Sticks and Stones

Sad Robot from Mike's Art Gallery, art.soboring.orgMy mother said something unforgivable to my sibling last week.

No, I really mean it. Unforgivable.

At least I couldn’t forgive it. But the Sib has forgiven my mother for really bad behaviors in the past.

And this got me thinking about how we communicate, what we say, the context surrounding what we say and what we actually mean.

If someone says something really cruel, really awful but doesn’t intent to hurt, is that easier to forgive? I would say, yes.

If someone says something cruel with the intention to hurt someone, is that less forgivable? I would say, yes, again.

If someone is mentally ill, AND says something cruel, both knowing and intending to inflict pain, is that more forgivable? I am thinking, not so much.

If someone is trying to protect themselves and feels that they need to strike out viciously at someone they love, are they sick? Well, Yes.

Does that make it more forgivable? Not for me.

Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don’t mean to do harm — but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves. — T.S. Eliot

If someone says something really mean, and they sincerely are sorry and ask for forgiveness, is that more forgivable? I think so, especially if they were really trying to right the wrong.

If someone says something really mean and never asks for forgiveness, how do you forgive?

No Foul

Hillary, Chelsea and Bill Clinton, a long time ago. (Photo, National Archives)During the never-ending “news” stream from the TV, a talking head said that Chelsea Clinton was asked about Monica Lewinsky at an Indiana campaign stop for her mom. Our talk around the TV went like this.

“Awww, that is just not necessary.”
“Well, they are pimping her out.”
“Yeah, but this is just out of bounds.”
“Good for her, she told them it wasn’t their business.”
“She’s a grown woman.”
“She was a kid at the time.”

It was the protective parent that made me jump to Chelsea’s defense. The campaign is not about her personal experiences at such a tough time.

Then, tonight (while watching an another awful American Idol, David Archuleta go home!) I read the coverage only to see that the question was not out of bounds–not a mean question about Chelsea’s personal esperience–but about whether Hillary Clinton’s credibility was damaged by her comments during the Lewinsky scandal. Not about how Chelsea felt. Not about how her mother and father coped with the scandal. Not about the chill around the White House breakfast table. Now that would be none of our business.

The kid at Butler State in Ind., asked a legitimate question. It was HRC who blamed a “vast right wing conspiracy” for yet another in a string of unfounded accusations against her husband. But turns out it wasn’t Clinton enemies, but a fact. The question asked was, what does that say about Hillary’s judgment? Now that is our business.

It is uncomfortable for Chelsea to be confronted about the Lewinsky scandal, but really, everyone knows about Bill’s thing with the intern, and Chelsea is publicly campaigning for her mom. Not out of bounds.

My Sib texted that my niece saw Chelsea today at one of the Clinton college stops in Ind. My niece reported that there were alot of Obama signs in the audience. That’s legitimate, too. But no being mean to Chelsea.

A Race to Race

Statue of Abraham Lincoln in the Memorial with a bunch of 50's tourists looking on.So, will Barack Obama’s speech on race–you know, the speech he really did not want to have to make –be noted in future histories as a turning point in U.S. race relations? And more importantly, if it is an historical “event,” will it be in the context of the election of our first black president or in the context of a failed candidacy that helped to bring an open discussion of race in America?

Too early to tell. Too early to know if this will have any long-term impact. Too early to tell if skittish white-folk will use Rev. Wright as a reason why they can’t support Obama. But for the skittish, they would need to find something anyway.

So when Obama offers nuance and context about race in America, does he inadvertently give an out to folks who like to have simple choices laid out in a menu of numbers on the wall? [I’ll take the #2 meal, Britney Spears burger, Bill Cosby fries, with a supersize of O.J.?] When there is no easy sound bite–precisely because this is a discussion and NOT a sound bite–can it be heard?

Only a tiny fraction of Americans will ever see the speech in full. Once it went through the media sausage grinder all you were left with was him failing to disown the pastor,” says Michael Munger, political scientist at Duke University and a libertarian. “It showed he is the kind of candidate we should want as president but not the kind we tend to elect.Financial Times

Okay. Maybe I am just a pseudo-intellectual snob. And maybe I just need to learn more about stuff white people like.

