Monday morning roundup

Policy and debt in Asia and Europe.

War stories.

Gotta run... hopefully heading out of town. Talk to you all later.

Post SB roundup

I don't know whether to be amused or afraid by this kind of... can't... call... it... logic.

I don't quite know why but I found this hilarious:

Ramble and response to comment

I am Miss Popular this morning: my phone is ringing off the hook (mostly with recorded messages). My flight for tomorrow has been canceled, and American Airlines, bless them, has bothered to inform me of that (United did no such thing for the original flight--I only found out when I went to check in online). Then UPS called to confirm that they're getting the hedgehog. Then my mother called to ask whether I was snowed in.

I have to say, the snow and the canceled trip is a double-wammy: I didn't buy a lot of food since I thought I'd be away all week, I didn't get the Post today, and so on. I'm not complaining, I still live somewhere where I can walk to stuff... but not knowing whether the trip is on for Tuesday or not, I don't know whether I should buy fresh food for the week or just for the next two days. And I don't know whether the stores are open and/or stocked. But I need to get out, so I guess I'll find out.

***
As I was formulating a response to Ernessa's comment (and digging out a path to my recycle bin), it occurred to me that I've taken to commenting on 'single' issues as much and in the same way that I've always commented on Russian and Jewish issues. That same way being, everyone's different, and take cultural generalizations with a grain of salt. For every Ian Frazier and his brilliant observation on Russians and their hour-long teas, which make them prone to 'unhealthy foreign ideas', there are ten idiots who completely misinterpret or overinterpret something.

Okay, that was my roundabout way of emphatically agreeing with what Ernessa had stated more articulately: everyone's different.

And I may not go as far as to deem Gottlieb's passage that compares single women to brain-dead accident victims offensive, I'll easily deem it inaccurate for the reasons I discussed in my original post: the unhappily married are cautionary tales, too.

I have (at least) one friend who "married him" because her older sister urged her to, said 'it just gets harder as you get older, so unless he's so hideous you can't let it go, marry him.' The guy my friend married is a good guy, but my friend is *not* happily married, i.e. not very happy. She's happy that she has kids, so maybe for her it's worth it--it's a trade-off each person can only make for herself.

Ms. Gottlieb's book is not going to change my life one way or another; there are no hordes of unattractive but otherwise wonderful men beating down my door. Nonetheless, I know that in other situations (job, house) where other people urged me to settle, I was really happy I held out until I found what was right for me. Neither is perfect in every way: had I held out for, say, Google-like working conditions, or a house right in Old Town with a newly renovated kitchen, I'd be worse off--but none of that is important for me. I'd also be worse off had I settled for, say, any employer that could reduce my commute or any house, period, because the time is right. So it comes back to what we've been saying all along: figure out what's right for you and go for that.

I twice recently mentioned 'He's Just Not That into You'--and I came across a quote that brilliantly captured the book's message: "If he likes you, you'll know. If he doesn't like you, you'll be confused." But I digress. There's another great book that I've mentioned on these pages, and it is one of my two go-to self-help books (the other is "Don't Sweat the Small Stuff"). This one is Karen Salmansohn's "How to Be Happy, Dammit: A Cynic's Guide to Spiritual Happiness". She talks about making choices with your soul rather than your ego, i.e. she makes the valid part of LG's argument without reducing it to an issue of being picky or not. It's not about lowering your standards; it's about being guided by what's really important rather than by window dressing.

Hilarious

Sunday morning roundup

Karaoke is apparently a blood sport in the Philippines--one that creates a niche market for gay men, to boot.

Amy Wilentz writes that the aftermath of the earthquake shows how far Haiti's come since Baby Doc fled twenty-four years today.

This coming Thursday marks another meaningful anniversary for freedom. I recommend you read all the brief (and very poignant) statements linked in that article, but I'll single out this especially articulate, compelling piece. I have to ask out loud, as much as part of me wants to keep out the snark, how the Tea Partiers fancy themselves freedom fighters.

More locally, the storm has screwed with just about everyone.

