my face? Am I eating? Am I talking too much? Are they talking enough? Am I interested? I'm not really interested. Should I play like I'm interested? But I'm not that interested, but I think she might be interested. But do I want to be interested, but now she's not interested, so now all of a sudden I'm getting--I'm started to get interested." 

And when is he supposed to kiss me? Do I have to wait for the door 'cause then it's awkward? Or should I just kiss him? It's like, well, "Goodnight. Do you do like the ass-out hug? Where you like, you hug each other like this and the ass sticks out because you're trying not to get too close or just go right in and kiss them on the lips or don't kiss them at all?" 

It's very difficult trying to read the situation.

being thankful (i don't care if it's the "wrong" month)...

It's amazing how much growing up (even at my age) that one can do in a week...

We like to think our personal problems are the most important in the world (and if you say you've never done this, you're lying).  These problems could include a co-worker you want to punch in the face, feeling left out by a group of friends, attempting to interpret whether there's more than friendship with certain males....you get the picture.  For better or worse,  these problems tend to consume us, as petty as they might be in the grand scheme. 

And that grand scheme hit like a ton of bricks (both bad and good) in the past week...

the bad (because it's better to start with the bad and end on a high note)...

On Tuesday prior to volleyball, I was kind of bummed that I wasn't going to the Cubs/Brewers game and made mention of it to a couple teammates (who knew the underlying reason why). After telling me to shut up and have fun, it ended up being a good night with friends.  

The next morning, I check my Twitter account (per usual) and see a tweet from DS about "a terrible wreck".  "WTF?" was my exact tweet back.  Turns out, the shuttle transporting my friends home from said baseball game got broadsided by a car.  One of the guys (MK) was thrown out the door and was "beaten up" - more precisely, a broken collarbone and a few broken ribs. Fuck...

the good...

Since Mom's diagnosis in August, I try to talk to her at least twice per week (although right now I'm failing miserably at this).  We usually talk about her treatment, along with the sports page.  Overall she's in good spirits, but every once in a while she'll complain about side effects - mostly being tired & run-down - which is to be expected.

On Sunday, I talked to Mom (per usual).  I was excited to share with her that I met an 18-year survivor of pancreatic cancer while at the PurpleStride Milwaukee event. (note: the average life span after diagnosis is 14 months, so 18 years is f-ing amazing) But Mom had fabulous news of her own....her tumor shrunk by 50%!!!!!  This not only means the chemo is working, but the treatments will now be less frequent and evasive. Woot!

In comparison, yes, my problems are trivial. I'm not lying in a hospital bed in pain. I'm not fighting the battle of my life against a deadly disease. I'm not living in a country were even my basic needs are compromised.  Again, you get the point...

As a society we tend to focus on the bad and what we don't have, rather than be grateful for the good and what we do have (myself included). And I know I really need to stop doing this and think about how lucky I really am. 

Thus, I'm thankful...

• that MK's injuries weren't more severe (and wish him a speedy recovery) and that everyone else came away relatively unscathed
• for the medical advances in cancer research, giving all of us hope
• that Mom is at Johns freakin' Hopkins and is receiving among the best care in the nation; as well as Mom continuing to handle herself with positivity, grace and resiliency 
• the above mentioned traits may have been passed down to me (at least in some capacity) 
• for the health, happiness and well-being (generally speaking) of my friends and family
• for my immediate family - their love, their support, the knowledge they'll always be there even across the miles
• for the unending support of my friends (both old and new) - the past ten months would have been hellish without all of them, and their friendships mean more than they know

Life is too short already.  Take the time to be thankful for and savor all the good things.

yes, for real...

I have gotten "interesting" messages via online dating sites before...but, yeah...I can't make this up:

Hi! I like your profile, and I would love to hear from you. I am a crossdresser with a pantyhose fetish looking for an open minded woman to roleplay fantasies with. 

The guy gets props for not being shy and up front about his fetishes.  And while I'm pretty open about things, how does one respond to that?

can we go back to the old way?

Whatever happened to the good old days where you met a significant other through friends or common activities?  I think I want those back...

Let's face it.  I'm a social person.  I like meeting people...in person.  The interwebs are a great tool and all, but nothing really beats meeting someone in person and striking up a conversation (in my opinion anyway). I get the whole notion that online dating sites allow you to "weed out" people - or in my case, find out how bad your grammar really is or your propensity to use texting talk (read: how r u?) in a message.  Ok, to be honest, I hate texting talk (even whilst texting) but for a text, it is what it is. But really, you can only hide behind the mask of technology for so long...

That being said, I have met a few people I've conversed with online.  It's been fun and interesting...to say the least.  A majority of the guys have been recently divorced after 10+ years of marriage and are looking to get back in the dating scene.  That is respectable.  They have been decent conversationalists and overall cordial.  With one I ever had a conversation about the whole Tebow trade (only I could work Tebow into a date...geesh).  

However, I have noticed a couple commonalities with the guys I've met:

They all hunt in some capacity.  Again....why???  It's a horrible assumption that a female who likes sports is ok with hunting - which I don't view as a sport, I view it as killing an animal  (but I've blogged about this at length already). But I'll talk your ear off about sports, especially NHL at this moment. And oddly, being a Cubs fan is not a deterrent.(and a side note: not a lot of NHL fans out there)

They all seem extremely bitter about the demise of their marriage and divorce. Having been there, it's not a pleasant experience. And I get there are issues (personal and otherwise) one must work through after any relationship break-up. But bringing up these issues during an initial date? Really?

