While I was party planning this afternoon, I started watching last night's episode of 'Parenthood'. Barely five minutes in, I fell over laughing when Crosby held up his newly-born daughter and exclaimed with shock, "She's so white!" And 10 minutes in, I nearly died again when Grandpa Braverman said, "She's even lighter than she was in the hospital!" and then expressed his confusion at the term light-skinned. Ah... All of this is so familiar to parents of biracial children.

Last night, Ted Cruz, the junior senator from my state (and general stain on humanity), decided to filibuster into the wee hours of the night on his crusade against ensuring proper healthcare coverage for million Americans. During his all-night-long rage against quality of life, he read Green Eggs and Ham. Why that book instead of any other Dr. Seuss tale? Well, ignoring the irony of reading a book about someone who stubbornly insists he hates something he's never tried only to find out in the end he likes it to protest something Sen. Cruz has declared he hates, even though it is yet untested, I have some theories about why the other Seuss books were a no-go:

Today one of the pages I follow posted an article from the Huffington Post entitled "10 Uncomfortable Confessions From an Imperfect Mom." One of the confessions, which the page featured, was, "I know that every time I feel defensive or judgmental about someone else's parenting choices, it's because I am less than confident about my own." Commenters were asked to agree or disagree. While there were other confessions that resonated with me almost to an eerie level of discomfort, this one did not. 

When it was announced over the weekend that Ben Affleck would play Batman, people immediately lost their damn minds. All of the sudden, it was like they had been personally betrayed or something. I don't get the outrage. What's wrong with Ben Affleck?

Miley, Miley, Miley... WTF, girl? Honestly, there isn't much I can say about her train wreck of a performance at the VMAs Sunday night than has already been said in many many places and by many people (including myself).
 So this is only partly about Miley. I want to talk about... priorities.

This afternoon, one of the pages I follow [and often share] posted this:

(W) Today's News quiz for the American public:

The phrase "MORAL OBSCENITY" is trending because:a) US Secretary of State John Kerry used it in the official statement referring to chemical weapons use against civilians in Syriab) Hundreds of mainstream media references to Miley Cyrusperforming at MTV awards yesterday.

Is the Web a mirror in which we see a real reflection of our society? If so, it ain't a pretty face 

It was a good point, but I believe it was pointless. For one thing, instead of getting the serious discussion I think the post was intended to have, a huge chunk of the comments (at least, as far as I bothered to scroll through--there were a lot) were about Miley's performance. I believe that was the exact opposite of what this page intended to do. But, more than that, this page (one I normally love, mind you) and some of the commenters on this page's status whose contributions to this post I read (the ones that weren't about Miley) about how "stupid," "dumbed down," or "desensitized" people who talked about the pop tart instead of John Kerry are, need to get a grip.


You know, it's perfectly possible and even acceptable to care about mindless, mundane things like Miley Cyrus making a complete fool of herself, Robin Thicke, and the rest of us while also caring about actually important world events. Just because you don't talk about Syria... or Egypt... or the NSA... or Trayvon Martin... or the 50th Anniversary of the "I Have a Dream Speech" on your Facebook wall doesn't mean you aren't informed and don't care. And, maybe, you know, underneath all of those grains of emptiness of millions of Facebook users and bloggers going on and on about Miley Cyrus and that poor excuse for "twerking" is a serious and legitimate concern that demands attention--like one woman who commented on this status pointing out that it's not a very "Liberal" (part of the page's name) attitude to have absolutely zero concern for the very feminist issue of why women feel they need to exploit themselves in order to be relevant?

Dafuq?? I'm pretty sure Paula Patton was ready to snatch those pine cones off her head...

For myself, though, I was just enjoying mindless fun--which I'm entitled to have. I read the news often. I'm generally up on current events. I am certainly no stranger to analyzing and ranting (both on this blog and on my personal Facebook wall) about world news and national or local political issues. However, for all of my talk today about the VMAs and all my talk for the last few months about women's issues, racism, voting rights, and other issues du jour, I have not posted one thing about Syria or Egypt. Why?

