2005-02-20 : 8:51 p.m.
What was meant to be a brief rambling turned... long. very. very. long.

Current Song: "Trying" Lifehouse
Current Rant: Politics, single life, second guessing, life itself
Current Obsession: well, it would seem dland... damn that just sucks.

So I really just need to sit down and do all the reading that I know I have to get done. My problem is that I just don't want to do it. Honestly, I just stuck in such a slump that I don't care. I guess it's been building up for a while, but last week and the week before, being sick and stuff, especially the migraine from hell, I've just lost even the little motivation that I had. I mean, I care, but I am just so busy second guessing every major choice I've made thus far in my life that I can't say I care about the present. It's like I'm stuck in the past or something. Maybe it's because I know I can float by without any problems. I don't know. Maybe that's it. Maybe now. Who the hell knows.

So today I went out to Exton with Mom. No real plans or anything, but we just went out to Main Steet and walked around, had lunch, and shopped a little. Honestly, the last time we were really just "out" was probably the last time we were at the shops on main street. It was March 1st ish so it's been almost a year. That's kind of sad. Anyway, during lunch and the car ride, we just sort of talked about stuff. Started with politics--me and my Bush bashing. I don't know why I've become so interested in politics lately, I just have. Talked about John Edwards and how we both really like him. He may not be quite liberal enough for me, but I still like him a lot.
I was watching the beginning of This Week on ABC this morning. They interviewed Edwards and that interview just reminded me how much the current political situation sucks. 4 more years of Bush? Fuck. We're screwed. Honestly, we are SCREWED. The tapes that came out were really interesting. Of coures, they even more so justified my Bush hate so... One of my favorite parts: ' �I wouldn�t answer the marijuana questions,� he said, according to the Times. �You know why? Because I don�t want some little kid doing what I tried.� He mocked Vice President Al Gore for acknowledging marijuana use. "Baby boomers have got to grow up and say, yeah, I may have done drugs, but instead of admitting it, say to kids, don't do them," he said.' Ah Bush... you're an idiot. I must say though, maybe it could have been worse. Bush-Ashcroft? Shoot me, please. That would have been hell. Ya know, I just hate conservative republicans. They're just so damn narrow minded. I hate narrow minded people. Honestly they are part of the reason that my views are so far left. I hate right wing conservatives!!!!!

While Mr. Bush thought the conservative Christian candidates Gary L. Bauer and Alan Keyes would probably scare away moderates, he saw Mr. Ashcroft as an ally because he would draw evangelical voters into the race.

"I want Ashcroft to stay in there, and I want him to be very strong," Mr. Bush said. " I would love it to be a Bush-Ashcroft race. Only because I respect him. He wouldn't say ugly things about me. And I damn sure wouldn't say ugly things about him."

Ya know what's really freaky? Something like 4 in 7 evangelical christians don't support the war in Iraq yet only 1 in 7 voted for Kerry. That said, the fact that 1 in 7 actually voted for Kerry is also freaky in it's own right...

More: By the end of the primary, Mr. Bush alluded to Dr. Dobson's strong views on abortion again, apparently ruling out potential vice presidents including Gov. Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania and Gen. Colin L. Powell, who favored abortion rights. Picking any of them could turn conservative Christians away from the ticket, Mr. Bush said.

Gag me.

And more:

Early on, though, Mr. Bush appeared most worried that Christian conservatives would object to his determination not to criticize gay people. "I think he wants me to attack homosexuals," Mr. Bush said after meeting James Robison, a prominent evangelical minister in Texas.

But Mr. Bush said he did not intend to change his position. He said he told Mr. Robison: "Look, James, I got to tell you two things right off the bat. One, I'm not going to kick gays, because I'm a sinner. How can I differentiate sin?"

Later, he read aloud an aide's report from a convention of the Christian Coalition, a conservative political group: "This crowd uses gays as the enemy. It's hard to distinguish between fear of the homosexual political agenda and fear of homosexuality, however."

"This is an issue I have been trying to downplay," Mr. Bush said. "I think it is bad for Republicans to be kicking gays."

Told that one conservative supporter was saying Mr. Bush had pledged not to hire gay people, Mr. Bush said sharply: "No, what I said was, I wouldn't fire gays."