So back to searching for "other fish in the online sea", unless I meet someone the old-fashioned way.  

Who knew this modern woman would long for something nostalgic and traditional?

online dating is weird. and annoying.

I have begun to embark on a strange journey....the journey known as online dating.  And let me tell you, I haven't even been on an actual date and I'm already annoyed.

But first, let me talk about the dating sites themselves.  Despite being in the marketing field, I am absolutely horrible at marketing myself (but dammit, I can market the hell out of just about anything else) - thus, writing a profile is somewhat daunting.  Mine consists mostly of one-liners and smart ass comments, and if someone likes that, great.  If not, then we obviously wouldn't get along really well.  That being said, I do actually get people interested in messaging/getting to know me.  And then I look at their profile...

You'd think people would have someone review their profile or use spell check or something.  I swear, half the profiles I've viewed have some of the most horrific grammar and spelling I've seen in my lifetime.   It literally makes me cringes.  I could blame being in marketing (again) where you must proof everything before it leaves the office, but really?  There is a difference between "you're" and "your" - as well as "there", "their" and "they're".  When you write a sentence, don't omit words.  Use the correct tense.  Yes, I may sound like the grammar police but to me, that reflects on your intelligence (or lack thereof).  This is not to say you need to have an advanced degree - or even a degree - but please show some sign of a functioning brain.

The other thing that baffles me is that I tend to attract people that enjoy hunting.  It seems that if I'm a woman who enjoys sports and hiking, it must follow that I would enjoy hunting.  That's fine and good, but I actually state I'm anti-hunting (just goes to show how much folks actually read the profile). WTF?  I know how to shoot a gun and will take target practice.  I like communing with nature.  I fail to see the point of shooting a deer, elk, duck, goose, grouse, etc. - especially since I don't eat said animals (and regardless, I would still not be a fan of killing an animal with a gun).  Thus, I will not date someone who hunts...I just can't.  Fishing is ok as I like boating, but don't expect me to clean the fish or anything like that. 

Then there are a few that aren't so scary, and thus, I feel safe/comfortable enough to give them my phone number so we can text and/or talk - plus that is way easier than going through the dating site all the time.  While some of these "select few" have proofread their profile, their lack of attention to the English language whilst texting drives me batty.  I despise it when people don't spell out "are" and "you", among other words (so yes, many titles of Prince songs annoy me).  Admittedly, I get annoyed when even my brother messages me "R u busy?" Yes, it's a pet peeve.  Grammar aside, it has been interesting.  I also tend to attract people from Racine, Wisconsin (which is another sordid tale entirely) and I've been texting a few from that area.  Thankfully, none of them went to Horlick High - I know WAY too many people from that school despite not be a native Wisconsinite.  

So I've been texting this guy from Racine I'll call "G".  It starts off fine and good, until he sent me the following text on 15 February "I called you last night but you weren't around.  Why not?"  To be fair, he left a message that Monday. Mondays are usually my "detox" night and I don't talk to anyone much, plus I think I was still recovering from an epic Madison weekend.  Not to good have a first convo with someone when you're half-zombie.  Had I been home on Tuesday (VD), I likely wouldn't have picked up as a first convo on VD is too weird.  I still have been texting G (even though the spelling and spacing is horrific in these texts), but it's become relatively apparent that he doesn't have much of a life - and I feel it's important for someone to have a life and have friends.   Based upon texts, I believe G is free every Friday and Saturday; and this concerns me (if you knew my ex-hole, you'd understand).  I am sort of a social butterfly (apparently) and discovered my first free Saturday is 7 April. I say this to verify (and maybe convince myself) that I'm not being a bitch, I really am busy.  Thus, I'm not sure how this one is going to pan out.  I'll continue texting him and see how it goes...

I've actually talked to a person I met online (novel concept, I know) - I'll call him "M".  I'm not making any predictions after one convo, but he appears more promising than G for a few reasons:  

1 - He admittedly has friends that he hangs out with, which is why it took a couple times to catch each other at home 

2 -  He has a good working knowledge of the English language (I know this shouldn't be a big deal, but it is)

3 - He likes hanging out in Bay View and on the East Side

4 - He asked about hashing (a drinking club with a running problem) and thinks it sounds fun

Again, we shall see how things pan out...

I really am trying to keep a positive attitude about dating (really, I am trying...) While it would be nice to meet some new people, part of me is just happy hanging out with my friends and heading out on some sort of crazy new adventure.  

Then again if my VD status of "where is that stupid little fat baby? he may have an arrow, but I have a shotgun" is any indication of where I'm at in the dating realm, it could be a while...

grinding gears 1.0

We'll call this a post about "what really grinds my gears" - because I most of the time I tend to write when someone or something aggravates me.  

A couple days ago, Starbucks posted this status message on Facebook:

We are proud to support Marriage Equality legislation in the Washington State Legislature. (read full article).  

This was awesome.  Granted, if I'm going out for coffee I'd much rather patronize Alterra or Stone Creek Coffee because they're local - but now I feel a bit better about going to a "big box coffee shop".  Hey, a girl needs a caramel frappucino every once in a while. Outside of my need for a java fix, it's nice to see a mega-corporation align with my views on an issue - especially one I've been involved with (some could say personally) for quite some time.  

