Please see here for an introduction to the Pulitzer Project.
Please also read the Spoiler Alert.
I'll be posting my first book review soon, so (being a lawyer) I thought it would be a good idea to come up with some rules for participation in the comments section regarding the book reviews.
Here they are:
1. Feel Free to Express Any Opinion About Any Aspect of a Book Or Review.
My goal is to encourage open discussion about the books, almost like a college literature class, or a book club that hasn't turned into a wine and cheese and gossip session instead. (Although wine and cheese and gossip is also encouraged here -- if you need an address to send the wine and cheese to, send me an email).
So, if you think I've misinterpreted something the author wrote, tell me. If you think my analysis of the plot is all wrong, tell me. If you hated a book that I loved, feel free to say so, and tell me why. I may or may not change my mind, but I want to hear your perspective on it. Similarly, if you loved a book I hated, tell me what you loved about it. Maybe I’ll re-read it with a new perspective and love it, too. Or maybe not, but I’d love to know what made the book great for you. If you think my analysis is right on, obviously I'd love to hear that, too.
You may also feel free to be provocative and play "devil’s advocate" if you like -- make a point for the "other side" just for the sake of argument.
(If this all sounds like too much work for you, then feel free to just read the reviews for whatever you think they are worth, and move on -- although I would appreciate a quick comment to let me know if you agree, disagree, or, if you haven't read the book, whether my review makes you more or less likely to want to read it.)
2. Be Respectful.
To encourage discussion, I will demand respect for all contributors.
I was an English Lit major for only about a year and a half in college. So although at one time (20 or so years ago) I learned the basics of critical analysis of literature, I am not an expert. Most of my commenters are probably not experts, either.
If you are an expert, or even just a better literature analyst that the rest of us, tread gently. Feel free to point out why my interpretation is misguided or just plain wrong, but do it nicely. Sometimes I am reading when I am tired or distracted by kids or subway people or the television, and sometimes I am just not that bright, and so I miss something huge in the story. I want to know what I’ve missed, but I don’t want to be called names or belittled for missing it. Similarly, treat your fellow commenters with respect. Comments deemed to be disrespectful or a personal attack or otherwise in violation of these rules (or spam) may be deleted, in my sole discretion.
So far, that’s all the rules, but this is my blog and I can add more rules any time I feel like it, so you may want to check back here to see what rule you’ve violated if you find that your comment was deleted and you don’t know why.
.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
(And it only took me four tries...)
I did it! I named all 50 states, and in less than 5 minutes....
...And it only took me four tries.
The first three times, I used up all 10 minutes and still forgot huge portions of our country -- not many states, mind you, just big ones like, say, Nebraska or Montana or Oklahoma (Oklahoma! How could I forget Oklahoma?!? There's a whole musical about Oklahoma, for cryin' out loud!).
All I can say in my defense is, it's harder than it seems like it ought to be. Especially if you attended elementary school in the deep south, where they required you to learn the names and locations of only the Confederate states.
Give it a try. Let me know how you fare. Good luck!
.
I named 50 US states in 10 minutes 
...And it only took me four tries.
The first three times, I used up all 10 minutes and still forgot huge portions of our country -- not many states, mind you, just big ones like, say, Nebraska or Montana or Oklahoma (Oklahoma! How could I forget Oklahoma?!? There's a whole musical about Oklahoma, for cryin' out loud!).
All I can say in my defense is, it's harder than it seems like it ought to be. Especially if you attended elementary school in the deep south, where they required you to learn the names and locations of only the Confederate states.
Give it a try. Let me know how you fare. Good luck!
.
Monday, December 1, 2008
Fantasy of Lights Parade 2008
Here is a photo of my daughter's Girl Scout troop in the Fantasy of Lights Parade on Saturday. This year's parade theme was "Christmas Ornaments."
They were in a big group of Scout troops, and each troop wore coordinated costumes. There was a troop of gingerbread girls (with the troop leaders dressed as bakers with hats and aprons), a troop of reindeer, a troop of candy canes, a troop of snowflakes... it was all quite adorable.
Here are photos of a few of the other parade floats and groups:
My daughter's troop dressed as angels, in case you can't tell. I was having a bit of trouble with my camera and did not manage to get a very good photo.
They made their own costumes and they sang Christmas songs while they marched in the parade. They also pulled a wagon with a CD player with the music to sing to, and a 4-foot Christmas tree decorated with Angel ornaments. You can't see that wagon in this photo, though.
They made their own costumes and they sang Christmas songs while they marched in the parade. They also pulled a wagon with a CD player with the music to sing to, and a 4-foot Christmas tree decorated with Angel ornaments. You can't see that wagon in this photo, though.
They were in a big group of Scout troops, and each troop wore coordinated costumes. There was a troop of gingerbread girls (with the troop leaders dressed as bakers with hats and aprons), a troop of reindeer, a troop of candy canes, a troop of snowflakes... it was all quite adorable.
Here are photos of a few of the other parade floats and groups:
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Tip O' The Day
When you wake up in the morning with a to-do list a mile long and realize that you have forgotten to do laundry all week, and then you look in the closet and the only thing you can find to wear is your khaki pants (a size too small after the Thanksgiving Day feast) and your red polo shirt, so you quickly shower and throw that on and run out the door to buy the things you need for your daughter's costume for the parade tonight....
... steer clear of Target, or you may find yourself being berated by the manager for failing to tuck in your shirt and wear your name tag.
.
... steer clear of Target, or you may find yourself being berated by the manager for failing to tuck in your shirt and wear your name tag.