As early as 1998, however, Mr. Bush had already identified one gay-rights issue where he found common ground with conservative Christians: same-sex marriage. "Gay marriage, I am against that. Special rights, I am against that," Mr. Bush told Mr. Wead, five years before a Massachusetts court brought the issue to national attention.

I love it!!!! "No, what I said was, I wouldn't fire gays." Dumbass. What the hell would being gay impact some person's ability to get a job done... that said, claiming not to fire gays makes it obvious that he would fail to hire them... gaah.

And yet more:

Many of the taped conversations revolve around Mr. Bush's handling of questions about his past behavior. In August 1998, he worried that the scandals of the Clinton administration had sharpened journalists' determination to investigate the private lives of candidates. He even expressed a hint of sympathy for his Democratic predecessor.

"I don't like it either," Mr. Bush said of the Clinton investigations. "But on the other hand, I think he has disgraced the nation."

Ok, shut up. I'll be the first to get up and admit to being a big Clinton support. So he had an affair. How many other millions of people have affairs? So he lied about it. Who the fuck care! The fact that he was asked about it under oath is even a bigger sin. If Clinton could run again, I'd be the first in line to vote for his re-election. I'm just a big Clinton supporter. I like what he's done in office and for the country, he's a charismatic individual, and screw it, I'm not justifying my Bill Clinton support.

Now, having said all of that, I can't say I'm quite as big a fan of Hillary Clinton. Now, if she became the democratic candidate in 2008, you'd better believe I'd vote for her. But that said, I have problems with her. I'm all for a female president, but right now without going too far into details, I can't personally say that I think she'd be the greatest in office. Also, I'm not sure she could win. It sucks, but I'm not sure the countries ready for a female president. I want a candidate that can win as well and at this point, can she? I'm not that confident. Having said that, she's doing great things as a NY senator.

Side note. I still hate Ohio but damnit, it was so close. Why oh why didn't Kerry immediately go out after the swift boat adds and ask one question. "Where the fuck were you, Bush? Where the fuck were you." Now a couple questions. How the fuck did Gore lose in 2000? Also who is there for 2008? I mean, Bush cannot run, thank god, but for both republicans and democrats, who is there? People love McCain and I do have respect for him, but I can't say I'd vote for him unless he switches parties. That said, with the right wing ultra conservatives controlling the republican party, I can't even see McCain winning the nomination. Will we end up with someone freaky ultra conservative running? God help us all. On the Democrats side, we've got Kerry, Edwards, H. Clinton, and bunches of others, but no one stands out. That's what freaks me out. Granted 4 years ago, who would have forseen Kerry-Edwards coming THIS close to office... Ah well. At this point, maybe I should just hope that 4 years from now I actually get to vote and they haven't changed the laws requiring me to site the bible prior to voting or that they end up allowing Arnold to run... damn this all could end up really fucked up.

Ok, so I got distracted. But I'm back! We also talked about Professors and classes and majors and colleges during lunch. I kinda expressed my dissapointment about essentially not being allowed to go to my first choice, Villanova. I loved their program and honestly, the area is my home, it's my comfort zone and I think you need that at a school. My mother kind of regrets that I have regrets as well. But hindsight is 20/20. Oh well. Ya know, it's funny, the school everyone thought would be perfect for me I didn't even apply to. That was Franklin & Marshall. I should have gotten in. I could have. But damn, whoever spoke at the open house dropped that school off my list so fast that I refused to even apply let alone consider attending. Maybe that was a bad choice, who knows. It was a gorgeous school too. My mom was so disappointed I hated it (even though she was turned off as much as I was)--she though I'd be perfect there. Now, what happened if the real speaker, not the guy who we all hated that filled in, had actually come and spoke? Where would I be?

Now when I stop and think about other school I refused to consider, I kind of regret it too. I refused to consider Bryn Mawr, some form of protest against all female schools? But then again at the time, I didn't even consider other majors that I know sometimes think about like History and Political Science. If I could do it all over again, I'd be a polysci major. I refuse to change now, I just want to graduate, but still... Then there are other schools. Wellsley and Weslyan and all those other N.England schools. What could have been. Yet maybe I'm were I should be anyway. It's a small school, but decent enough. I consider it on the same level as Temple (considering all our Temple adjunct profs) and Temple is decent enough. Oh man. Second guessing is what screws us all in the long run...

Ok, what the hell is the distincation between full professor, assistant professor, associate prof, senior instructor and so forth?? Does any of it matter? yes no maybe so? I am so confused!!! EXPLAIN IT TO ME!!!