And maybe, just maybe, no matter what happens in this upcoming election, we can actually

“…continue the long march of those who came before us, a march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America. [B]ecause [we] believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together – unless we perfect our union by understanding that we may have different stories, but we hold common hopes; that we may not look the same and we may not have come from the same place, but we all want to move in the same direction – towards a better future for of children and our grandchildren.” —Barack Obama

Yeah, like that.

Spitzer is Gross

We were driving back from rugby practice.

The 16-year-old: I have alot of issues with Spitzer, but the hypocrisy really sticks out.
Me: Yeah. But I keep thinking of his family. Three teenage daughters.
Him: 3?
Me: Yeah.
Him: Oh, man. Like teenage in high-school?
Me: Probably like 18, 16, 14.
Him: No! Well, I know that my dad would NEVER do anything like that so it’s not like I would ever be faced with this, but if he did, I would hate him.
Me: No. You wouldn’t. You always see everyone’s point of view. You would hate what he did, but you wouldn’t judge him and blow him off. That’s just not what you do.
Him: Yeah, well, it sucks to be me sometimes.

Actually, it might suck to be him, but not to be loved by him.

Friend Request

Image of part of a Facebook profile page.Every couple of weeks I send a Facebook friend request to the 16-year old. I just now sent another one.

Me: Hey, did you get my friend request?
Him: I don’t know.

or

Me: I sent you another friend request.
Him: I know.

Facebook is an online networking group originally for college students, and then high-school students, to keep in touch. You create a personal page and can send out electronic “friend” requests. “Friends” can send messages, post photos and videos, and add new friends. All from the comfort of your own computer. In 2006, they opened up the floodgates and let even old geezers like me in. That’s the problem.

The Post today has front page (don’t ask me why) story on “When Mom or Dad Asks to Be a Facebook Friend.” And kids, here is the right answer.

JUST SAY NO!

Of course, I am stalking the 16-year old to be my “friend.” I’m the parent, that’s what I do. But frankly, he should be able to exchange pleasantries–and not so pleasantries–with his peers. And, I AM NOT HIS PEER.

I don’t want to be a peer. My role in this show is to be the parent. Part of him growing up means that I don’t get to know everything. I don’t need to know that there is a group “Get Guy Laid.” Really, I don’t need to know. And he needs a modicum of privacy.

Okay, I know why we want to know. We want to protect our kids. And wrap them in bubble wrap and keep them germ free. But I also know that that is no way to grow up. The path to adulthood is fraught with danger. That path has got to be traveled, and decisions on which turn to take have to be made by the traveler. Otherwise they can’t become adults.

That’s really the point of parenthood. We take our precious babes and help them to grow up and leave us behind. From a 7 pound eating-pooping machine to a 6-footer able to make good decisions when he comes home to a broken pipe in the basement. And hopefully when confronted with even harder choices, too.

We succeed when they are successfully independent. Not if they have no bruises. Not if they don’t make mistakes. Not if they don’t take risks.

By the time they are rejecting our Facebook friend requests, they are working from whatever we gave them. Not like we don’t matter anymore, but they are applying the lessons we gave to the ever widening world they live in in high school and in college. We don’t need to spy. There are other ways to know your kid.

So yes, I will continue to bug the 16-year old about being my friend. He has 289 to my paltry 19. But I don’t need him to be my friend. He is already my son.

And good for me that he doesn’t read this. Otherwise, he would never take me seriously.

What Are People Looking For?

Amy Winehouse in London. I think this might be from AP.I was poking through Google’s toolset and stumbled on Google Trends. Google says that their Trends (in beta) can let you “see what the world is searching for.” Among the cool features, you can compare trends on different search terms over time and by region.

So, you can see that U.S. users had a spike in searches for Amy Winehouse, and that Amy tracks higher than Britney. Across the pond, Brits were generally less interested in learning about Amy, and more in Britney.

You can also track the relative popularity of Kanye West and 50 Cent. Fitty famously promised to retire from music if Kanye’s CD outsold his on the day they were both released. 50 had more searches than Kanye through most of 2007–until the release of the CDs. Kanye queries killed him on that day, and has been a bit ahead ever since.