.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Just Call Me The Dishwasher
Something about the huge mound of dishes that resulted from yesterday's eat-and-drink-o-rama otherwise known as Thanksgiving dinner reminded me of the following true event.
My third year in college, a couple of friends and I got together and rented an ancient wreck of a house just off of campus. The house had a lot of "problems" -- no air conditioning, a hole in the kitchen floor in front of the sink, the upstairs shower didn't work, the roof leaked by the front door when it rained, and so forth. But the rent was cheaper than the dorms, and you could actually have parties with alcohol at your own house (unlike in the dorms). But fourth year, one of the roomies moved out, and we needed to fill her spot.
An acquaintance of mine (a fellow Italian Club officer -- the treasurer, to be exact -- who later absconded with the Italian Club's money) recommended that we have her friend (let's call her "Nicole," since that was her name) move in. She said that Nicole was overseas in France at the time, would be returning from her "semester abroad" in June, and would need a house to live in the following year. Nicole agreed to move into the house, sight unseen. We agreed to live with this woman, sight unseen and without even speaking with her on the telephone. If this all sounds like a terribly bad idea well, you're right, it was.
Upon returning from France, Nicole came straight to the house -- without even calling to warn us first. No big deal, I guess. I mean, we had agreed to rent her the room, we had sent her the key, and the room was empty and waiting for her. Still, a phone call would have been nice... something like, "I'll be there tomorrow at 3 p.m., can't wait to meet you all in person" or something similarly civilized.
But no, Nicole simply showed up with all her stuff in the truck, walked in, and announced: "I'm here!" I was at work at the time; my housemates were watching something or other on tv. Porn, probably. Or maybe a Grateful Dead movie. Whatever it was, they were so engrossed in it that, after saying "hi" to Nicole and introducing themselves, they went right back to their tv show. They later reported that Nicole stood there for a couple of minutes, then said, with her hands on her hips, "Well, aren't you guys going to help me carry in my stuff?!?"
They reluctantly did so. Despite their best efforts to work slowly and their continual stopping to watch whatever was on tv, they still found that each of them seemed to carry in at least 2 boxes for every 1 that Nicole carried in. Yowza.
I guess I have good timing. I arrived home from work right after the housemates had finished piling all of Nicole's junk in her room.
At that point, Nicole asked me for the "tour." Mind you, there wasn't much to see. She had seen most of it just by walking through the living room and up the stairs to her bedroom. But I am an accommodating sort, so I helpfully gave her the "grand tour."
"Well, we're standing in the living room. The fireplace works. The roof leaks above the front door, so watch your step when you come in if it's raining. There's the dining room. The washer and dryer are in there, too (I know, it's odd to have the washer/dryer in the dining room, but it was the only room with the right kind of outlet). The kitchen is right through here...."
As she looked around the kitchen, Nicole asked, "Where's the dishwasher?"
I said, "Oh, we don't have one."
She then asked, in a surprised and innocent voice, "Well then, how do you get the dishes clean?"
(Whaa...? You've got to be kidding me!)
So, being the accommodating sort that I am, I introduced her to many difficult concepts such as hot soapy water in the sink, sponges, dish towels, and drying racks.
Apparently none of it sunk in. She did not wash a single dish all year long, even when she would invite her boyfriend over for dinner and they would cook and use many pots, pans, utensils, plates and glasses. (It looked a lot like my kitchen after Thanksgiving dinner last night.) Afterwards, they would go out to a movie, leaving the kitchen a wreck, then back to his place for two or three days of "nookie," by which time she could be sure that the rest of us would have broken down and washed the dishes, if only so that we could use them.
.
My third year in college, a couple of friends and I got together and rented an ancient wreck of a house just off of campus. The house had a lot of "problems" -- no air conditioning, a hole in the kitchen floor in front of the sink, the upstairs shower didn't work, the roof leaked by the front door when it rained, and so forth. But the rent was cheaper than the dorms, and you could actually have parties with alcohol at your own house (unlike in the dorms). But fourth year, one of the roomies moved out, and we needed to fill her spot.
An acquaintance of mine (a fellow Italian Club officer -- the treasurer, to be exact -- who later absconded with the Italian Club's money) recommended that we have her friend (let's call her "Nicole," since that was her name) move in. She said that Nicole was overseas in France at the time, would be returning from her "semester abroad" in June, and would need a house to live in the following year. Nicole agreed to move into the house, sight unseen. We agreed to live with this woman, sight unseen and without even speaking with her on the telephone. If this all sounds like a terribly bad idea well, you're right, it was.
Upon returning from France, Nicole came straight to the house -- without even calling to warn us first. No big deal, I guess. I mean, we had agreed to rent her the room, we had sent her the key, and the room was empty and waiting for her. Still, a phone call would have been nice... something like, "I'll be there tomorrow at 3 p.m., can't wait to meet you all in person" or something similarly civilized.
But no, Nicole simply showed up with all her stuff in the truck, walked in, and announced: "I'm here!" I was at work at the time; my housemates were watching something or other on tv. Porn, probably. Or maybe a Grateful Dead movie. Whatever it was, they were so engrossed in it that, after saying "hi" to Nicole and introducing themselves, they went right back to their tv show. They later reported that Nicole stood there for a couple of minutes, then said, with her hands on her hips, "Well, aren't you guys going to help me carry in my stuff?!?"
They reluctantly did so. Despite their best efforts to work slowly and their continual stopping to watch whatever was on tv, they still found that each of them seemed to carry in at least 2 boxes for every 1 that Nicole carried in. Yowza.
I guess I have good timing. I arrived home from work right after the housemates had finished piling all of Nicole's junk in her room.
