Apt. 11D

Fun v. Fun

So, what's a girl like me doing reading Lileks? He's Mr. Flat Tax, and I want the government to take more of my money. Get me a candidate who promises to raise my taxes, damn it. He'll win for sure.

I read Lileks, because his life so closely parallels mine. He goes to Target. I go to Target. He muses about mid-century furniture at Crate and Barrel. I spent some quality time with the new CB2 catalog today. He scans old matchbook covers into his computer and writes commentary about them, and I... well, no...

He writes about his life before the kids:

We should all see each other more often, of course, but most of us are now busy attending the offspring, and the opportunities for just dropping in and sitting around drinking coffee, smoking cigarettes, scoffing at MTV, and rising from the sofa six hours later to go home and have a frozen pizza are remarkably few. (Every man misses his single days in principle, but rarely in specifics.)

And Steve and I talk about life pre-kids. Actually we went to that bad place last night -- we wondered if we had more fun before we had kids. When this topic comes up, you are supposed to say, "having kids is a different kind of fun." Well, last night I wanted the kind of fun that involves staying up all night, smoking a pack of cigarettes without guilt, and doing body shots in a Mexican restaurant on West 3rd Street.

Yeah, yeah. You can't maintain your party-hardy, couch slacking ways for long. I mean nobody wants to see a forty year old woman licking salt off a guy's neck and coughing up big phlegm balls from the smokes.

Even the slacker thing becomes old, too. Steve always brings up his old roommate, Tiny, as the poster boy for the aging slacker. Tiny is still in the four bedroom apartment on 146th Street with the rotating cast of crazy roommates found in the Village Voice. He's still blowing his money on video games and pot. He is a professional slacker. Of course, he hasn't had a girlfriend since the first Bush administration and is getting fat from all that Chinese take-out.

Last week, we briefly talked about why people, especially Europeans, aren't making babies like they used to. I've got a new theory. Childless people are having too much fun. They are congregating in urban areas and when they outgrow body shots and apple core bongs, they move on to nice restaurants, museums, and last minute trips to Anguila. The breeders get stuck going on the DisneyLand cruise and posing for pictures with Goofy. And why are the Europeans having even less kids than the US? Ibiza.

Kids really are fantastic, but you don't really know it until you have one of your own. When you take the love for your kids out of the equation, all you have is a comparison between fun and no fun. And without the social pressure to procreate, many people choose no kids.

Having children shouldn't mean such a vast change in lifestyle from complete freedom to chained to the boring house in the suburbs. It shouldn't mean poverty and a mandatory second income. It shouldn't mean the end of parties and interesting vacations. It shouldn't mean being too busy with work and activities to sit around with the kids and slack with them.

I've got to train little Ian to get me a beer from the basement fridge and pop it open for me.

Bloggers and Everyone Else

I've been spending a lot of time in the liberal blogosphere lately. Bloggers have been inspired by the upcoming election and are churning out some cool posts. I particularly liked this post by Chris Bowers.

I reproduce this map because the progressive netroots is composed of political obsessives. Most of us spend an inordinate amount of time focused on current events, legislative policy, abstract matters of ideology, infrastructure, media narratives, electoral activism, and general strategy. Sometimes, I feel that because we are so obsessed with politics online that we often lose touch with what truly motivates voters. 80% of the country has no idea who Ann coulter is. Hell, 60% of the country has no idea who Harry Reid is.

Then he wonders if voters are more influenced by identity, rather than policy or ideas. He tells us (other bloggers? Democratic party leaders?) that we shouldn't fall into the policy wonk trap of boring people with details. We have to translate progressive ideas into terms that will appeal to the common voter.

It was a wonderful post that provides the nice little reality check we all need. I am not sure I agree that it's all identity, but I think that's a part of the puzzle. I do strongly agree with Chris that bloggers are different from everyone else. Bloggers are intense nerds, who plug away at their computer while other people watch the tube or socialize. Bloggers read the op-eds before most people take their shower in the morning. Bloggers are unusually politically active before they even open up their first blogspot space.

It's hard to understand this truth, especially when most of your socializing happens on line with other bloggers, but normal people don't care about politics like this. They don't know who Ann Coulter is. Hell, they don't know who Dick Chaney is. It's hard to not go to that snoberoo place and feel contempt for ignorance, but, you know, they've got other worries.