Well, for me (and only for me), when it comes to my political rantings and ravings I prefer to post about things that outrage me that I feel I (or my Facebook friends) can have some control over. Can the people I know change the way they approach and view others (subconsciously often) regarding race or gender? Absolutely. Can I remind my Facebook friends and family members (especially my younger family members who may still live in a bubble where they are 100% unaware of any news that doesn't fall into the entertainment category) of how important it is to vote? Of course. Can I do a thing about a government using chemical weapons on its citizens? Probably not. I can sign all the MoveOn.org petitions in the world, but there's nothing about my behavior, my actions, or even my moral outrage that could possibly do a darn thing. And really, that's part of my internal litmus test for my Facebook page and this blog. Some of the factors I use are: (1) is it funny or cute?; (2) do I actually have any personal or professional knowledge about this subject that allows me to talk about this without sounding like a complete idiot?; (3) does it directly affect me?; (4) can we do anything about this?; (5) is it worth my breath? Those aren't everything I internally process in approximately 10 seconds before I post something, but it's a pretty good summary of where most things break down. But that's just me.

My friends all have different tests. I have some friends who have one or two topics that get their goat, and they will latch on to any and every topic related to those issues. I have other friends who (as I often do) have a large variety of topics from which to draw their internet material. And I have other friends who feel like they would rather leave the negative issues in one place and use Facebook and blogging for the silly, funny, happy, and mundane. It's our variety that makes the world go 'round. Sure, I have friends who may have been busy posting about vacations or sharing funny pictures of polar bears when I was ranting and raving about the Texas Legislature's war on women, but that doesn't mean that they had absolutely no idea what was going on. It didn't mean they didn't care. And it also didn't mean that their cute polar bear pictures were somehow a waste of time or 100% unimportant (after all, funny and cute things improve your quality of life).

When I posted a very heartfelt "Some of you have been far too silent, so please delete me if you don't care about these couple of issues that are part of the essence of me and some of the most important things I believe" plea to all of my friends on my personal Facebook page, I got responses from a lot of people saying something to the effect of, "Please don't take my silence as an indication that I don't care. I do care. I just don't use Facebook for that." And, quite honestly, I have a lot of friends who admitted in one way or another that they really didn't care about certain issues, either because something else in their lives took priority or because they completely disagreed with my view of things. Whichever of these camps some of the answers fell in, it was good litmus test for me--to what extent was I willing to be okay with remaining in the online of company of people who didn't feel certain topics worthy of discussion or who fundamentally disagreed with me about things that I found so important that I was physically ill at points over the topic? The answer actually was, "Well... it depends on the person and why s/he doesn't want to discuss that kind of topic here/whether I can respect his or her point of disagreement." But it was also a good reminder: Silence on a topic doesn't mean someone isn't paying attention.

A friend of mine always has this statement about people's struggles: It isn't a contest, and someone suffering more doesn't mean that my struggles don't exist. Similarly, just because a person focuses on something mundane and mindless doesn't mean that s/he is mundane or mindless. It doesn't mean that the important, interesting, and topical thing isn't important to him/her. But it also isn't a contest. Why can't you be outraged by Syria and Miley Cyrus "twerking" (hardly) at the same time? Are we not allowed to multi-task anymore? Doesn't the fact that I belong to a page where discussion of heavy political and global issues is the norm while ranting about Real Housewives mean that I am multi-tasking?



So my answer to the page that I briefly considered un-liking today before shrugging off this one hiccup in our otherwise stable relationship (wherein I repost 15 gazillion articles from it a day) is this:

No, the web is not a mirror in which to see a reflection on our society. It is what it is. Everyone chooses what they want to share and to what they want to contribute, and sometimes that isn't going to be the heaviest and most serious issue of the day; but it is quite presumptuous to think that just because the things that the majority choose to discuss ad nauseum aren't the things you consider important means our society is headed for a downfall. After all, isn't the fact that a country is using chemical weapons on its people while an over-indulged former Disney girl performs the ultimate cry for attention on the same weekend partial evidence that we've kinda already fallen?