At that point, Nicole asked me for the "tour." Mind you, there wasn't much to see. She had seen most of it just by walking through the living room and up the stairs to her bedroom. But I am an accommodating sort, so I helpfully gave her the "grand tour."
"Well, we're standing in the living room. The fireplace works. The roof leaks above the front door, so watch your step when you come in if it's raining. There's the dining room. The washer and dryer are in there, too (I know, it's odd to have the washer/dryer in the dining room, but it was the only room with the right kind of outlet). The kitchen is right through here...."
As she looked around the kitchen, Nicole asked, "Where's the dishwasher?"
I said, "Oh, we don't have one."
She then asked, in a surprised and innocent voice, "Well then, how do you get the dishes clean?"
(Whaa...? You've got to be kidding me!)
So, being the accommodating sort that I am, I introduced her to many difficult concepts such as hot soapy water in the sink, sponges, dish towels, and drying racks.
Apparently none of it sunk in. She did not wash a single dish all year long, even when she would invite her boyfriend over for dinner and they would cook and use many pots, pans, utensils, plates and glasses. (It looked a lot like my kitchen after Thanksgiving dinner last night.) Afterwards, they would go out to a movie, leaving the kitchen a wreck, then back to his place for two or three days of "nookie," by which time she could be sure that the rest of us would have broken down and washed the dishes, if only so that we could use them.
.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Aaaaw, Shucks...
Many thanks to Ms. Florida Transplant for tagging me with this (literally) fabulous award! For those of you who have not checked out her blog, you should. It is interesting and at least as Fabulous as mine. (After all, she won the award, too!).
It's my first blog "award," and I feel so very honored.
Not only that, but it is timely, coming right before Thanksgiving and all, so I can blog about 5 fabulous things I am thankful for, and it just ties right in with the week's theme. Wow. I am truly blessed.
So, in compliance with the requirements for accepting this fabulous blog fodder award, I hereby post my list of "Five Fabulous Fings" (as my 5 year old would say):
1. Well, I'd be a schmuck if I didn't list my family. But truly, they are awesome. From my kids to my husband to my parents, step-sibs, & in-laws, nieces, nephews, aunts, uncles, and on and on -- I love them all. Not only because they are genuinely good people with good hearts, but also because with their infinite capacity for random nuttiness, they will provide me with endless blog fodder for the foreseeable future. What's not to love?
2. The "C-foods" (as in, I am on a "C-food" diet) -- that's chocolate, cheese, and coffee with cream, and I try to make sure I get all three every day. Helps keep me thin and healthy, you know. Other fine C-foods include chicken, carrots, chimichangas, and champagne. Not necessarily to be eaten together, you understand.
3. My dog. He is a bassett hound and he has endless patience with my kids. Over my continuing protests, they hug him tight like a stuffed animal and kiss him on the nose, hook him up to their little plastic wagons so he can pull their toys around, and put funny hats and reindeer ears on him -- and he just sits there looking patient and bored. I have literally seen my son (accidentally) step on my dog's "wee-wee" and all he (the dog) did was give a little yelp and walk away. There was no biting, no barking, no growling -- just an apparent recognition that "the little boy did not intend to hurt me but, ow, I'd best get out of the way." When the kids are home, he is always with the kids. When they are not home, he sleeps happily by my feet while I work on my computer all day (or goof off by writing silly blog posts, one of those). What a great dog. What a great friend.
4. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Really, our founding fathers did a good job of designing a system of government by taking the best of what was there at the time and improving upon it, and also allowing enough flexibility that we can continue to improve upon it.
5. Beaches. The warm sand, the cool salty ocean water, the ever-present soft breeze, the beautiful seashells, the cheerful sunshine... oh, what would life be without beaches?
Now, I am supposed to pass this on to five other bloggers who I think are Fabulous (and, presumably, who have not already received this award). I have no idea whether the following bloggers will want to participate in this meme / award thing, but even if they don't, their blogs are fabulous and you should check them out. They, in turn, are supposed to list 5 things they think are fabulous. They don't have to write a book or even a paragraph about each one like I did. In fact, if they can keep it short, they will prove they are even more fabulous than me.
Here goes:
1. That Damn Expat tells some good tales, about everything from politicians who pee in their pants to her experience as a cheerleader for a day. Check it out. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll be back for more, I promise.
2. Wide Lawns and Narrow Minds. Another blogger that will make you laugh, cry, question human nature, and come back time and again looking for more stories.
3. Whiskeymarie. Always witty, with lots of photos and a great list of other great time-wasters... um, I mean blogs.... in her sidebar. Plus, she's got a great meme ceremony that I am sure will be even more lovely when it is performed in the winter with snow on the ground -- assuming she will consider this award to be in the "meme" category.
4. Here Comes Johnny Yen Again. Not sure he really wants to be called "fabulous," and also not sure he participates in meme-type awards, but I do enjoy his thoughtful and entertaining posts. You will, too.
5. Fancy Schmancy. From thought-provoking and sentimental to funny as h---.... she's got it all and then some. Check her out if you haven't already.
To my other favorite bloggers (you know who you are) that I didn't tag with this fabulous award, you know I love you anyway. Keep writing. Maybe next time you'll make the cut.
Happy Thanksgiving everyone! Even if I didn't tag you for the award, do take some time to remember all the fabulous people and things in your life.
.
It's my first blog "award," and I feel so very honored.
Not only that, but it is timely, coming right before Thanksgiving and all, so I can blog about 5 fabulous things I am thankful for, and it just ties right in with the week's theme. Wow. I am truly blessed.