Anyway, we went shopping ant Pier 1 and I got a pillow and vase and then since their flowers were massively expensive, got flowers at Marshalls. Very pretty ones.

Wow. this has gotten long.

So yesterday I sat around at work readind Cosmo (following people) though I do realize it does make little sense for me to be reading Cosmo considering my lack of a sex life/love life. Nonetheless, I sometimes read cosmo. That said, I really am lacking a love life. Another reason why it sucks were I am at school. 70-30 female male ratio. The guys that are single are either: involved or gay. The majority are gay though. Thanks Arcadia for helping my love life flourish...

Very interesting article. "A" for always alone

It has gotten so that faced with two potential dating choices � a divorced thirtysomething or a never-married person of the same age � men and women will often opt for the former.

Why? Single-and-never-married has become synonymous with immature.

"There's this idea that if you married, even if you divorced, you're somehow considered an adult, and if you never married, you somehow evaded some responsibility," says Sasha Cagen, 31, a satisfied single in San Francisco and the author of "Quirkyalone: A Manifesto for Uncompromising Romantics", a book that celebrates those who shun the "tyranny of coupledom." Last weekend, Cagen hosted one of a growing number of alternative Valentine's Day parties that celebrate the range of love, including self-love.

Society's prevailing attitude, Cagen says, is that because you haven't been married, you're missing out on what life is really about. The consensus seems to say that by a woman's mid-30s and a man's early 40s, it's better to have settled for a schmuck and gotten the shaft than never to have walked down the aisle.

Pamela Paul has heard that logic before. During the nearly five years between her divorce and remarriage, women told her, " 'Well, at least you've already been married,' as if I had some credential," says Paul, 33, who wrote "The Starter Marriage and the Future of Matrimony," considered groundbreaking when it was published in 2002. Though she calls her divorce a "very sad thing," to others, "it's viewed ironically that, 'Well, someone obviously wanted you enough to want to marry you and therefore you're not quite so bad.' "
"If you are 30ish, female and truly single � not divorced � then you are pretty much considered weird or a lesbian, which I'm neither," says Sherry Ott, 35, a New Yorker who is "pretty darn happy" about having never been married.

Debate away. That all said, the way marriage has become in society, i'm not surprised. Honestly, divorce is like the birth control of marriage and longterm relationships. "Let's get married, we can always divorce..." But really, it seems so true. It sucks to be 30 and single. People seem to think that means somethings wrong with a person. Damn society. And to think I'm basically 10 years from 30... AHHH. 1 month till i'm 20... grr.

Other parts of the article:

At the same time, as the percentage of people who are divorced has risen steadily over the past 20 years, society's perception of divorce has changed dramatically, to the point where divorced, childless men and women are considered catches in some circles. The thinking goes as such: Divorced people have demonstrated they're capable of making a commitment; there's no confusion about their sexual orientation; and with their "starter marriages" out of the way, they can concentrate on real, lasting relationships.


But if anyone's a pariah now, it's the never-married singleton. The broader culture supports the trend. The engagement of Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles, both divorced, was given Queen Elizabeth's blessing � the same Elizabeth who, 50 years before, informed her sister, Princess Margaret, that marrying the divorced man she loved would mean losing her royal status.

By contrast, even as women like Condoleezza Rice and Oprah Winfrey have risen to the height of their professions, the public still makes an issue of why they've never married. Consider what happened to never-married "Desperate Housewives" star Marcia Cross this month: After Internet rumors circulated that she was gay, Cross' publicist released a statement denying them. Cross herself told ABC's "The View": "I just assumed this is what comes of being 42 and single."

Even as the percentage of the population that has never been married has grown, being single is met with the whispers and raised eyebrows that once greeted divorced people. In today's coupling-at-all-costs culture, staying happily unmarried is akin to standing on the sidelines.

After all, even the triumphantly single women of "Sex and the City" all ended up safely coupled at that show's conclusion.

Well, I guess I should wrap this up. It got quite long, didn't it? Did anyone make it to the end? Damn I've wasted too much of my weekend right here....

Last Five Entries

Peter Jennings - 2005-08-08
- - 2005-08-08
night i'd not like to repeat - 2005-06-20
- - 2005-06-19
so i'll update - 2005-06-07

<< | >>