When I get to the elections section of Pol. Sci. 101, we always talk about the tight rope that candidates have to walk during elections. The voters who show up for the primaries are more politically extreme than voters who show up for the general election. Candidates will give speeches to the primary voters and say things that they will have to take back when it gets closer to November.

Bloggers are like those primary voters, intense and extreme.

Matt Bai wrote a rather disdainful column about bloggers in the Times Magazine on Sunday. (Read Holbo for more commentary.) Bloggers are these smart primary voters, but without real political sophistication. They know online, but they don't know offline. They aren't organized around a common policy goal. They don't even know what to call themselves.

I'm not sure what bloggers will do in the next election. But, as Bai points out, 600,000 people show up to read Kos every day. Howard Dean and John Kerry read the blogs and do it themselves. I'm not sure that the netroots are organized enough to make their own dent in electoral politics, like a political party or interest group. But they are the nice curveball thrown into politics as usual. They will force the candidates to talk more policy than identity at least in the early stages of the election. And that's good enough for me.

Local Corn

It was a mildly stressful weekend trying to get the little savages to conform for extended family gatherings. But things settled down by midday today, when we went to watch our kid march in the local Memorial Day parade. An hour long procession of brownies and cub scouts, seniors and vets sweated down the main street of town.

Crunchy Mom

I was cutting up strawberries for Ian when he decided to join in. "Ian cut too." He ran off to get his orange handled IKEA knife. He sawed very nicely and diced those strawberries into little pulps and then tossed them one by one in his mouth. Strawberry goo covered his face and his hands. After he finished the strawberry feast, he got up, took his gooey hands and slapped them on the walls. Splat. He smiled proudly at his rose colored hand prints on the wall and announced, "A clue. A clue. Notebook." I was laughing too hard to get mad.

When Ian was in school, I ran over to Jonah's school to catch a bit of Field Day. On Field Day, the whole school is out on the field rotating between relay races and ball tosses all morning. Each class has a tie dyed shirt in their own color. And they look cute as pie. The school doesn't really advertise that parents can come by, but they don't shoot you if you crash, like I did.

I followed Jonah around the field for a while helping out with the games and chatting with the kids. Mr. Popular got a headlock and a noogey. The Wonder Twin girl and I laughed about our crazy street. I told Big Thuggish Boy that he better stop growing. "I ate half a steak last night," he responded.

Then I realized it had happened again. Just as when we lived in New York, I had become very attached to my kid's friends. The extra love for my kid spilled over and landed on the nearest people around him. Even Bored and Hyper got a punch in the arm.

I was planning on writing crunchy posts all this week. Not that I have a strong idea of what crunchy is supposed to mean. I suppose it means local, organically grown, socially conscious, environmentally friendly, responsible. I'm not as crunchy as some. I do walk as much as I can. I drive a small car and live on a small lot. I'll vote for stronger environmental legislation and recycle. I'll buy organic products when I'm in the mood and have an extra dollar in my pocket.

But I don't wear Birkenstocks. I eat meat. I wear makeup and heels. I don't dye my hair yet, but I'm starting to get that Bonnie Raitt, white on red hair thing and may have to soon. I'm concerned that crunchiness is a rich person's movement. As much as I like a good trot through the woods, I prefer a warm summer night in the East Village bopping from outdoor cafe to club.

So, maybe I get a C+ or a B- for crunchiness.

I am, however, very crunchy when it comes to my kids. They are locally grown. I put a lot of effort into grooming them to be good people. I love cutting up strawberries, sneaking into school events, dancing to techno during the Sprockets Dancing Hour, and eating popcorn on Friday Movie Night. I love Ian's crushing hugs. I love watching my six year old get so proud of his mom for visiting him at school and messing with his buddies. I like that I've been able to shape them myself. My little, organic babies.

Spreading Love

Bitch writes, "Blah blah single women, blah blah soccer moms, blah blah security moms, blah blah NASCAR dads? Wanna know how to motivate those folks and get them to the polls? Talk about issues that matter to women and mothers. Talk about issues that matter to families. " And she has great links to politicized moms. The Democrats have to take back the family.

Harry writes, "restrictions on women’s participation in the labour market constituted a massive subsidy to public education." The smartest women became teachers, because there were few other career options for them. Harry isn't bemoaning women have more options today, just celebrating the smart teachers of the past. I would add that the schools still free ride off women's volunteer labor and assume that moms are there to pick up their child at 3:00 and are home full time over the summer. What job conforms to the school year?