One of my best friends from college came out to me seven months after we graduated.  My response was "That's nice, could you get me another beer."  A unique response?  Perhaps.  But the point was his that I didn't care if he was gay - he was still my friend.  That wasn't about to change.  And on that cold December day over a decade ago, my journey as a straight LGBT advocate began.  More than a handful of friends have come out to me since, probably because I won't judge and I accept people for who they are, not their sexual orientation.  Period.  And honestly, I feel every else should do the same (but we sure as hell know that isn't the case).

Back to this wonderful (and somewhat ballsy, seeing the issue at hand) post from Starbucks. I try to keep political banter to a minimum, so I simply "liked" the status.  Then I noticed a male friend posted this comment:

I am so glad I am no longer associated with this filthy corporation.

My initial response was "what the fuck?"   I fail to see why their stance on marriage equality is "filthy".  Seriously.  You can come at the religious angle all you want.  From what I choose to accept and translate from the collection of stories called the Bible, Jesus accepted EVERYONE - regardless of race, creed, religion, socio-economic status, etc. EVERYONE includes sexual orientation. Alienating and damning a whole facet of our population to hell is certainty not "Christian-like".  And I don't think Jesus would approve.

Religious views aside, It seems to me that legislation (and constitutional amendments) were supposed to grant citizens rights - not take them away.  With all the "exclusions" currently in our society, I seriously question the state humanity and our future.

To be in love with someone and be raising a family with someone and want to make that commitment and not be able to is ludicrous, just ludicrous. - Brad Pitt

judgement

this is my choice

my conscience – my life

don’t think i haven’t thought about it

i do every day

and make choices so i don’t have to

make that decision again

the path traveled is the same today

for different reasons

not to repeat the past

i am responsible for this choice

one i should not be ostracized for

walking through doors where my life

dramatically changed

now offer salvation

but more importantly understanding

no questions asked

once the door closes

the interrogation begins

does one really have the right

to question – even judge

you don’t know me or my reasons

who are you to pass judgment

or preach verses to me

allow me to drive off in peace

embracing who i am

big foot

As a child, I remember my brother and I making fun of the shoes Dad wore.  I must clarify here.  Dad rarely ever had "normal" gym shoes (read: white or black colored).  No, they always seemed to be some hideous green (and I like green) or a blue/yellow combination, similar to that of the LA Rams NFL uniforms in the 1980s.  These were really the ugliest gym shoes I've seen in my life.

Now, Dad never claimed to be fashion forward - and indeed, he wasn't. He also found it entertaining to embarrass me and my brother, and almost anyone he could.  Thus, we just chalked it up to him being a fashion idiot and wanting to embarrass his children whilst wearing "clown shoes".

Perhaps I should also mention that Dad wears a size 14-15 shoe.  Of course, as a kid, you don't comprehend that it might be a pain to find a shoe in that size - you just think "I have to be seen with him wearing THOSE shoes".  Thankfully Mom wore a much more "normal" size 9 women's shoe - at least her shoes were acceptable.  This also meant I had a chance of not being a big foot.

In all honestly, I still did have a slight fear of wearing "clown shoes".  I wore a size 10 when I was nine years old, and I was maybe 4 ft 8.  Eventually, I grew a little over a foot in total and then a size 10 didn't look ridiculous on my frame.  Although finding that size can prove to be a pain, as I went to a DSW in Maryland and there were on four size 10s in the whole store.  I was also told by a vendor in Valencia, Spain I had big feet - never mind that I was at least a head taller than him.  WTF?  But I've resigned to life with a lesser shoe variety and some random "big foot" comment.  After two decades, you just deal.

Until Mom decides to tell me that your feet literally grow for the rest of your life.  Really? That can't be....or I was really, really hoping it couldn't be.  Then a couple weeks later, my right big toe begins hurting me when I wore my gym shoes.  I figured it was just an ingrown toenail and took care of it.  The annoyance continued.  I needed new gym shoes anyway, so I head to the store.  Try on the size 10.  Sure as shit, that's the issue.  My stupid feet have grown into a size 11.  With my big foot shoes in tow, I head to a (less painful) fitness camp.

First, I hate it when Mom is right - even if it's something as trivial as a shoe size.  Second, finding a 10 was hard enough.  An 11?  That's a bitch and a half.  You really have to take what you can get - and hopefully, they'll be somewhat fashionable, comfortable and not totally butt-ugly.   Third, I have some idea of what Dad went and still goes through shoe-wise.  LA Rams shoes were probably the only option he had back in the day.  

Thankfully, the internet has wonderful sites that carry size 11s.  I know, I have to start replacing my vast (ha ha ha) shoe collection.  However, my feet better not grow anymore.

Maybe that's why I'm not a fan of shoes. 

a 9.11 perspective

9/11 is to us as to what JFK's assasination is to our parents.  As our parents can immediately answer the question - "Where were you when JFK was shot?", we can do the same for "Where were you when the Towers were hit?".  

I remember the day vividly.  It was a gorgeous, sunny day, highs in the 70s with a slight breeze. - a day perfect for playing hookie.  But alas, I had to attend a training at Children's Service Society of Wisconsin (this was back in my non-profit/social service days).  Before I left my office, I already knew about the first tower being hit, but chalked it up to a mechanical malfunction.  The reality of a terrorist attack on US soil was far-fetched at 8:00 am CDT on 11 September 2001.  During the drive over the second tower was hit but I was listening to a CD - probably one of the few oblivious Americans at this point.  I walked into CSSW and then I found out about the Pentagon.  I recall the receptionist asking, "Are you ok, because you just turned white."  I responded with, "My parents live just outside DC" whilst thinking "Holy shit my mom works at Navy."  