Oh, Lori Gottlieb. I understand the point you're trying to make, and I *still* disagree with you, kind of. I mean, I agree with what I think you mean, i.e. it would behoove women, and men--because everything you say applies to men as well (they can get lonely, crave companionship, and reject women who don't look 'perfect')--to redefine their idea of Mr. or Ms. Right. But I think all too often women make the opposite mistake, too, and you're dwelling on women being too picky--because you've been too picky--but the grass is always greener, and single women like you can write about how you wish you'd "settled" but you'll find few married women--among those miserable in their marriages--admitting that they wished they'd thought more carefully about whom they'd chosen to share a life with. At least we do have women who divorce, like Jenny Sanford, to offer that perspective. But wait, apparently, you don't think this settling stuff applies to men. Sorry, I think you're full of $hit (well, I can only speak for myself, and I would rather be single).

Here's where I do agree with her: we should be to decouple, in our discourse, loneliness from desperation (and from gender). Friends have reported feeling guilty, from an independent woman perspective, for wanting to be in a relationship. There's nothing anti-feminist about wanting companionship (like I said, men do it, too), just like there's nothing anti-feminist about being mindful about what you eat. No one should get slammed for having a full life and yet acknowledging that it might be more fulfilling with a partner (see Sonya Sotomayor). And here's where I'll reiterate what I said in the previous paragraph: it won't be more fulfilling with just any partner. Yes, by all means, let go of the Adonis thing, but stick to your standards, if they're reasonable, for character, and never, ever compromise those because you'll end up just as lonely except with a huge, hard-to-get-rid-of burden in your life in the form of another person.

So there, mom

I had asked some friends whether they wanted to go see Kevin Smith at Sixth & I, and one sent me a link in response, which in turn linked to this... which gives me something to tell my mother next time she gets creative about how fat I am (I have yet to achieve that).

My winter wonderland: the sequel

Tempting

Do you guys remember this? I'm seriously considering it, except I don't have any beer and I don't think I could handle that much tea. Or beer, for that matter. So shoveling it is.

Phone call

Message from mom: Where are you? You should be sitting at home with the phone nearby!

Mom: Hello?
A.: Hi.
Mom: So, where were you? Out shoveling snow? In the bathroom?
A.: I was on the phone.

Wow. Mom really thinks I don't have any friends. The possibility that I might be on the phone with someone does not cross her mind.

Mom: So, you're getting lot's of snow?
A.: You could say that. The heaviest of it fell overnight, but it's supposed to keep snowing until this evening.
Mom: Did you shovel?
A.: Yeah, I shoveled last night and then again just now. I cleared the path through the front lawn, as well as the sidewalk. I'm saving the back for when I get stir crazy again. Everything's closed and the metro's shut down.
Mom: Have you cleaned off your car?
A.: No. I'm not driving anywhere.

Mom: Do you know anything about Seagate?
A.: Seagate what?
Mom: I have a Seagate storage drive I'm trying to use to transfer files to the new laptop.
A.: No.

Mom launches into a tirade about Seagate.

A.: Mom, I'd really have to see it and do it myself--I can't help you over the phone.
Mom: Well, could you ask someone?
A.: Ask someone what?
Mom: About Seagate?
A.: No. But I can take a look at it next time.
Mom: That doesn't help.
A.: Sorry.

Mom and dad start arguing about something. Eventually, they remember that I'm on the line.

Mom: We can discuss that later.
A.: Yes, please do.
Mom: So, what are you going to do?
A.: [Shrug] Clean. Shovel. Read.
Mom: Have fun with that.

Saturday roundup

Remittances from the Persian Gulf to South Asia are drying up.

It's still snowing. Gail Collins makes an interesting point about that.

The cable guys are local heroes this weekend.

Matthew DeBord's commentary on the auto industry, with regard to what it takes to get to #1 versus stay at #1, isn't without analogy to the difference between campaigning and governing.

I take your point, Ms. Givhan, as it pertains to Katie Couric, but women in more down-to-earth industries embrace the sexy-is-powerful paradigm at their own professional risk.