So, in compliance with the requirements for accepting this fabulous blog fodder award, I hereby post my list of "Five Fabulous Fings" (as my 5 year old would say):
1. Well, I'd be a schmuck if I didn't list my family. But truly, they are awesome. From my kids to my husband to my parents, step-sibs, & in-laws, nieces, nephews, aunts, uncles, and on and on -- I love them all. Not only because they are genuinely good people with good hearts, but also because with their infinite capacity for random nuttiness, they will provide me with endless blog fodder for the foreseeable future. What's not to love?
2. The "C-foods" (as in, I am on a "C-food" diet) -- that's chocolate, cheese, and coffee with cream, and I try to make sure I get all three every day. Helps keep me thin and healthy, you know. Other fine C-foods include chicken, carrots, chimichangas, and champagne. Not necessarily to be eaten together, you understand.
3. My dog. He is a bassett hound and he has endless patience with my kids. Over my continuing protests, they hug him tight like a stuffed animal and kiss him on the nose, hook him up to their little plastic wagons so he can pull their toys around, and put funny hats and reindeer ears on him -- and he just sits there looking patient and bored. I have literally seen my son (accidentally) step on my dog's "wee-wee" and all he (the dog) did was give a little yelp and walk away. There was no biting, no barking, no growling -- just an apparent recognition that "the little boy did not intend to hurt me but, ow, I'd best get out of the way." When the kids are home, he is always with the kids. When they are not home, he sleeps happily by my feet while I work on my computer all day (or goof off by writing silly blog posts, one of those). What a great dog. What a great friend.
4. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Really, our founding fathers did a good job of designing a system of government by taking the best of what was there at the time and improving upon it, and also allowing enough flexibility that we can continue to improve upon it.
5. Beaches. The warm sand, the cool salty ocean water, the ever-present soft breeze, the beautiful seashells, the cheerful sunshine... oh, what would life be without beaches?
Now, I am supposed to pass this on to five other bloggers who I think are Fabulous (and, presumably, who have not already received this award). I have no idea whether the following bloggers will want to participate in this meme / award thing, but even if they don't, their blogs are fabulous and you should check them out. They, in turn, are supposed to list 5 things they think are fabulous. They don't have to write a book or even a paragraph about each one like I did. In fact, if they can keep it short, they will prove they are even more fabulous than me.
Here goes:
1. That Damn Expat tells some good tales, about everything from politicians who pee in their pants to her experience as a cheerleader for a day. Check it out. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll be back for more, I promise.
2. Wide Lawns and Narrow Minds. Another blogger that will make you laugh, cry, question human nature, and come back time and again looking for more stories.
3. Whiskeymarie. Always witty, with lots of photos and a great list of other great time-wasters... um, I mean blogs.... in her sidebar. Plus, she's got a great meme ceremony that I am sure will be even more lovely when it is performed in the winter with snow on the ground -- assuming she will consider this award to be in the "meme" category.
4. Here Comes Johnny Yen Again. Not sure he really wants to be called "fabulous," and also not sure he participates in meme-type awards, but I do enjoy his thoughtful and entertaining posts. You will, too.
5. Fancy Schmancy. From thought-provoking and sentimental to funny as h---.... she's got it all and then some. Check her out if you haven't already.
To my other favorite bloggers (you know who you are) that I didn't tag with this fabulous award, you know I love you anyway. Keep writing. Maybe next time you'll make the cut.
Happy Thanksgiving everyone! Even if I didn't tag you for the award, do take some time to remember all the fabulous people and things in your life.
.
Monday, November 24, 2008
As God Is My Witness....
In honor of the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday, here is a YouTube clip of the best-ever episode of "WKRP in Cincinnati" (one of my favorite shows at the time, and still one of the funniest sit-coms ever made). But first, just a little background:
In this show the Station Manager, Mr. Carlson, decided it would be a great Thanksgiving promotion to give away hundreds of free turkeys at the local mall. Here is how the great promo event played out:
Afterwards, back at the station, Carlson and the gang were agonizing over the completely disastrous event (lawsuits are threatened, the whole city is angry -- it's just **bad**) and Mr. Carlson moaned: "As God is my Witness, I thought turkeys could fly..." (Sadly, I can't share that portion of the show with you, as I couldn't find it on YouTube).
I am laughing out loud with tears rolling down my face just remembering this line. Truly, I will never know how the actor who played Mr. Carlson managed to utter that line without cracking up. They should show this episode on tv every Thanksgiving so we can all laugh at least once that day.
.
In this show the Station Manager, Mr. Carlson, decided it would be a great Thanksgiving promotion to give away hundreds of free turkeys at the local mall. Here is how the great promo event played out:
Afterwards, back at the station, Carlson and the gang were agonizing over the completely disastrous event (lawsuits are threatened, the whole city is angry -- it's just **bad**) and Mr. Carlson moaned: "As God is my Witness, I thought turkeys could fly..." (Sadly, I can't share that portion of the show with you, as I couldn't find it on YouTube).
I am laughing out loud with tears rolling down my face just remembering this line. Truly, I will never know how the actor who played Mr. Carlson managed to utter that line without cracking up. They should show this episode on tv every Thanksgiving so we can all laugh at least once that day.