Upon recovering from the shock, I was actually pissed.  How dare anyone attack the city of my birth and the metro area where my family lives?  What the hell did we do to deserve this?  After my minute internal tirade, I tried to call my parents via cell - to be greeted by the Gene Mueller (the radio newsguy) telling me that all cell service was shut off into DC as it might trigger another attack.  I proceeded back to work, still somewhat dazed.  

Then I read an e-mail from my mom:  "Both towers were hit.  The Pentagon was hit.  We are running on generators.  They are evacuating all non-essential personnel.  We're shaken, but I'm ok." 

This began my six-hour attempt to reach my parents via land line.  Finally, at 3:30 CDT, I got a hold of my mom.  Still shaken, but still ok. 

On that day, the reality of feeling safe on our home soil had been shattered. And the public wondered if we would ever be safe again.

Yes, the TSA has stepped up airline passenger protocol in an effort to ease our minds.  While I think we probably should have been showing an ID to fly in the first place, not being able to bring a larger than 3 oz bottle of contact lens solution is a little drastic.  I understand the theory and what the TSA is trying to do, but let's face it.  If a terrorist really wants to smuggle an explosive or weapon on an airplane, they will find a way to do it - it just won't be as easy.

Yet in global comparison, America was and still is a safe country.  Car bombs don't go off.  There isn't violent unrest between neighboring nations.  Our water and food supply is generally parasite free.  We don't face the penalty of death for having different beliefs.  In the grand scheme, we are a fortunate nation. 

Ten years later, we continue to honor all those who perished in the attacks - from the first responders at what is now Ground Zero to the passengers on Flight 93 to the victims of circumstance at the Pentagon.  In a sense, it could referred to another "day that will live in infamy".  And while I don't think we should forget the events of that day, the media (as it sometimes has a tendency to do) went a little overboard.  I don't think that makes me any less of a citizen of this country for thinking that.  

However, it has been said (numerous times on Sunday and leading up to that day), that 9.11 brought a sense of patriotism and unity to the country.  I'd like to believe so but sadly,  I don't think it has.  Sure "God Bless America" is now sung at sporting events all around the country.  Singing this anthem doesn't make one automatically patriotic as sitting in a garage doesn't automatically make you a car.  There are still people out there who believe all Muslims are responsible for the events of that day, even though the reality is it was a group of radical extremists using religion to further their propaganda, as sick and hateful as it may be.  The same goes for Christian extremist who claim to act in the name of God.  That doesn't sound like unity to me.  

Once we are able to accept differences in others (i.e. race, creed, accent, religious beliefs, cultures, sexual orientation) and learn from these differences, only then will we even be able to begin on the path to a true United States of America. 

have foot, will travel

For quite some time (at least a year), I have been contemplating going car-free.

Seriously.

Living on Milwaukee's "fashionable" east side, I've realizing almost everything I need on a daily basis is within a mile - drug store, grocery store, nightlife, entertainment and even volleyball.  My only reservation was commuting 12 miles to work, as MCTS sometimes does not have the greatest routes or schedules.

Then I decided it would be fun to rear-end a car on I-94 a week ago, and my car decided to retaliate by overheating on Tuesday.  Apparently this is what happens when one demolishes the engine cooling fan in said accident.  Since the car is not drivable (and the bf is conveniently with his car in Minnesota), enter the "big green bus" or the scary world of public transit.

The last time I had to commute to work was when I was living in Bay View - the commute took an hour long bus ride and a 3/4 mile walk.  In the rain (ok, it really did rain once).  And that was a straight shot.  I couldn't imagine how hellish an East Side to West Allis commute would be.  Turns out, it's not so bad even with a transfer downtown.  The #44 Freeway Flyer is a wonderful thing that drops/picks up 3 blocks from work.  It's only a couple blocks between the transfer points, it only live a block away from the bus stop (about 10 blocks total, if you're keeping track) and...it only adds 30 minutes to my total commute.  For real.  But the best part?  I can listen to my iPod, play games or facebook while someone else drives - and I get to be "entertained" by the sights, such as crazy bus riders and bubble gum pink Audis.

I got to thinking:  maybe this IS actually possible.

But what about running errands or grocery shopping or dog food?  

Well, I thought about that too.   I work walking distance to a 'big-box" grocery store, so I can stock the work fridge with lunches.   Plus, I tend to lean toward the European way of grocery shopping - stopping by the store daily to get what you need (and guarantee it's fresh - part of the theory, not necessarily me). There are friends I can probably con into driving me to get dog food or to Target, or to Target to get dog food - for a nominal fee (read: lunch at Arby's).  And there is this little thing called ZipCar, where you can reasonably "rent" a car by the hour - conveniently located on UWM's campus.  For longer trips, there's always Enterprise.  But realistically, I've grown fond of the "pedestrian lifestyle" and tend to walk wherever I can.  Plus, most of the time I do things "in da hood" or I persuade someone else to drive.

Yes, I am still thinking this is possible.  And that it still makes sense.