FDA reconsiders serving sizes to reflect actual behavior rather than suggested portions. I see the benefits--including a decrease in declarations of 'no trans fat' when there's less than half a gram--but isn't also worthwhile to inform people of what a suggested serving size is? I'm comfortable with a portion of pasta at 2/3 to 1 cup cooked, but I don't think I'd ever stop at half a cup of ice cream. I do agree that declared serving sizes are deceptive when they're not intuitive (half a muffin or frozen meal or can of soup), even when it's not deliberate, like in the case of the chips in the article. Transparency is the key... although standard setting is also an issue.

As for what is junk food, I know nutrition is nuanced and complicated, but don't put avocados in the 'maybe' category with crackers. I also disagree with this guy: 'cheap' needn't be part of the definition of junk food. Whole Foods sells a whole bunch of expensive, processed crap. Terra chips are high brow and very good, but they're still junk food. They may have less fat than avocado, but the latter is still real food. Sure, empty calories cost less, BECAUSE THEY'RE SUBSIDIZED. Yes, all that stuff is still junk. And no, not all nutritious food is expensive. An apple doesn't cost more than a candy bar, and peanuts don't cost more than chips. Don't tell me that nutrition is elitist when the following foods are under $1 a serving: eggs, whole wheat breads and other whole grains, hummus, beans, oatmeal, nuts, bananas, frozen spinach, etc.

You know I don't want to come off as a blind follower of Michael Pollan, but the fact is, his food rules were my food rules before he 'patented' them (two of them, anyway; I came late to the 'not a lot' set of rules). Actually, Jay and I were just talking about hidden trend-setting talent: I was having anti-Valentine's Day parties before it was cool, and composting and CSA-ing before it was hip and trendy (my parents have always composted, and I belonged to a CSA in college), and he and I went to Panama before it was cool, and I've been making amazing oatmeal before the trendsters got a hold of it. Which is why I'm telling you that the trends I eschew--like truffle oil and granite countertops--will soon go the way of the dodo.

By the way, award-winning food writer, Scottish salmon is farmed. But I couldn't agree more with Tom Colicchio here:

Tom Colicchio, who helped found the modern green-market-gastronomy movement at Gramercy Tavern and then Craft, says, "Some people think manipulating food is the job a chef does. It isn't. Flavor comes first. You treat it with respect and keep its natural taste. I want people to say, 'I never knew scallops tasted like this.'"

But this is why I don't go to a lot of restaurants: I can make food that conforms to my standards (quality, taste, sustainability, price) at home.

Friday afternoon roundup and rambles

After the office closed, early, I thought I'd pop into the Safeway a few blocks up before heading home. The lines were insane, but I had a magazine and I wanted some groceries. In the line that I stood in--for an hour and a half--the couple not far ahead of me took turns holding the place in line and running all around the store to get more stuff for their two grocery carts. It was rude. I know I extolled the virtues, the other day, of not blogging about $hit like that, but it was so egregiously obnoxious that I had to tell you about it.

I had to wonder about the hordes in the market, apart from those clearly shopping for a cast of thousands for what I imagine are superbowl parties. They'll be able to shop again *in two days.* I just happened to have some time and a hankering for avocado.

***
I had my own bag, in case you were wondering. I keep one in my handbag. It was enough for the six items for which I waited ninety minutes.

The bag tax may be coming to Virginia, although there's some opposition in the state legislature. To which I say, 'really, D-Alexandria? Do you know your constituency?'

I read this guide for Type-A parents while in line. It's pretty funny.

***
Ruth Marcus can't understand why Jenny Sanford put up with so much BS and ignored so many signs, but women--smart women--do it all the time. I've done it, and I find myself talking my friends out doing it, regularly. This why I wholeheartedly believe that "He's Just Not That into You" is possibly the greatest gift to women of all time, up there with "Our Bodies, Ourselves".

***
I recommend last night's Daily Show in its entirety, but I have to share one clip in particular.

Now, I may have told you before that one motivation for mom's concern over my weight and my overbearing personality and overall harshness is that she seems to believe, at least partly, that that's why I'm single. Let me offer you an alternative explanation: I have the sense of humor of a 14-year old boy, and that clip had me rolling.