So, what about the Democratic contenders?

Google search trend data shows Clinton queries ahead of Obama queries for much of 2007Well, Hillary Clinton (red line above) was ahead of Barack Obama (blue line) during the long pre-primary season. Interest in both candidates picked up at the end of December, going into the Iowa caucuses. Since then, people have been looking for information about Obama more than info about Clinton–and on some days by much more.

Even more interesting (at least to me) is the regional trending.

Line graphs showing Obama ahead in Iowa, Clinton up in N.H. and tie in S.C.By December 2007, Obama (blue) was ahead of Clinton in Iowa, which he won. Clinton (red) was more interesting to people in New Hampshire, and she won there. And South Carolina queries at the end of the year were pretty even for our intrepid candidates. [Obama ended up winning S.C. handily at the end of January.]

Anybody picking up a trend here? It looks like people might be looking for stuff that they are interested in. This can be troubling for the Clinton campaign if you take a look at what people are looking for now in Texas and Ohio.

It's crazy--Obama queries are way up from Clinton in both Texas and Ohio.The Google Trend for the past 30 days sees a large gap between searches for Obama (still the Blue Line) and Clinton (Red Line) in these two key upcoming primary states. Tuesday will tell, but as far as people looking for candidate information, it appears that they are more likely to be seeking information about Obama. Or maybe how to contribute to his campaign. Or how to volunteer. Or who knows. Maybe they already know enough about Clinton.

This Google Trends stuff is so cool. And despite the fact it skews to Internet users–more educated, more white, more wealthy– it’s now the Doc’s zeitgeist poll.

Love, FEMA

So yesterday FEMA said that they would take some of their mobile homes leftover from Katrina to house people who lost their homes in last week’s deadly tornadoes in the South.

Today, FEMA and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) released information of the formaldehyde tests they ran in December and January.

CDC’s preliminary evaluation of a scientifically established random sample of 519 travel trailers and mobile homes tested between Dec. 21, 2007 and Jan. 23, 2008 showed average levels of formaldehyde in all units of about 77 parts per billion (ppb). Long-term exposure to levels in this range can be linked to an increased risk of cancer, and as levels rise above this range, there can also be a risk of respiratory illness. These levels are is higher than expected in indoor air, where levels are commonly in the range of 10-20 ppb. (halfway into FEMA’s press release.)

FEMA has been kicking the formaldehyde can down the street since September 2006. OSHA came in last May to see if it was safe for FEMA employees. FEMA was working to get people out of the trailers in September 2007, but was acting like it was precautionary rather than necessary.

Now we know that the trailers pose a health risk to their residents. The CDC said so. But does FEMA know that?

Dear Disaster Victims in Tennessee and Arkansas,
Sorry about your losses. We have these great trailers for you to stay in until you get back on your feet. And maybe some swamp land in Florida. Oh, and don’t forget to read the warning labels on the trailers.
Love, FEMA

Take Her, Not Me

Not too far on the heels of my adulthood, I started joking with my folks that they didn’t do so bad. I mean the cops never brought us home. Mom and Dad were never called by Officer Krupski to come down to the station to pick us up. Never booked or in a lineup. Maybe not a high bar, but certainly a marker of “not so bad.”

Yesterday, the cops came for my mother.

She has been suffering from depression and anxiety since my father died in June. She was sometimes unable to control her anger. It was loud. She was feeling like she couldn’t trust people. At the same time she didn’t feel that she could trust herself to make decisions–despite being perfectly capable. She wanted someone else to take control. She couldn’t stand being out of control. She fell and went into a nursing home for recovery.

The hospital provided an opportunity to address her mental health. Working class people don’t seek psychiatric care. Maybe, just maybe, we might see a priest. People who see therapists are weak or can’t control their families. And people would find out. There is a stigma. You can take medication for high-blood pressure, but not for debilitating sadness.

In the hospital, my mother started taking medication that made her feel safe to try. She went from saying “I can’t” to “I can,” from saying “me, me, me, me” to asking about other people, from blaming everyone else to helping other residents learn the ropes of the nursing home.