I dunno... This is pretty damn morally outrageous, too....

• Brandon Borello (? to ?) is the man behind "Tim McGraw." This one was a sweet memoir of a past relationship, because young Taylor had not yet learned the bitter way of the worlds. Also, dear Brandon was only going to college, not dumping her because she was cray cray, so why do more than "something to remember her by"?
• Unamed-"Redneck"-Who-Wouldn't-Let-Her-Drive-His-Pickup-Truck (? to ?) is the inspiration behind "Picture to Burn." Let the bitterness begin!
• Sam Armstrong (? to ?) was the guy to whom she "dedicates" "Should've Said No," and Taylor made it so clear that every time an S, A, or M appears in that order in the CD booklet, it was capitalized to spell out his name. Uh-oh, girl... We're getting a little crazy now.
• Joe Jonas (July 2008 - October 2008) inspired "Last Kiss" and "Forever and Always" (later she made nice with "Holy Ground"... guess she got over him? Well... Until she wrote "Better than Revenge" about his ex-girlfriend, Camila Belle. Damn girl! Put the claws back in.
• Lucas Till (March 2009 - April 2009) managed to escape the song curse. I guess one undramatic month doesn't provide enough song material?
• Taylor Lautner (August 2009 - December 2009) — "Back to December," an apology for dumping him (guess there's a better treatment when the breakup is her idea?)
• John Mayer (December 2009 - February 2010) is the guy for which "Dear John" ("Don't you think I was too young to be messed with." Uh... isn't that your call, too, honey?) was written. There's also some speculation that "I Knew You Were Trouble" (see also Jake Gyllenhaal and Harry Styles) may be about him
• Cory Monteith (suspected April 2010 to May 2010) is thought to be the guy behind "Mine" (even though he was, if the unconfirmed rumors were true, not even hers for very long)
• Jake Gyllenhaal (October 2010 to January 2011) apparently provided an entire album for Taylor in their very brief time together: "The Last Time," "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together," "State of Grace," "All Too Well," "Girl at Home," "The Moment I Knew," and "I Knew You Were Trouble" (in fact, the VMA she received for "Trouble" last night was dedicated to him)
• Conor Kennedy (July 2012 - October 2012) "Begin Again"
• Harry Styles (November/December 2012 - January 2013) - none as of yet, though there has also been speculation that "I Knew You Were Trouble" is about him.

"Ma'am, that'll be 269--," the cashier started to tell me. "Wait! We're not done yet!" I interrupted, and I handed her my phone. The register verified that I had saved $10.41. Then I swiped my debit card, and my total bill went down to around $240. Not bad for two seconds work. What's my magic trick? Cartwheel and a Target debit card.

Cartwheel is a new app by Target. The basic concept is social couponing. You login to Cartwheel with your Facebook account, and you are instantly connected with everyone on your friend list who has downloaded the Cartwheel app. You see what they're saving, they see what you're saving, and you can choose to save on the same deals. You earn badges based on your savings and your friends' savings, and those "badges" result in more open slots for you to select coupons.

Unlike the Target Mobile coupons that get text messaged to you every week, these coupons are totally customizable. You can go through the extensive list of coupons and select what you what. My strategy is to go to Target with an empty Cartwheel and search for the items I'm purchasing. If my selection comes down to a choice between brands, I usually select whatever has a coupon. Since I shop first and save later, my savings usually end up larger than they do when I simply clip any and all coupons, because I'm truly only finding savings for things I want to buy (much like when I use Ebates), not changing my shopping habits by using coupons to subconsciously influence me to buy something for which I wasn't actually in the market. Also, unlike the Target Mobile coupons, once you use the Cartwheel coupons, they do not go away until either you physically remove them or the expiration date. Also, you can use the coupons multiple times for the same instance of an item. The Cartwheel coupons can be used in conjunction with sales and other coupons and the 5% discount you get for using a Target Visa or debit card.

Here's an example of some of the things that went into the $10.41 I saved today:

As you have probably heard, yesterday Wentworth Miller told the St. Petersburg International Film Festival [I'm paraphrasing here]: "Thanks but no thanks for your invitation to appear at your festival, but as long as your country is oppressing gay people like me, you can go f*** yourselves." And people, gay and straight alike, lost their damn minds.