.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Recent Arizona Governors' Hall of Fame and/or Shame
I promised you all some entertaining stories about Arizona politicians, so here is the "Recent Arizona Governors' Hall of Fame and / or Shame":
First up, we have former Governor Evan Mecham. Elected in 1986, he began his term as Governor in 1987. (Should I still use the title "Honorable" for a fellow who was impeached and resigned in disgrace? Just curious). While serving as Governor of our great state, he cancelled Martin Luther King Day, and also used (and defended the use of) the word "pickaninny" and made other racist remarks, provoking a "boycott" of the State by people in other states, which eventually cost the state an opportunity to host the Superbowl. In 1988, after serving only one year of his term, he was impeached for fundraising improprieties that had occurred during his campaign, and was removed from office in April 1988 before he could cause any more damage to the State's image and financial well-being.
The Honorable Rose Mofford, who was at the time of Mr. Mecham's impeachment the Secretary of State, by statute took office upon Mr. Mecham's removal from office. She was a very cool lady and was the first woman Governor of the State of Arizona. She restored Arizona’s image as a decent State, and governed with grace and good humor. She wore a "beehive" type hairdo and heavy fake eyelashes, and in 1988 she commissioned and sent out holiday cards with a caricature drawing of her as a toga-wearing "Goddess of Liberty" atop the state capitol – and showing lots of leg.... a real jaw-dropper! Sadly, she declined to run for another term after completing her "fill-in" term for Mr. Mecham.
For more on Ms. Mofford, including a photo of her famous hair, see this article at azcentral.com.
For an even better photo, see her biography cover photo at Amazon.com. You should probably buy the book. I'd be willing to bet it is fascinating!
Sorry, I couldn’t find a color photo (or even a very good quality photo) of the famous holiday card (maybe there is one in the book?); I did find a rather grainy black & white photo in the Tucson Observer archives, which I have reproduced here:
(You can follow this link if you want to go to the original source).
The card received national press coverage, as well – it was written up in Time magazine, although apparently with no photo. At the time, there was lots of talk about how "inappropriate" this card was and how awfully wrong Governor Mofford was to have commissioned it. If that was the worst they could say about her, well, compared to her predecessor and her successor, I'd say she did a mighty fine job as Governor. Also, I subsequently learned that these caricature cards are a holiday tradition for Ms. Mofford -- see this example on flickr.
Fife Symington was the successor to Governor Mofford. His campaign claimed that Mr. Symington was a successful businessman, and he promised to run the State like a successful business and solve the State’s financial problems. Sounds good, right? Well, his business ventures were so "successful" that he ended up filing bankruptcy in 1995, and (apparently based on statements made during the course of his bankruptcy case) he was later indicted and prosecuted in federal court for extortion, making false financial statements, and bank fraud. After his conviction in 1997, he was forced to resign. His conviction was overturned on appeal due to issues with a juror at trial; before he could be retried, he was pardoned by President Clinton in 2001.
After his pardon, Mr. Symington attended culinary school. More recently, Mr. Symington has appeared discussing UFOs on Larry King Live, and has claimed that he saw a UFO in March of 1997. Follow this link for more information.
With male governors like these "bad boys" with their impeachments and criminal charges as "bookends" to an uneventful yet amusing female Governor, is it any wonder that Arizonans subsequently have elected (so far) only women Governors after Symington? Jane Hull (Republican) followed Symington, and Janet Napolitano (Democrat) followed Jane Hull.
Welcome to Arizona politics. Now, aren't you sorry we didn't elect Senator McCain as our new President? Surely it would have been a more entertaining and eventful 4 years than Mr. Obama is likely to provide...
.
First up, we have former Governor Evan Mecham. Elected in 1986, he began his term as Governor in 1987. (Should I still use the title "Honorable" for a fellow who was impeached and resigned in disgrace? Just curious). While serving as Governor of our great state, he cancelled Martin Luther King Day, and also used (and defended the use of) the word "pickaninny" and made other racist remarks, provoking a "boycott" of the State by people in other states, which eventually cost the state an opportunity to host the Superbowl. In 1988, after serving only one year of his term, he was impeached for fundraising improprieties that had occurred during his campaign, and was removed from office in April 1988 before he could cause any more damage to the State's image and financial well-being.
The Honorable Rose Mofford, who was at the time of Mr. Mecham's impeachment the Secretary of State, by statute took office upon Mr. Mecham's removal from office. She was a very cool lady and was the first woman Governor of the State of Arizona. She restored Arizona’s image as a decent State, and governed with grace and good humor. She wore a "beehive" type hairdo and heavy fake eyelashes, and in 1988 she commissioned and sent out holiday cards with a caricature drawing of her as a toga-wearing "Goddess of Liberty" atop the state capitol – and showing lots of leg.... a real jaw-dropper! Sadly, she declined to run for another term after completing her "fill-in" term for Mr. Mecham.
For more on Ms. Mofford, including a photo of her famous hair, see this article at azcentral.com.
For an even better photo, see her biography cover photo at Amazon.com. You should probably buy the book. I'd be willing to bet it is fascinating!
Sorry, I couldn’t find a color photo (or even a very good quality photo) of the famous holiday card (maybe there is one in the book?); I did find a rather grainy black & white photo in the Tucson Observer archives, which I have reproduced here:
(You can follow this link if you want to go to the original source).
The card received national press coverage, as well – it was written up in Time magazine, although apparently with no photo. At the time, there was lots of talk about how "inappropriate" this card was and how awfully wrong Governor Mofford was to have commissioned it. If that was the worst they could say about her, well, compared to her predecessor and her successor, I'd say she did a mighty fine job as Governor. Also, I subsequently learned that these caricature cards are a holiday tradition for Ms. Mofford -- see this example on flickr.