Globally, I'd be leaving my "carbon footprint" and being eco-friendly - but really, I'm viewing that as an added bonus.  Economically, I would save about $380/month ($4500/year) by not having a car.  That's a number one can't argue with - who wouldn't want an extra chunk of money each month?  Emotionally (aka sanity), driving and other drivers piss me off causing me not to enjoy the experience.  Leaving it to someone else helps me maintain (at least some) stability.  And sanity - in any arena - is a good thing.

This isn't to say that living a car-free lifestyle is permanent.   However, right now it seems to be the way to go.

Seriously.

palin = moron

Last fall, Sarah Palin characterized Michelle Obama's "Let's Move" anti-obesity campaign as an assault on individual rights.

"What she is telling us is that we can't trust parents to make decisions for their families in what we should eat," Palin told radio host Laura Ingraham. "Instead of a government thinking that they need to take over and make decisions for us according to some politician or politician's wife priorities, just leave us alone."

So tell me, how is this different from the GOP taking over and attempting to force legislation to dictate women's reproductive rights? 

Fucking idiot.

quote from this article

keep your post to yourself

A recent Facebook post:

Can anyone tell me why it is so hard to pray, but easy to swear? Why gangs are growing and churches are shrinking? Why it is so hard to re-post a Christian status, but easy to post gossip? Why we can worship a celebrity, but not Jesus? Gonna ignore this? The Lord said, if you deny Me in front of your friends, I will deny you in front of my Father. Re-Post if you're not afraid of what your friends will think.

People are entitled to their own beliefs (even if I don't necessarily agree); and I am also entitled to mine.  However, when it comes to the topic of religion it is the skeptics, non-believers and those questioning their faith who are often ostracized by the religious right for their beliefs.  Yes, someone has every right to post and believe in the above - thanks to the First Amendment.  In turn, I have the same right to disagree with and refute the above, so I will.

Can anyone tell me why it is so hard to pray, but easy to swear? 

In my case, yes I can.  I don't pray.  To be honest, I never did.  All those times growing up when I was supposed to be praying in church (such as after communion), I was people watching; often making mental notes of hideous outfits and seeing if I knew anyone.  Years later, I do the exact same thing when I attend Christmas mass with my mom (which I now view as part of my Christmas gift to her).  

The whole concept of prayer somewhat astounds me.  How can someone ask for help, guidance or anything  to an entity that may or may not exist?  If you need or want something, shouldn't you do everything in YOUR power to achieve it?  On some level, I view praying as a version of "passing the buck".  What I mean by that is some people "leave it up to God" and make no real effort on their part to achieve the end goal, or any effort to improve themselves.  This is not to say that everyone who prays does this - I know plenty of people who do pray and are quite industrious and ambitious in their efforts. But to not take full responsibility for your choices and your life seems quite juvenile. 

As for the easy to swear part, I find swearing somewhat therapeutic at times (i.e. when I totally botch a set at volleyball).  Plus "fuck" is one of the most versatile words in the American English language.

 

Why it is so hard to re-post a Christian status, but easy to post gossip? 

This is easy to answer.  First, I have always viewed religion to be a private matter.  What you believe is fine and good, but for fuck's sake (note the versatility), I don't need to know about it.  And it seems those who are the most adamant about shouting their beliefs from the rooftops are the ones trying to compensate for something else - perhaps their "unChristian-like" behaviors.  That could be another blog entirely (and likely will be in the future).  In reality, I cannot tell you the religious belief (or lack of) of most my friends.  Honestly, I really don't care what your beliefs are - until you attempt to shove your beliefs down my throat.  Overall, my more religious friends have been good about not over-broadcasting their beliefs - although the posting of these status messages are pushing the line, in my opinion.

Second, if you're not Christian - and trust me not everyone is, despite what you may be led to believe - it's damn easy not to re-post (or post) a Christian status. And as a side note, why don't the Jewish feel compelled to post a Jewish status?

Third, I may enjoy gossip but I do not post it on Facebook or any other social media outlet. 

Why we can worship a celebrity, but not Jesus? 

The act of worship is to show reverence and adoration for a deity; or to treat (someone or something) with the reverence and adoration appropriate to a deity.  Essentially, putting them on a pedestal.  Yes, it is true that some people do worship celebrities, but that is not the norm (and on some level, these said people might need some professional help).  While I may admire some celebrities for their talent and/or using their clout to promote the greater good or causes I believe in, it's not worship.  Of course, this is presuming Jesus did indeed exist.  If not, how is worshiping an "idea" any worse than worshiping a celebrity?  At least the celebrity as a living, breathing human being that indeed exists.

The Lord said, if you deny Me in front of your friends, I will deny you in front of my Father.

Going out on a limb, I guessing this is stated in the Bible.  However, Christianity (as well as other religions) tend to pick and choose what scripture to follow.  For example, the Bible also states the punishment for adultery is the stoning the "guilty" party on his/her front porch.  I personally did not do it (as fun as it might have been), nor do I see it as a common punishment in this day and age.  

At a place of employment, you can't pick and choose what responsibilities you decide to fulfill; you need to perform ALL of them.  Shouldn't it be the same for a religion? 

Re-Post if you're not afraid of what your friends will think.

I am sure some will be angered or offended by this train of thought.  However, I'm not afraid of what my friends think...that's why I wrote this blog.