***
Speaking of clips, have you guys seen this?? Scroll to 2:20 or so.

Friday morning roundup

Anne Applebaum doesn't fault the POTUS for skipping out on the European summit.

Over half of the front page of the Metro section in today's Post is devoted to panda coverage, including this awesome headline. While we're on headlines, the Post's digest places "Webcam viewer alerts Scottish park to rhino birth" two blurbs after "PAKISTAN: India offering to talk, Foreign Ministry says" and gives it about as much space.

This is Not Funny but you have to admit it kind of is:

.A respected domestic violence and anger management counselor in Fairfax County was arraigned in federal court Thursday after he allegedly pulled a gun on two men who he believed were blocking his car on an Annandale street last week

People are flipping out over maybe a foot of snow. I'm flipping out because the flipping out may mess with my business travel.

It's really tempting to get a new digital camera, but I don't need one.

Sigh

I get it, New Yorker writers and editors: you knew J.D. Salinger well, and few can say that. And your appreciations are genuine, and it is understandable that you'd devote the entire 'Talk of the Town' section to them. The insights you share in honor of his memory--about books, writing, writers--are interesting. But I have to question this one:

In American writing, there are three perfect books, which seem to speak to every reader and condition: “Huckleberry Finn,” “The Great Gatsby,” and “The Catcher in the Rye.” Of the three, only “Catcher” defines an entire region of human experience: it is—in French and Dutch as much as in English—the handbook of the adolescent heart.

No, Mr. Gopnik: they speak to every (white) male reader, and define an entire region of the (white) male experience. Guy bonding, guy adolescence, guy coming of age. And there's a lot to be said for that, but don't try to pass it off as universal.

***
It's funny because I've referenced, on these pages, two writers whose stories speak to my condition: David Bezmozgis and Gary Shteyngart. They're both guys, but their books, stories are less male-centric than 'Catcher in the Rye.' Kind of. I mean, "Natasha" in "Natasha and other Stories" is very male, but the other stories aren't, really, and that book spoke to me to the point that I felt it in my bones. You'd never think to suggest a book about an immigrant childhood as a narrative of a universal experience--nor should you--but the point is, you'd never even think about it. But it doesn't seem like Adam Gopnik thought twice about extending the Holden Caulfield experience to the rest of us.

Thursday morning roundup

It's like Pandora's bottle. Those are some statistics, and that's quite a bit of caffeine. At least Russian's get to share the wealth. The wealth being, a reputation (based on truth) for destructive alcoholism.

The Collins-Brooks conversation on national security trade-offs.

The Swiss Government is scrambling to not give millions to Baby Doc.

Toles on DADT.

Wednesday evening roundup

Really? The Lavish pay of the federal workforce? As Jon Stewart would say, meet me at camera 3.

Sigh. I don't want to get into personal financial details, and I won't--you saw (read) me react in horror when my mother wouldn't stop alluding to my salary at dinner over the holidays (when a friend of the friends with whom we were having dinner said that federal workers make high six figures). You can probably deduce that I am not exactly rolling in it, since I put up with an overgrown baby for a roommate for much too long, but that--i.e., my salary--is not the point. Just like my weight is not the point. Yes, the fact that I'm not actually overweight makes my mom's commentary on the matter even funnier (if I were, her commentary would be merely tragic rather than a healthier tragicomic). But as close followers of this blog will know, mom has recently developed a new superpower: she can assess my weight without actually seeing me. Which is to say, roundaboutly, that my weight--which is healthy--is not the issue. Likewise, my salary, which is appropriate--neither paltry nor lavish--to my level of skill, education and experience, and to the cost of living in this area, is not the point. Making it the point is like assessing charities purely on their administrative expenses, without taking into account what they actually do and how they do it (and yet, so many people only figure in administrative expenses when choosing charities to support). The point is, it's not like a monkey could do my job (and I am not even talking about the examples of highly specialized professions in the response letter--doctors, lawyers, scientists, etc.). Maybe it's appropriate that skilled people earn a living wage, commensurate with the competence they bring to the job. I work directly and indirectly with highly competent, hard-working, dedicated people across the federal government. Could we maybe show them a little respect?