Putin's efforts to subsidize baby-making have put the cost of motherhood and dropping populations back on the radar. Glenn Reynolds says that the safety nuts have made parenting too hard. No more five kids in the backseat. Sam Crane writes that Americans are making more babies than Europeans, because we aren't that concerned about the safety of the kids. "Americans have more children because they are irresponsible and do not understand or carry through their child rearing duties."

One of my rules about blogging is to never diss family, friends, or work. But maybe I should reverse this policy. Look at all these people who've made a ton of money dishing the dirt on their blogs.

Look What That Ho Is Wearing Now!

Amanda Marcotte has an interesting post on the debate in the feminist blogosphere over the blog, Go Fug Yourself. GFY posts pictures of celebrities wearing bad clothes and mocks them silly. Some say this mockery isn't funny and is hurtful to women who don't like to dress up. Other say nonsense. This sort of mockery helps to bolster the patriarchy-blaming model.

I don't really see how mocking celebrities has any impact on women either way. Celebrities are our Greek Gods. We worship them. We mock them. They aren't human enough to feel like the barbs aimed at them have anything to do with us mortals. The funny part isn't that these are women wearing bad clothes. The funny is that these are rich women with a pile of handlers and advisors, and they STILL get it wrong.

I don't feel that sorry for them either. It's part of the bargain. They get a ton of money and beautiful bed partners, and we have the mockery. GFY does focus on women, but the tabloids spread the mockery to men as well. Look at Tom Cruise.

However, I did feel bad for Britney here. Britney almost dropped her baby and the press caught the whole thing on camera. The photographers follow her to a restaurant where they find her with smeared makeup and her thong showing. They gotta lay off that girl.

Tara Reid, on the other hand, is fair game. Girlfriend, Mork wants his jacket back.

(Of course, all this debate has killed the funny. You just can't politicize funny. )

Geek Night on TV

OhmyGod. Who watched TV last night? Geekfest! The finale of American Idol. 63 million people voted for the finalist. That's more votes that any president has ever received. Really sad. And that finale was such a tub of corn with Dionne Warwick and Meatloaf and everybody in matching Brady Bunch outfits.

There was the Dateline special on Internet predators. They caught 120 scum in 6 days and had quick interviews with them as they were caught. The pervs looked normal. The banality of evil. I'm waaay on the left on criminal justice issues. I'm strongly against the death penalty, the three strikes law, and the incarceration of drug dealers. But these sex offenders are another story. I'm not convinced that they can ever be rehabilitated.

And Lost. They brought back Brother Desmond. Mister Eco and Lock appear to be dead, but you know that they are coming back, because they weren't caught DWI like Libby and Anna Lucia. As we were watching, Steve kept wondering what the geeks on Fark were saying about the show.

I've got a few good links today. I'll spread them out into different posts, because they're good for debate.

That Tent Thing Again

Anthony Lane's review of the Da Vinci Code should be your first stop in this week's New Yorker. I was a bit disappointed in his review of Cruise and MI3 a few weeks ago. I though he could have been a lot ruder. But Lane has reinstated himself as my favorite literary crush after this: "There has been much debate over Dan Brown’s novel ever since it was published, in 2003, but no question has been more contentious than this: if a person of sound mind begins reading the book at ten o’clock in the morning, at what time will he or she come to the realization that it is unmitigated junk? The answer, in my case, was 10:00.03, shortly after I read the opening sentence..."

heh. But this post isn't about Lane. It's about Jeffrey Goldberg's article "Central Casting: What is the Democrats' Best Way to Win." (The article isn't on line, but an interview with the author is.)

Despite a huge opportunity landing on their lap, Goldberg says that the Democrats show every sign of fucking it up. It could be 1964 all over again. In '64, huge, new class of freshman Democratic congressmen was elected, which gave Johnson the chance to push through the Great Society program. 1964, people. And instead, we're already making mistakes like that Lamott thing and Pelosi keeps making an ass of herself and the best we've got is Hillary. Okay, back to the article.

Goldberg cited some very useful numbers:
In 2004, 61% of church-going voters said they voted for Bush; 39% went to Kerry.
59% of voters with kids supported Bush; 40% for Kerry.
21% of Americans self-identify as liberal
34% as conservative
45% as moderates

In order to win, Democrats have got to pull almost 2/3rds of moderate voters. They also have to get those church-going voters with kids.

Even Howard Dean gets this. I didn't realize that he was so strong on national security issues, until I read this article, but he is. And this is one of the issues that is important to middle America.