And as you can see, it was WAY to long to post in a status message or note.

subway, i hardly knew yee...

As of late, I have "liked" quite a few pages on facebook regarding American Staffordshire & American Pit Bull Terriers.  Yes, Caye is an AmStaff (and an adorable one at that as evidenced below).

Many of these sites focus on the fostering and rescuing of these "bully breeds".  Mostly, they share success stories.  I  admire all those who dedicate their lives to foster and/or find "forever homes" for this breed - and for any dog for that matter.  If I could, I would take every single one of those pups home with me.  However, there are also stories about dogs being euthanized, etc. for one reason or another (usually no one to take them in).  After reading those stories, I get teary-eyed (at work, no less).  My co-workers now think I have really bad allergies this year.

And once in a while, the topics of BSL - Breed Specific Legislation (which is evil - "punish the deed not the breed") and Michael Vick resurfaces.  This time it was the latter.  On Sunday at the BET Awards, Vick was awarded the Subway Sportsman of the Year award.

I'm sure you have at least heard about Michael Vick and his dogfighting ring - which consisted of American Pitbull Terriers (APBTs).  If not, you can read this article to get up to speed.

This has prompted a petition entitled:  Say No To Subway.

Yes, I like Subway.  I love my dog.  And Jimmy John's will suffice.  If you feel so inclined you can sign the petition here.

I did.  I also felt compelled to share my comment along with my signature:

As an owner of an American Staffordshire/American Pit Bull Terrier, I cannot believe anyone would give a "sportsman" award to someone who committed such heinous acts against animals.  Yes, Vick had a great year athletically - he served his time and should be able to continue his career.  However, the term "sportsman" has come to be defined as more than athletic prowess.  It also pertains to conduct, attitude and overall good character on AND off the friend including fair play and courtesy – none of which Vick displayed off the field whilst funding (and other involvement) Bad Newz Kennels.  

I was a frequent Subway patron.  However,  I cannot support a company who bestows an honor upon an individual who does not emulate the traits of “sportsmanship”.

I do realize not everyone feels the same way about AmStaffs/APBTs as I do.  However, after meeting and interacting with Cayenne, most people tend to think of him as a happy, friendly, well-behaved dog and are shocked that is indeed an AmStaffs/APBT (thank you negative media coverage).  More importantly, most at least consider the fact that all "bully breed" dogs are not evil.  

Although it is not (and never was) my intent with him - Caye is indeed a great ambassador for his breed.  But really...how can you not love this guy?

expression of faith

Our faith should be expressed in working toward a better planet for our children and not the selfish, juvenile hope for a better afterlife for ourselves. I don't think anyone is going to Hell because it only exists in the minds of people who wish ill-will on others. 

- Greg Graffin, PhD, lead singer of Bad Religion

The above-referenced quote eloquently sums up how I feel about faith.  I have always maintained that I believe in the basic foundations of Christianity:  charity (read:  supporting and/or helping others in need - volunteering or otherwise), respect for others (read: acknowledging that others have a difference of opinion, be of a different creed, religion, race or orientation -  but it doesn't necessarily mean they're evil or damned for eternity) and  the "golden rule" (read: I hope I don't have to explain this).  However, I don't believe current evolution of Christianity (rather, I feel it's regressed a few centuries, nor to I support its doctrine and the organization it has become.  

Thus, I question my own religious (or lack of) beliefs on a fairly regular basis.  Even as a teenager, I questioned the purpose of going to church - which would explain why I went to the mall instead.  To use the cliche:  going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than sitting in a garage makes you a car. I  feel many  people use attending church to profess their faith and to validate that they are a good person.  It begs the question: why must one go to a service to profess one's faith?  Shouldn't one do something worthwhile for humanity rather than recite a creed in a church pew? (honestly, that seems somewhat cult-like to me).

A couple years ago, I posed the following, somewhat related scenario to my friend who is a professor of theology (for sake of argument, Jesus did exist):  

Let's say I have one hour per week to spare.  I can either go to church or volunteer in my community.  What would Jesus prefer me to do?

Her response:  Jesus would want you to volunteer. 

Mind you, this is not why I have been involved in a volunteer organization for nearly two decades.  Although I have told my parents more than once, "some people go to church, I go to Circle K/Kiwanis".   Dad has accepted this; Mom is waiting for me to attend church again. 

Now, I never got anything out of going to church (I think that's glaringly apparent).  However, volunteering is quite the opposite - helping those in need, fostering support for our fellow humans (and animals), working for the common/greater good and perhaps leaving the planet in better shape than when I got here.  

If you want to label that "faith", that's how I choose to express it.

Easter on the fb

Oh social media, what hath thee bestowed upon us now? 

This is the current "facebook challenge" going around:

During this couple of weeks before Easter, I am out to prove that my friends will repost, I hope I am right!!! Easter is not about bunnies and chocolate eggs. Let's lift up God's name and make a statement!! When Jesus died on the cross he was thinking of You and Me. If you are not ashamed to call Jesus Christ your savior, copy and repost. I'm not ashamed.

I call myself spiritual.  Raised Catholic, but currently don't follow a specific religion and I honestly don't foresee that changing in the near future.  And if I do, I definitely won't be Catholicism.  In some capacity, religion does some for some people (i.e. sense of community, feeling of belonging, prescribing to a common belief) - I'm just not one of them.  However, I do realize that I have friends and family who prescribe to religion and it is a large part of their lives.  While I may not necessarily agree with their beliefs, it's their prerogative so long as they don't try to shove their beliefs down my throat.