Fife Symington was the successor to Governor Mofford. His campaign claimed that Mr. Symington was a successful businessman, and he promised to run the State like a successful business and solve the State’s financial problems. Sounds good, right? Well, his business ventures were so "successful" that he ended up filing bankruptcy in 1995, and (apparently based on statements made during the course of his bankruptcy case) he was later indicted and prosecuted in federal court for extortion, making false financial statements, and bank fraud. After his conviction in 1997, he was forced to resign. His conviction was overturned on appeal due to issues with a juror at trial; before he could be retried, he was pardoned by President Clinton in 2001.
After his pardon, Mr. Symington attended culinary school. More recently, Mr. Symington has appeared discussing UFOs on Larry King Live, and has claimed that he saw a UFO in March of 1997. Follow this link for more information.
With male governors like these "bad boys" with their impeachments and criminal charges as "bookends" to an uneventful yet amusing female Governor, is it any wonder that Arizonans subsequently have elected (so far) only women Governors after Symington? Jane Hull (Republican) followed Symington, and Janet Napolitano (Democrat) followed Jane Hull.
Welcome to Arizona politics. Now, aren't you sorry we didn't elect Senator McCain as our new President? Surely it would have been a more entertaining and eventful 4 years than Mr. Obama is likely to provide...
.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Arizona Secession Talk (otherwise known as "Monumental Stupidity, Part II")
Yesterday, I blathered at length about some racists in the South who are talking foolishly and (as Fancy Schmancy pointed out in the comments, treasonously) about secession merely because a multiracial person has been elected president. And although I think this “secession” talk is based on both morally repugnant principles and ignorance, it is, at least in some twisted way, based on principle.
What I mean is, I suppose I might be tempted to talk of secession or at least leaving this country if, say, a Nazi who campaigned on a platform of racial separatism and eugenics were elected president. And, by analogy, a multiracial candidate who campaigned based on “including all voices” and “change” might well be a pretty scary thought for a white racist. In that sense, the fact that these racists might want to politically separate themselves from the rest of us because we will have a multiracial president, while ignorant and repugnant to most of our sensibilities as well as pretty monumentally stupid, is not quite as monumentally stupid as what (I heard) actually happened here in Arizona back in the early 1990's.
Here is the tale, true to the best of my knowledge and belief:
A friend of mine worked as an intern at the State Legislature in the earlyl 1990s. At the time, a federal highway funding law had required states to enact certain laws (regarding speed limits and such) in order to obtain federal highway funding.
My friend reported that a certain state legislator (who shall remain unnamed here because I don't want to be sued later for libel or defamation or whatever) was appalled and outraged at the federal government's attempt to control us, to bind our hands, to prevent us from making our own laws and rules.... "We should be allowed to set whatever speed limit we want, here in Arizona! We shouldn't have to comply with federal directives about that! That's just wrong!!" he shouted. (This is a paraphrase, obviously, since I wasn't there.) Okay, I can understand the sentiment, but...
What was his proposed solution? "Arizona should secede from the Union!!"
Yes, folks, you heard that right. He proposed secession as a solution to the perceived problem of the federal government using its purse strings to encourage Arizona to enact particular laws, apparently not even thinking about the fact that it was treasonous to propose secession, or even considering the two most obvious implications of his proposal:
(1) If the entire South in the 1860s (at the time, half the states) couldn't muster enough armed forces to successfully secede from the Union, what made him think that Arizona, one of the least populous states, could manage it alone in the 1990s? (Or perhaps he thought the federal government would just let us go without a fight, since it's mostly just desert out here anyway? Yeah, ok, that'll happen.)
(2) Why bother to secede? If you don't want to be controlled by the federal government on these issues, just set the speed limits any old way you want them and forget about the funds -- after all, if Arizona did manage to secede from the Union, the United States government surely would not provide Arizona with any federal highway funds... (Or perhaps he thought we'd make up for it with the money we'd save by not having to pay federal taxes? Ah, yes, but then our State taxes would go way up, leading to hugely unpopular state representatives, and we'd still not have enough money to build all those miles of highways in this huge state).
Yes, folks, this is the caliber of elected official we were blessed with in our great state in the early 1990's. (Not sure it has improved much since then, actually).
Next time, I’ll tell you about a few other notable Arizona politicians in recent memory.
.
What I mean is, I suppose I might be tempted to talk of secession or at least leaving this country if, say, a Nazi who campaigned on a platform of racial separatism and eugenics were elected president. And, by analogy, a multiracial candidate who campaigned based on “including all voices” and “change” might well be a pretty scary thought for a white racist. In that sense, the fact that these racists might want to politically separate themselves from the rest of us because we will have a multiracial president, while ignorant and repugnant to most of our sensibilities as well as pretty monumentally stupid, is not quite as monumentally stupid as what (I heard) actually happened here in Arizona back in the early 1990's.
Here is the tale, true to the best of my knowledge and belief:
A friend of mine worked as an intern at the State Legislature in the earlyl 1990s. At the time, a federal highway funding law had required states to enact certain laws (regarding speed limits and such) in order to obtain federal highway funding.
My friend reported that a certain state legislator (who shall remain unnamed here because I don't want to be sued later for libel or defamation or whatever) was appalled and outraged at the federal government's attempt to control us, to bind our hands, to prevent us from making our own laws and rules.... "We should be allowed to set whatever speed limit we want, here in Arizona! We shouldn't have to comply with federal directives about that! That's just wrong!!" he shouted. (This is a paraphrase, obviously, since I wasn't there.) Okay, I can understand the sentiment, but...
What was his proposed solution? "Arizona should secede from the Union!!"