Democrats also have to play nice with religious folks. Respect. You may not agree with their positions on things, but stop that sneering. We aren't going to get elected that way.

Dean has tried to reach out to, among others, evangelical Christians, and he doesn't like what he suggests is the Party's gradual abandonment of the socially conservative but economically liberal working class. 'The Democratic Party was built on four pillars -- the Roosevelt intellectuals, the Catholic Church, labor unions, and African-Americans," he said not long ago. "But we had stopped communicating with the Catholics and with labor, and so all you have left was the Roosevelt intellectuals and the African-Americans."

My man, Obama, comes out of the article shining. He's not ripe enough for 2008. Too bad, because he's the man. He gets middle American more than anybody else in the Democratic leadership. Not like Pelosi, who wants to waste time by subpoenaing Bush for two years. I'm past that. Bush is roadkill. We have to step over his dead body and get some work down, rather running him over with the car again and again.

Goldberg spends some time interviewing Democratic candidates in Missouri. They say they don't want Hillary down there campaigning for them. The red states hate her, even if she is trying to be the moderate.

But it all comes down to respect. The former Virginia Governor said that it would be dumb to nominate Clinton who would only have appeal in 16 states. "Part of this is just showing respect. Respect for culture, faith, values. You know, not everybody wants to live in a big city.... I don't think it's only about faith; it's about values and respect. It's about being comfortable at a NASCAR race as wellas in a boardroom."

Goldberg writes, "The Democratic Party of 2006 bears little resemblance to the party that dominated American politics from 1932 until 1964. But if the New Deal coalition has dissolved, there is a persistent desire to revive it -- and to modernize it -- especially among those who feel estranged from the Party's national leadership. 'We used to be the party of the big tent, Montana's Governor Schweitzer said. "We have to respect regional differences. A Democrat in Montana looks a little different from one from Massachusetts. You don't have to agree with my idea about gun control, but you've got to respect it."

It's a damn good article. I have no patience with people who have no interest in getting elected. No common sense or vision. No interest or sympathy for the people who enter the voting booth. Too bad that Obama isn't ready yet.

Whoo

He's a cornball. But I like that Taylor Hicks. Even if Mo Ryan thinks he's the next Ruben Studdard.

Rebuilding Biloxi

Hurricane Katrina hit Mississippi even harder than it hit Louisiana. Biloxi, a small city that juts into the gulf, was completely flattened. The Times had a fascinating article on the politics of rebuilding Biloxi.

The city planners want to rebuild the city according the New Urbanism movement.

New Urbanism arose as a reaction to sprawl, the default American landscape of highways lined with strip malls and big-box stores and suburban subdivisions populated by a homogeneous and insulated middle class. The New Urbanists proposed higher-density, pedestrian-friendly communities: old-fashioned neighborhoods with schools and shops, parks and offices, single-family homes and low-income apartment buildings, all mixed together and connected by shady streets and wide sidewalks. Seaside, Fla., was the first real New Urbanist project, and it remains the most famous, in large part because the movie "The Truman Show" was filmed there. But the Congress for the New Urbanism, which was founded in 1993 by six like-minded architects, now has 2,500 members who have built scores of communities.

Sounds great doesn't it? Yeah, that's because you're an effete blue stater. The locals hate it. A good number of the people won't be able to afford the new housing. One interviewee said, "Affordable to who? It won't be me, I can assure you of that." The locals don't want walkable neighborhoods.

...New Urbanism is like Whole Foods: it's meant to be good for you, but it's expensive, at least on the front end, and it comes with a set of cultural connotations that generally play best among the prosperous and the self-consciously progressive. At Tyrone's Barber and Beauty Shop, Bernice Catchings had flipped through the plan, with its spiffy little houses and tasteful storefronts, and said: "A poor lady like me, what the hell am I going to do with that? Walk by it and admire it? We can't buy it. The white man will always have us pushed to where we have to just . . . go by and admire it and then go home somewhere and eat them old beans and bread and be thankful."

Actually, the locals don't want to even follow FEMA's elevation codes, which is insane given the dire weather predictions. They want to build cheap homes quickly without concerns for safety or aesthetics.
Reminds me of the problems of trying to enforce environmental regulations on the third world.

New Urbanism. Whole Foods. Environmentalism. How do we make progressivism more than an upper class movement?

(Here are two old posts on suburban planning.)