When she moved into her senior apartment, she was full of hope and potential. She was everyone’s favorite, including mine. Phone calls were balanced. When for years she hadn’t asked about me or my family, now every member of the family was addressed and caressed. She would talk lovingly about my father, remember to ask about the football game two days ago, and tell me that she felt so close to me when we spoke.

She fell in the grocery store. She was still a little wobbly, but was helping out one of her friends from the apartment by returning her bottles. She was off her meds for the two-plus days in the hospital. In that short time period, us Sibs saw a return of the anxious, self-oriented, suspicious mother. We knew then that the medication was critical to her self-reliance and success. To say nothing of our own selfish needs to have a mother that we liked.

Me: Is it wrong to want her on the medication?
Sib: Better living through chemicals is not a bad thing. Do you think she is happier when she acts unhappy??

About two weeks ago, phone calls became litanies of anger and distrust.

Me: Your mother said, complaint, complaint, complaint.
Sib: Well your mother said, mean thing, mean thing, mean thing.
Me: She was getting so upset.
Sib: She is so hard to talk to now.

Then the light bulb went off. She was going to crash again. And, again, we couldn’t do anything to stop it. Only her kids saw her paranoia and anxiety, and that it was getting worse. Monday her doctor did not see any reason to change her meds. She wasn’t complaining to him and didn’t show any increased agitation. So the train wreck that we were watching was set into motion.

And the cops came for my mother yesterday. And the paramedics. And the ambulance.

And I realized that my mother isn’t suffering from being old. She is suffering from mental illness. And I also realized that she has been suffering for decades.

Me: Remember that time when we were like ten, and mom was locked in the bathroom and we were begging her to come out because we were afraid that she might hurt herself?
Sib: And when we would come home from school and she would be screaming at Dad like he was messing around with her sister.
Me: And we were like ten and twelve and we called Auntie to see what really happened? Now that was a family rift.
Sib: And when you moved out, I would come home and she would scream the same scream at me. Like every day?
Me: And we thought she was a bitch. But not like she was sick. Do you think that Dad was masking her behavior? And when he left, there was no one left to shield her?
Sib: And Dad took the brunt of her anger. We saw that.
(Both a question and a statement) She has been very sick for a long time.

So when the cops came, my mother told them to take my sister, not her. Her daughter was the bad guy. But the professionals could see that there wasn’t a bad guy in the room. Just someone very sick. And someone watching her mother get strapped onto the stretcher who was very sad.

Spirit of the Law

You parents out there. You know how your kids can be barristers? You know how they can parse words when it suits them? Like:

Me: I said no online games.
Him: Well, actually you said that you hate online shooting games, and this isn’t a shooting game.
OR

Me: Homework needs to be done before goofing around.
Him: Well, I did finish my homework. I just didn’t show my work, and I didn’t understand problems 3-18, and I didn’t bring home my social studies so how could I read it?
OR

Her: I am having a fundraiser-not campaigning.

In our community (okay, in my house), I don’t accept parsing of words to get around the intent of the agreement. The boys know the right thing to do, and I am not going to have an esoteric argument because I didn’t cover every possible variation of circumstance. Especially the stretch of circumstance which would allow the child to do what he wanted to do DESPITE the fact that it had been disallowed.

The point is: You know better.

Rose Colored Endorsement?

I agree with Steve Clemons that JFK had a much more complex presidency and, following on that, a more complex legacy than is commonly recalled. But JFK’s daughter wasn’t making a complex argument when she endorsed Obama today.

The idea(l) of Kennedy is one of youth, hope, promise, and responsibility. Almost 50 years later, people still reference Kennedy’s call to put a man on the moon and his call to national service with reverence.

JFK called us to be more than we are, to believe in ourselves, to take the gifts of our country and to do good. Ms. Kennedy is evoking the promise of promise in her endorsement of Mr. Obama. She believes he can guide the United States through this century’s challenges–terrorism, the disruption of a global economy, the imperative of global warming, and the needs of the least of us.

Frankly, Ms. Kennedy and I are too young to have personal knowledge of the JFK presidency, so we both have to go by what we have been told. But Ms. Kennedy and I are adults now, and through our own lenses we are both looking for inspiration and leadership–not just for ourselves, but also for our children.