Yes, folks, you heard that right. He proposed secession as a solution to the perceived problem of the federal government using its purse strings to encourage Arizona to enact particular laws, apparently not even thinking about the fact that it was treasonous to propose secession, or even considering the two most obvious implications of his proposal:
(1) If the entire South in the 1860s (at the time, half the states) couldn't muster enough armed forces to successfully secede from the Union, what made him think that Arizona, one of the least populous states, could manage it alone in the 1990s? (Or perhaps he thought the federal government would just let us go without a fight, since it's mostly just desert out here anyway? Yeah, ok, that'll happen.)
(2) Why bother to secede? If you don't want to be controlled by the federal government on these issues, just set the speed limits any old way you want them and forget about the funds -- after all, if Arizona did manage to secede from the Union, the United States government surely would not provide Arizona with any federal highway funds... (Or perhaps he thought we'd make up for it with the money we'd save by not having to pay federal taxes? Ah, yes, but then our State taxes would go way up, leading to hugely unpopular state representatives, and we'd still not have enough money to build all those miles of highways in this huge state).
Yes, folks, this is the caliber of elected official we were blessed with in our great state in the early 1990's. (Not sure it has improved much since then, actually).
Next time, I’ll tell you about a few other notable Arizona politicians in recent memory.
.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Southern Secession Talk (otherwise known as "Monumental Stupidity, Part I")
I read an article* today which stated that there is a "white backlash" because of Mr. Obama's election, that the election "has triggered more than 200 hate-related incidents" so far, and that this watershed event will be a "potent recruiting tool" for white hate groups.
That is seriously depressing. But I can't say it is entirely unexpected. People in this country -- heck, in many, perhaps even most countries -- have serious issues with race and ethnicity. Witness the genocide (to name just a few examples) in Darfur, in Bosnia, in Cambodia, in Nazi Germany ... the list goes on and on, back to the dawn of time.
Most of us have difficulty understanding how anyone in this country that is made up of immigrants from all over the world and with our Statue of Liberty proclaiming that we welcome the "teeming masses" -- refugees from foreign lands -- can hate a person based merely on their race or ethnicity. But there is, and long has been, in this country a substantial minority of persons who believe that folks who are "other" (i.e., "other than white and male") are somehow "lesser" and should therefore be hated (or at least "kept down").
I have Republican friends who feel angry, sad, scared, and a host of other negative emotions because of Mr. Obama's win, because they believe that with the Democrats in power they will lose money, the economy will get worse, and the country will veer toward socialism. Think what you want about whether these fears are rational and whether having Democrats in political power will be good or bad for the country, but whatever your beliefs about that, at least these reactions are based on someone's theory of economics and/or politics (things the election was supposed to be about), not based on the fact that Mr. Obama has dark skin and a mixed heritage.
The fact that some people feel angry, sad, scared, and a host of other negative emotions solely because our newly elected President is not a white male (and apparently without regard to whether they agree with his economic or political views) makes me feel angry, sad, scared, and a host of other negative emotions.
But here is the show-stopper: Apparently, according to the article, there is "talk of secession" in "some parts of the South."
Wow.
I will concede that the fact that there is a "backlash" and that the election is serving as a "recruiting tool for hate groups" makes some sort of twisted sense. After all, people are often moved to act when something happens that they don't like. For example, the re-election of Bush 4 years ago was a "potent recruiting tool" for the Democratic party and many of Bush's policies may have unintentionally provoked a "Democratic backlash."
So if you are a close-minded bigot who believes in white supremacy but haven't been active in a supremacy group, then the election of a multiracial individual might spur you to join one. It's sad, but at least is logically consistent with the bigoted viewpoint.
But secession? Really?!? Didn't the South learn anything last time? Well, in case you've forgotten, or never studied it in your American History class, it was a complete disaster. Huge death toll. Houses, farms, towns, even whole cities (e.g., Atlanta) ruined. People left destitute. Brothers fighting brothers, sons fighting fathers, sisters being raped and killed.... And in the end the North won, and despite (some say because of) the "reconstruction" efforts, the South was in economic ruin for years. Why would anyone think it is a good idea to try that again?
I recognize that the number of persons proposing secession likely is not large, and I am guessing no State will actually try to secede from the Union because most people in the South (I know this because I was born and raised there) are not actually close-minded radical bigots. And I also concede that the article says they aren't talking about "1860's style secession," more of a political autonomy concept. But still...
Even to talk about secession merely based on who is President seems to me to demonstrate monumental stupidity. After all, our system is set up to encourage change and experimentation. Presidents serve only a 4 year term, and if they do a bad job they can be voted out at that time. If they are horribly corrupt, they can be impeached and tossed out even before then (e.g., Nixon). If they refrain from obvious corruption and either do a good job or smear their opponent enough during the subsequent election, they can be elected for another 4 year term, but then, no matter what -- good, bad, honest, crooked, worthy, unworthy -- they are gone. Why would anyone want to risk political upheaval, and the potential for civil war and economic disaster, over a mere 4 to 8 years of a President they don't like?
Truly, from a logical viewpoint, the slavery question and the Emancipation Proclamation provided a much better justification for secession. After all, whether you approved of the institution of slavery or not, the fact is that it was a way of life in the South and was even enshrined in our Constitution, and many landowners had lots of money invested in slaves and in the plantations on which they worked. Freeing the slaves was certain to cause economic upheaval and to change an entire way of life, and the change was going to last far longer than the 4 to 8 years that any given president would serve. While I think slavery was morally repugnant, I can understand how someone might feel compelled to fight for their way of life and their economic well-being when threatened with permanent change.