That being said, I find this facebook challenge well, uncomfortable.  I always felt religion was a personal thing that was better kept private and not proclaimed from the rooftops - or interwebs.  That's what irks me about this whole "challenge".  Plus, if someone was to post that "Easter is about chocolate bunnies and chocolate eggs" I shudder to think about the wrath they would receive from "believers".  Because let's face it, in our society we question non-religious people in their beliefs as if they are deficient in some capacity but it's perfectly acceptable to have "Bible-thumpers" shouting scripture from every place imaginable (whilst picking and choosing what verses to adhere to and what not to).  That's wrong.  Everyone is entitled to his/her beliefs - and not shoving those beliefs down someone else's throat.  Period.

Besides, Easter is really about Peeps and Cadbury Creme Eggs.

played into hibernation

It is not a fun time to be a Bears fan in Packer Nation.

Truth be told, it never really is. However, when the prize for winning the game is a ticket to Super Bowl XLV, it's just that much more fun.

Yes, that was sarcastic.

To be fair, I (partially) brought it upon myself. I was trash-talking Packers fans all week. And as much as I wanted the Bears to punch their ticket to the Super Bowl, my gut was saying otherwise (admittedly, I picked the Packers to win). But I continued to trash-talk nonetheless; even during the game where at times I wondered if the Bears would decide to show up and play.

All in good fun, right? Right....until Monday morning.

I'm the only Bears fan in my office, and I wore black in mourning. It was duly noted by numerous co-workers that the Bears lost. And yes, I did expect it. My boss even brought it up in a meeting - just to razz me. The only upside is that I won $20 in the Packer pool for the week. However, I would have preferred a Bears win.

Really, I don't mind "the Bears still suck" comments (note: I actually think that's a funny song by Happy Schnapps Combo even if I don't agree with it) and other assorted smack from people I talk to or see on a regular basis, or those I consider my good friends. I view it as what it's intended - a friendly rivalry, maybe in a twisted way, a sign of affection. What I don't like is people who rarely bother to talk to me otherwise finding it appropriate to talk smack. The camaraderie just isn't there, and thus, it almost seems slightly malicious.

In the end, we all have to remember it's just a game (albeit a big game). The Packers played better and deserved to win. Although I am happy to see the Bears have a formidable back-up QB in Hanie. And I hope the Packers beat the crap out of the Steelers.

Until NFL 2011...BEAR DOWN!

nfl: a strange beast

Michael Vick is currently the leading vote-getter for the NFL MVP. And people are going fucking nuts about it.

Vick and his cohorts operated Bad Newz kennel - a kennel that abused pit bulls and bred them as bait for dogfighting rings, as well as funded the gambling side of the operation. In 2007, he pled guilty to federal charges in the dog fighting investigation (amongst a slew of minor state and federal charges). Additionally he was suspended by the NFL due to his illegal, cruel and reprehensible behavior - and filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. He served almost two years in federal prison and was required to provide to a fund for the care and rehabilitation of the dogs rescued from his kennel. (Note: of the 51 dogs rescued, only four were euthanized. Over half of the remaining dogs now have permanent homes).

I understand the backlash against Vick; backlash from animal rights groups, no-kill shelters, the general populous. This is largely because we can all relate. After all, almost all of us has had encounters house pets at one time or another, and those of us who own pets consider them part of the family. And yes, the Vick incident hits close to home for me; especially seeing Cayenne (and Lily too) represent the breed brutally abused. Abusing animals is unfathomable to us, and just plain wrong.

But this turn of events reveals the strange beast of the NFL.

Earlier this year, Ben Roethlisberger was accused of raping a woman in Florida nightclub. No charges were filed. Yet this is not the first time Big Ben has been accused of sexual assault. He tends to go after almost any female that moves. Abuse - physical, sexual, emotional - against any human is also wrong. Yes, he was suspended for six games by the league. However, there was minimal (if any) backlash from women's abuse organizations, women's rights organizations, etc.

Then there's the whole Brett Favre "sexting" scandal. Favre allegedly sent inappropriate messages to former Jets gameday reporter Jen Sterger. She claims harassment, even though the communication was allegedly mutual. Keep in mind Favre is married (to someone who looks exactly like Sterger, strangely enough). There have been no legal repercussions as of yet, and honestly, there might never be. Sure, Favre screwed his reputation and his marriage, but it's his to screw up. Oh, and did you notice any backlash from the Council for Marriage and Family or the like?

But what about NFL players and murder? Enter Ray Lewis, indicted on murder and aggravated assault charges. However, charges were dropped against Lewis in exchange for his testimony against his two "friends". He got a year of probation, misdemeanor of obstruction and a hefty fine. No suspension. No backlash from anyone that I recall - although this was just over a decade ago. And he was named Super Bowl MVP a year later. Today, he is one of the most revered linebackers in the NFL. I'm not denying his talent or on-field charisma, but everyone seems to have forgotten the past murder charges. Call me crazy, but involvement in a murder is a bigger crime than animal abuse (as trite as that sounds).

What I'm saying is that the punishment should fit the (alleged) crime. I don't condone what any of these players (allegedly) did. In the case of Vick - he paid his dues, served his time, and should be allowed to play the game.

