Dying to get in

You may have heard about how outrageous the housing market is here in the Bay Area. It really is beyond the beyond—both property ownership & renting.

But here’s something I’ve never seen before, anywhere:

That should really tell you something.

Olive pits

I’m presuming you’ve heard about the contretemps surrounding the Grand Forks, N.D., restaurant review of the new Olive Garden store.

The review was actually about as bland & whitebread as anything you’ll find on the menu of any of the 67,433 OG outlets in the Lower 48. But because it didn’t excoriate the food, it went viral & picked up all kinds of snotograms from bloggers & tweeters.

(This kind of reminded me of the woman who used to “review” restaurants for the Pasadena Star News, where I worked for a while. Possibly because all her food was comped by the establishments she was writing up, or maybe just because she really, really enjoyed her eats, she never met a meal she didn’t like, or a restaurant she didn’t give top marks to.)

But it turns out that when Grand Forks Herald writer Marilyn Hagerty focuses on the ambiance of a place, she’s practicing in print what our mothers used to tell us to do: if you can’t say anything nice about someone, find something you can’t denigrate. As in, “Tuna surprise? Oh, what a lovely dish you have it in!”

So she spent all her time talking about the décor, rather than the chow.

But the thing I get the biggest kick out of, in this whole farrago is a comment that appeared on one of the critical sites, Fark: "Residents of Grand Forks, N.D., are lining up for blocks to enjoy a one-of-a-kind European dining experience that finally puts the city on the culinary map with its unique brand of Tuscany refinery. It's called The Olive Garden."

Here’s my response to the whole thing:

Grand Forks has blocks?

Justice blind & mostly dumb

Following with all due speed upon the take-down of Osama Bin Laden by US Navy Seals ten months ago, the great government of Pakistan is taking steps to show to all the world its zero-tolerance policy against law-breaking evil-doers.

They’re charging Bin Laden’s several widows with entering the country illegally.

The BBC reports that the three women probably won’t be tried in an open court (meaning: no media coverage), possibly because it would be hard for even Pakistani lawyers to frame the questions so carefully as to avoid answers that they don’t want anyone hearing.

The mind boggles here. A country with as many loose cannons as Pakistan, such endemic poverty, repression & corruption thinks, that putting on a show trial for women who—even if they did enter the country without getting their passports stamped (if they have passports)—would never have had any choice in the matter is somehow going to convince the world of their commitment to fighting terrorism—well, you can count the dozens of ways that’s just plain ludicrous for yourself.

& I’m not going to argue if someone wants to point out that the US has glass houses of its own, with all the social ills we have & both the right & left going ape over a motormouth like Rush Limbaugh instead of actually, you know, taking action about crumbling infrastructure, employment, healthcare or education.

Even so—this is just so colossally, gobsmackingly fatheaded, I just couldn’t help myself bringing it up.

Enjoy.

(& a big shout-out to Roo for bringing this to my attention. Still laughing.)

Anti-social media

I’m taking a careers workshop and was pretty much gobsmacked when a participant assured me that the way for me to go is social media. Something to do with either running social networking communities, or managing social networking software products; I’m not sure and she seemed pretty vague, too. More interested in sounding authoritative than in providing actual, you know, substantive information.

(And this was after I’d said that I’m interested in nothing to do with the consumer or social media space.)

See, I’m not sure that this whole social networking phenom is more than a fad. Like, you know, that-there iPhone thing. But, beyond that, I’m completely dumbfounded not only by how much platforms like Twitter or Facebook encourage continuous public displays of self-absorption, but how they seem to imbue their members with seemingly unlimited amounts of utter, mind-freezing stupidity.

People are so enthralled by the concept that, instead of a mere 15 minutes of fame, they can get bleeps and blobs of it round the clock—just keep tweeting or updating your FB status. Those go out to everyone they’ve connected to, with the urgency you’d expect to get from a news-flash announcing that the Israelis and Palestinians have just sealed a peace agreement over a pulled-pork sandwich and a few brewskis. Over and over again.

And I’m not even talking about those god-awful FB games.

People just lose their brains when they log on to those sites, blabbing stuff, posting photos and who knows what with this bizarre schizoid idea that they can at the same time draw the admiring attention of everyone who views yet another pic of them slamming back tequila shooters or leading the pack in a wet tee-shirt contest while not appearing on the radar of current or future employers.

And the environments positively encourage this sort of thing.

But here’s one of the more recent examples of why I can’t get excited about social networking: the Washington state corrections officer who was charged last week with bigamy after FB’s “friending” algorithm suggested that Wife #1 might want to friend Wife #2, since they had Alan L. O’Neill as a common friend.

Now, O’Neill isn’t the first—I Googled “Facebook bigamist” and found others over the past years. So what is it that makes anyone think that anything that can be uploaded from a phone, pad or PC isn’t going to be circulated, processed and entered into evidence somehow?

And why, if I’m not a PI or a blackmailer, would I want to be part of this business?

Besides, my idea of a time suck is putting out a feeder full of Nyjer seed and watching goldfinches squabble with juncos at it for hours.I'm thinking I'll add a hummingbird feeder, too.

I'll drink to that (for medicinal purposes only)

Okay, I understand that it’s early days, yet, and they haven’t run, you know, extensive clinical trials on this and everything, but evidently there’s some scientific support for the idea that “moderate” drinking in women may lower their risk of stroke.

I really don’t have time to comment. I have to open a bottle of wine.

Cheers.

Road signs

I found myself behind one of those behemoth SUVs at a stoplight the other day. You know, one of those old-style ones that take up two parking spaces and get about 9 miles per gallon.

Then I noticed this:

After I took the shot, I backed the hell off.