I was listening to a replay of an earlier episode of Lance Bass's Dirty Pop the other day, and Lance and his co-hosts were talking about the Tennessee judge who changed a child's name from "Messiah" to "Martin." This topic lead into a discussion of weird baby names people have heard, and several people called in with some whoppers. And when I mean whoppers, I mean these were outright lies.

What is it about you teachers and nurses (the biggest offenders) that you apparently think your job isn't interest enough on its own that you have to make up names of students? I'm not saying teachers and nurses don't have interesting jobs. In fact, most of the teachers and nurses I know have much better war stories (assuming any of them are true) than pretty much any other profession I've met. But either you people are so greedy that you want to have a lock on "In addition to all the crazy stories I can tell you about my day, let me tell you this name I heard!" or you for some reason think that the rest of the world finds your job so boring that you're just making up stuff. Either that, or you're pathological liars. I dunno. But nearly everyone of these obviously fake "baby names" that are easily debunked by anyone who wants to spend 10 seconds on Google come from a nurse, a teacher, or a person who heard the name from a nurse or teacher. Heck, even my own mother used to make up these, "There's a child at my school named [insert name that's never appeared in the U.S. birth records ever]. Her mom is so uneducated she didn't know what it meant!"

So what were the baby names (and how they were pronounced) reported by teachers, nurses, and friends of teachers/nurses to the Dirty Pop crew? Shithead (shah-threed), La-a (lah-dash-ah), twins named Lemonjello and Orangejello (lu-mon-jah-lo and oh-ron-jah-lo), Placenta (play-ceen-tah), and Meconium (mek-oh-nam). Seriously?! Not only have everybody and their grandmothers heard these urban legend child names before, but Snopes has debunked Every. Single. One. Of. Them. The only name missing from this "common urban legend" list was Female (fem-uh-lee; rhymes with "Emily").

There were a couple of reported names that were probably real, like Dick Wiener (Richard Wiener is easy to believe. Not to mention, there was once a mayor in Indiana named Harry Baals, and the "First Lady" of my home state of Texas was named Ima Hogg). And there was at least one name that I completely called bullshit on, which turns out is actually real... because people suck [that name, in case you were wondering is Abcde (ab-sa-duh), which, while apparently a real name, is claimed to belong to someone actually known to the reporter more often than the vital records would support. That's just lazy, people! (and stupid)].

Overwhelmingly, though, these names were clearly and lazily made up. Just the fact that Snopes has two articles on them, and I've heard no less than a dozen comedy routines using a number of these names is proof positive that people need to find new material. If you're going to make things up, at least be original! Though, really, I would prefer people just didn't make these things up. There are enough people in the world with unbelievably horrible names because of their parents' stupidity, that you really shouldn't even need to make up names. Not to mention, as the Snopes writer points out, many of these names have their origins in racism. Even if these urban legends aren't thought of as racist in today's times, they are, at best, classist. Personally, I don't find it particularly amusing to make fun of people because they are poor and have low education.

Now, a note about Messiah:
Look, it's no secret that I loathe kr8v names. But that judge was way over the line. In addition to the complete overstepping of her bounds [the only issue before her was the baby's last name, not his first], her reasoning for the name change really bothers me. "There's only one Messiah" smacks the legal system stepping its bounds into religion. Since the government shall establish no religion, and there's only one religion that believes there has been the one Messiah, it sure looks like that judge was establishing a religion in violation of the First Amendment. I don't foresee this withstanding appeal. I'm not a fan of naming a kid Messiah, but that wasn't this judge's call to make.

(Heidi Wigdahl / Associated Press) Sorry, little guy. Whatever your name is, you sure are cute.

First thought just rampant speculation and silly rumor, it is apparently now all but officially confirmed that a gold (but not a tacky gold, mind you, "more of a champagne color") phone will be the new edition to the iPhone line when Apple makes its announcement next month. And I could truly care less.