***
Speaking of charities, here's why I told you not to give to the Red Cross.

And here's the debate about how best to rebuild Haiti.

Wednesday morning roundup

Admiral Mullen boils down a non-complex issue into a clear statement of 'wtf':

"No matter how I look at the issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens."

Maureen Dowd and Dana Milbank elaborate.

Could Guinea be the "rare case in which swift international sanctions actually worked"?

In China, a prominent human rights lawyer vanishes in what some see as part of a trend:

John Kamm, a veteran American human rights campaigner, said that during three decades working in China he had rarely seen such a hard line toward dissidents — and unbridled defiance against pressure from abroad. “China right now doesn’t feel like it owes anyone anything on human rights,” said Mr. Kamm, the founder of the Dui Hua Foundation, which seeks clemency for political prisoners through quiet diplomacy. “I’ve never seen a downward spiral like this.”

Child pornography is not a victimless crime, and people who buy the stuff are part of the problem.

At times I've urged people to cut WMATA some slack--things can happen even under the best management. But not this many things.

Oh, would you people stop whining?! It's not even cold out.

Joe Davidson explains why federal workers aren't overpaid.

Discussions and excerpt

A coworker and I were talking about what a bad paper the Post is. It's amazing. And it didn't used to be that way.

Another coworker was talking about a creepy guy around the corner who kept popping into her office and talking to her, and she couldn't figure out why. He wasn't flirting--in fact, he mentioned his wife all the time. Then she realized that he thought she needed the companionship. It reminded her of RM. Who, by the way, shot me an e-mail the other day to say 'hi.' I didn't *get* it, but I responded as tersely as possible.

I loved, loved, loved this week's fiction in the New Yorker. Last week's was good but weird, but this week's--Kevin Barry's short story--was amazing. And I have to quote from it, based on another conversation with a coworker, who is Ukranian, and actually shops at the lame Russian store a few blocks from my house (I guess it's less lame if you eat meat). Anyway, you know I'm very deliberate about my food choices, but I don't generally judge other people's food choices (the 'generally' is key; I did often think, speaking of RM, 'and that's your brain on high fructose corn syrup'). Anyway, I loved this:

I was not well liked out in Killary. I was considered “superior.” Of course, I was fucking superior. I ate at least five portions of fruit and veg daily. I had omega 3 from oily fish coming out my ears. I limited myself to twenty-one units of alcohol a week.

Groundhog Day roundup

Great t-shirt idea.

Howard Kurtz responds to this awesome opening clip.

Tuesday morning roundup

Whom would Jesus kick-box? I was waffling on including this article, but some of the lines, such as the following, proved irresistible:

The outreach is part of a larger and more longstanding effort on the part of some ministers who fear that their churches have become too feminized, promoting kindness and compassion at the expense of strength and responsibility.

Salons are popping up around Baghdad.

Gail Collins wittily parses the Illinois senatorial election.

If it weren't freezing and if I weren't carrying a ton of crap, this, while a good idea, would be a good reason to bike in.

A friend sent me this. As a loyal reader of this blog, he must have figured that my mom has been too distracted by my gargantuan @$$ and collagen-deficient lips to look out for my career.

Eugene Robinson is wary of the personal political brand. Dana Milbank comes a month or so late to the Orszag hotness analysis.

Monday morning roundup

Haiti's leadership crisis.

I love the discussion of fiction as self-indulgence unless there's a reader in mind. But even when new media challenge's one's reclusive tendencies, the right town will help you pull it off.

As a fervent Daily Show fan, I find Howard Kurtz's analysis baffling. Maybe it's my own liberal bias showing, but Jon Stewart has always been an equal-opportunity skewer of things that don't make sense. And this whole paragraph:

His "senior black correspondent," Larry Wilmore, solemnly informed the host that "Negroes aren't magic. . . . He's just suffering from the hard bigotry of high expectations." On another night, Stewart chided Obama for his cerebral style, saying: "You thought you could win us over with rational policy decisions and an even temperament?"

I interpreted less as chiding of Obama and more as pointing out the public's unrealistic expectations.

Sledding in Alexandria has gotten harder.

My governor, everyone.