But I don't understand how someone would feel moved to secede from the Union and potentially trigger a civil war merely because someone they don't like has been elected President.
He'll be gone in 8 years, tops. Live with it, people!
Tomorrow, I'll share a stupid and humorous story right out of Arizona political history, which may make some of you even happier that Mr. McCain (an Arizona politician) was not elected.
(I must say, however, that I do not mean to imply, nor do I think, that Mr. McCain even begins to approach the level of stupidity, irrationality, and ignorance to be illustrated tomorrow. In fact, I think he is reasonably bright and is a decent and honorable person and a good family man (to paraphrase his description of Mr. Obama), with whom I happen to disagree on some issues.)
==========
* (The article is here, at azcentral.com, but I don't know whether it will be there for long so if you are reading this months later, the link may no longer work.)
.
That is seriously depressing. But I can't say it is entirely unexpected. People in this country -- heck, in many, perhaps even most countries -- have serious issues with race and ethnicity. Witness the genocide (to name just a few examples) in Darfur, in Bosnia, in Cambodia, in Nazi Germany ... the list goes on and on, back to the dawn of time.
Most of us have difficulty understanding how anyone in this country that is made up of immigrants from all over the world and with our Statue of Liberty proclaiming that we welcome the "teeming masses" -- refugees from foreign lands -- can hate a person based merely on their race or ethnicity. But there is, and long has been, in this country a substantial minority of persons who believe that folks who are "other" (i.e., "other than white and male") are somehow "lesser" and should therefore be hated (or at least "kept down").
I have Republican friends who feel angry, sad, scared, and a host of other negative emotions because of Mr. Obama's win, because they believe that with the Democrats in power they will lose money, the economy will get worse, and the country will veer toward socialism. Think what you want about whether these fears are rational and whether having Democrats in political power will be good or bad for the country, but whatever your beliefs about that, at least these reactions are based on someone's theory of economics and/or politics (things the election was supposed to be about), not based on the fact that Mr. Obama has dark skin and a mixed heritage.
The fact that some people feel angry, sad, scared, and a host of other negative emotions solely because our newly elected President is not a white male (and apparently without regard to whether they agree with his economic or political views) makes me feel angry, sad, scared, and a host of other negative emotions.
But here is the show-stopper: Apparently, according to the article, there is "talk of secession" in "some parts of the South."
Wow.
I will concede that the fact that there is a "backlash" and that the election is serving as a "recruiting tool for hate groups" makes some sort of twisted sense. After all, people are often moved to act when something happens that they don't like. For example, the re-election of Bush 4 years ago was a "potent recruiting tool" for the Democratic party and many of Bush's policies may have unintentionally provoked a "Democratic backlash."
So if you are a close-minded bigot who believes in white supremacy but haven't been active in a supremacy group, then the election of a multiracial individual might spur you to join one. It's sad, but at least is logically consistent with the bigoted viewpoint.
But secession? Really?!? Didn't the South learn anything last time? Well, in case you've forgotten, or never studied it in your American History class, it was a complete disaster. Huge death toll. Houses, farms, towns, even whole cities (e.g., Atlanta) ruined. People left destitute. Brothers fighting brothers, sons fighting fathers, sisters being raped and killed.... And in the end the North won, and despite (some say because of) the "reconstruction" efforts, the South was in economic ruin for years. Why would anyone think it is a good idea to try that again?
I recognize that the number of persons proposing secession likely is not large, and I am guessing no State will actually try to secede from the Union because most people in the South (I know this because I was born and raised there) are not actually close-minded radical bigots. And I also concede that the article says they aren't talking about "1860's style secession," more of a political autonomy concept. But still...
Even to talk about secession merely based on who is President seems to me to demonstrate monumental stupidity. After all, our system is set up to encourage change and experimentation. Presidents serve only a 4 year term, and if they do a bad job they can be voted out at that time. If they are horribly corrupt, they can be impeached and tossed out even before then (e.g., Nixon). If they refrain from obvious corruption and either do a good job or smear their opponent enough during the subsequent election, they can be elected for another 4 year term, but then, no matter what -- good, bad, honest, crooked, worthy, unworthy -- they are gone. Why would anyone want to risk political upheaval, and the potential for civil war and economic disaster, over a mere 4 to 8 years of a President they don't like?
Truly, from a logical viewpoint, the slavery question and the Emancipation Proclamation provided a much better justification for secession. After all, whether you approved of the institution of slavery or not, the fact is that it was a way of life in the South and was even enshrined in our Constitution, and many landowners had lots of money invested in slaves and in the plantations on which they worked. Freeing the slaves was certain to cause economic upheaval and to change an entire way of life, and the change was going to last far longer than the 4 to 8 years that any given president would serve. While I think slavery was morally repugnant, I can understand how someone might feel compelled to fight for their way of life and their economic well-being when threatened with permanent change.
But I don't understand how someone would feel moved to secede from the Union and potentially trigger a civil war merely because someone they don't like has been elected President.
He'll be gone in 8 years, tops. Live with it, people!
Tomorrow, I'll share a stupid and humorous story right out of Arizona political history, which may make some of you even happier that Mr. McCain (an Arizona politician) was not elected.
(I must say, however, that I do not mean to imply, nor do I think, that Mr. McCain even begins to approach the level of stupidity, irrationality, and ignorance to be illustrated tomorrow. In fact, I think he is reasonably bright and is a decent and honorable person and a good family man (to paraphrase his description of Mr. Obama), with whom I happen to disagree on some issues.)
==========
* (The article is here, at azcentral.com, but I don't know whether it will be there for long so if you are reading this months later, the link may no longer work.)
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