Spinal trap

Ever since I was caught in the middle of a five-car pile up on the Pasadena Freeway more than 20 years ago (where I took the brunt of the pick-up that plowed into me & only pushed me into the fool in front of me…who sued me), I occasionally need chiropractic services.

Most recently my back, shoulders & neck just locked up into one continuous spasm of pain in mid-December. I made it through the weekend, but by Monday morning I really could barely move. So I trawled the Web to find local chiropractors & was kind of surprised by what I found.

Given how many physical therapy practices around the Silicon Valley—& how many people earn their living hunched over PCs—I expected to find more chiropractors around here. But there weren’t very many, & even fewer that garnered okay reviews online.

Well, I won’t go to anyone who uses blunt force; I only allow someone who’s certified in use of the Activator method, so I guess that narrows down the field.

Anyhow, some offices were closed on Mondays, & those I could reach couldn’t get me in that day. The single practice that could see me turned out to be everything that’s sleazy about chiropractic. I won’t go into details, but let me just say that they pitched a much harder-sell on long-term treatment than I’ve ever received. You know you’re in for a pocket-picking session when the chiropractor puts that puppy-eye face on & tells you you need to see him three times a week…for six months.

Seriously? Does anyone sign up for that? Does anyone’s insurance carrier sign up for that?

(Also, he must bathe in cologne. Guy near to asphyxiated me.)

But what I want to share with you was one of those pictures that replace 1000 words. Want to know how sleazy this guy is? Take a look at one of the many examples of wall art throughout his office.

Rush rash update

Further fallout from the latest Limbaugh contretemps: according to the Borowitz Report, the mouth that roared has lost yet another sponsor.

It seems that Satan has cut his ties with Limbaugh.

Although I don't generally weigh in on the side of the Prince of Darkness, in the spirit of Winston Churchill, I think in this case I’ll put in a good word for the devil.

Dramatic political turnaround

In a stunning upset of all expectations, Vladimir Putin has been elected to the office of president of Russia, a post he held from 2000 to 2008.

Obviously, this vox populi expression in a free & open election represents a mandate for Putin’s policies, whatever they might be on any given day.

& I am Marie of Romania.

Rush rash

I’m trying to understand the logic…erm, no. The reasoning…uh, uh. The thinking…

Well, I mean to say that I’m trying to imagine the ratiocination construct that lies below Rush Limbaugh’s recent verbal vomit about Sandra Fluke. You know, the Georgetown student who testified before a Congressional committee on why contraceptives should be part of any health insurance. I’m at a bit of a disadvantage, because I’ve heard neither Fluke’s nor Limbaugh’s full spiel, but here’s my understanding.

Fluke, a third-year law student, went before the committee to represent other women who depend on Georgetown’s health coverage, but have to pay for contraception out of pocket because the plan doesn’t include it. She pointed out that birth control pills can be prescribed for medical conditions outside actual prevention of pregnancy. (These include irregular menstrual periods, acne, endometriosis, Polycystic Ovary syndrome, amenorrhea and some others.) Refusing out of hand to cover any contraception means that women who are diagnosed with these conditions don’t have access to these therapies.

Ignoring that, Limbaugh went on the attack, claiming, “She wants to be plaid to have sex. She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraception. She wants you and me & the taxpayers to pay her to have sex.”

So, I have some questions about this. Maybe you can help me out with some answers.

Who’s the “us” he’s talking about? He objects to “us” paying for Fluke’s alleged sexual activities. (And, by extension, that of all women. But evidently he’s not opposed to men, you know, screwing. Except probably men having sex with other men. I’m just spitballing, here; but I’m guessing that as a conservative flag waver, he’s probably not down with that.)

But unless “we” are an actual, you know, insurance plan (or the employer that might be contributing to that plan’s costs), then “we’re” not paying for anything: not for treating the consequences of sex, smoking, skydiving or any other social behavior.

Could he be talking about “us” in the sense that “we” are also major shareholders in, say, GM? As in “we the taxpaying people”? Meaning “a single-payer health policy supported by our taxes”?

Hmm, I shouldn’t have thought so from the mouth-foaming tenor of conservatives' opposition to the Affordable Care Act. But I suppose I could be wrong.

Is he saying health plans shouldn’t cover pregnancy—since sexual activity is the most common cause of pregnancy and Limbaugh seems opposed to the price tag of contraception? I have to say that compared with pre- and post-natal obstetrical treatments, even a normal childbirth and a couple of decades of pediatric care, the cost of contraceptives is quite the bargain. I won ‘t go into the considerable non-medical burden of social services required to deal with children whose parents are ill-equipped to raise their offspring.

(Although, in fairness, it’s been my observation that conservatives’ interest in the moral imperative of protecting the sanctity of life pretty much stops, uh, dead at the moment of birth. They’re disinclined to fund anything that would help that creature so sacred in utero have a life of dignity outside the womb. So those costs wouldn’t figure in any cost-benefit analysis run by the right.)

And finally, is Limbaugh going to go ballistic about funding Viagra, Cialis and all the rest of the erectile dysfunction meds that big pharma can’t produce fast enough to meet the demand of middle-aged men? Since (as I understand it) men wouldn’t need Vitamin V unless they specifically intend to engage in, you know, sexual activity in the immediate future?

Or would the possible alternative therapeutic uses—for hypertension, Raynaud’s phenomenon or heart disease—be his ticket out. “Oh, get stuffed, liberal pinko scum. Men need these pills for very serious conditions. Not like birth control pills for women.”

Well, look—in Limbaughland, that sort of argument not only holds water, it’s a mainstay of all discourse.

Another staple of Planet Rush is the grudging, forced non-apology. (Forced, in this case, because several ad sponsors of his show have cut him off.) He’s made this to Fluke via a statement that said he never intended that calling her a slut and a prostitute would be construed as a personal attack.

I think his own meds are due for adjustment.