And for the record, I don't think Vick (or any of previously mentioned players) should be MVP for the reasons listed above.

citizens actually decide election outcomes

I swear I know some crazy, whacked-out conservatives (thank you Marquette University for introducing me to these folks...please note the sarcasm.)

This status message greeted me on my facebook newsfeed last night (although I didn't wholly get my thoughts together until now): (insert God-fearing conservative here) would like you to support Scott Walker, Rebecca Kleefisch and Ron Johnson when you vote but knows that ultimately God elects government leaders. This is why we try not to speak ill of our elected leaders even if we don't agree with their decisions, especially in front of our children. To God be the glory.

OK, I really don't have a problem with someone promoting/advertising for whom to cast your ballot, even if there is no fucking way I am voting for those candidates. I would like everyone to support Tom Barrett, Tom Nelson and Russ Feingold. Those are my political views and whom I feel ultimately are the best choices for Wisconsin. And yes, on some level, I think everyone should vote for the candidates I do. Sadly I likely will be in the minority thus will be drowning my sorrows with - ironically - red wine. Point being, in the USA we are able to vote - mostly without being ostracized or brutalized - for the our candidates of choosing.

My issue is the statement that "ultimately God elects government leaders". Correct me if I'm wrong, I still wholeheartedly believe that the citizens going to the polls and actually casting ballots will elect the next government leaders. Believing this statement would mean this election is already over whether or not one votes...so why bother? It also implies that we have no free will in the voting process. Isn't voting a symbol of freedom and living in the free world? I thought so. We, as citizens, are ultimately responsible for the outcome of these elections and the choices we make in general. Period. Anything otherwise would be preposterous.

I know I have supporters with my views and opinions on this. However, I did not expect one to respond to the comment (and I have no idea who this person is, but I kind of like them): I will teach my children that we're ultimately responsible for the choices we make, and the people we elect. Not to pass the buck to "God" when things go badly. But thanks for the advice.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. There people who are intelligent and hold themselves accountable out there.

(Note: There was a counter-response to the effect we rely on God for everything and not our government; and he's passing on a burden to his children. Somehow, I fail to see how teaching your child to hold him/herself accountable for actions/choices as passing a burden or a bad idea. Teaching children to rely on something/someone other than themselves seems to be a much worse idea.)

As for the second half of the statement, it is probably good practice not to speak ill of people in front of children in general - elected official or not. However, there are no children reading this so here it goes. I thought "W" was a moron and royally fucked this country for eight years. There is no way Obama could clean up his mess in 1.5 years, let alone four. But whether or not I personally voted for "W" or agreed with his policies (which I didn't), he was still the president of the USA and thus commands some (albeit a tiny, tiny iota) of respect. However, this does not mean I will stop badmouthing "W" or the projected Wisconsin governor anytime soon.

Bottom line: It is your privilege to vote as we live in a free country. Exercise that privilege. Make your voice heard. And when you do, vote Democrat. OK, really...go vote for whom you feel is the best candidate.

the skinny

A strange phenomenon has happened in my life in the past month...people have referred to me as "skinny". If you feel so inclined to reference my being benny post, you might have picked up that I find this extremely weird.

The first inkling appeared in mid-August at a volleyball game at Tracks. Two team members said it looked like I had lost weight. I just brushed it off, rationalizing that it was summer and since I'm outside more I was tan, thus appearing thinner. Whatever.

Enter the month of October. I went home to Maryland for my cousin's wedding - or as I like to call it, an excuse to see my nephews (oh, and those people who take care of them) - early in the month. I'm standing in my brother's kitchen - probably drinking a beer - and out of nowhere he asks, "Hey Bec, have your lost weight?" I respond with a "deer in headlights" look, as I don't think my brother has ever asked that question (well, to me anyway). Truth be told, I couldn't really answer the question as I firmly believe "scale" is a dirty five-letter word and borderline satanic. But I did think he needed his eyeglasses checked.

On this excursion home, of course I had to go into DC, visit the Washington Monument and take photos (even if it looks the same EVERY time). Upon my return to Milwaukee I posted these and other photos on facebook, per usual. I go volleyball the following Monday, and one of my teammates who viewed the photos commented "I like the photos...and you look so skinny." Huh? The conversation then gravitated to how my teammates usually see me in shorts (which I am not attractive in. At all.), t-shirt and XL sweatshirt. Thus, when I wear "real" clothes, you can actually tell I have a waist. This prompted me to slam my beer. Really? We're in a bar. Can't we talk about football or the douchy vball team we were about to play?

Last week I was at a "Swap Party" (aka "One persons trash is another person's treasure" - everyone brings stuff we want to get rid of and we kind of go through it to see if we want anything. The "leftovers" are donated) and the host told me I was getting smaller - ironically I was stuffing my face with cheese and beer at the time. So I start to look through the clothes and find a few tops. I try them on, determine I want them, etc. Then I look at the size. Medium. I can actually fit into a medium. And today, my dress pants that used to barely fit are actually loose. Shocking I know.

Maybe it's the vball, 5x/week PT exercises and daily 3 mile walks with the pup; because I know I don't eat any better (exhibited by the mozz sticks, nachos and beer I considered dinner last night). And maybe this giving up the soda (sans diet white soda) was a good idea. Whatever. It's weird.

Honestly, I still think y'all are on crack. However, I'll accept the compliments and reply with a heartfelt "thank you".