Seem to Be Repeating Myself

In Missoula, MT since late Saturday night. Yesterday we did quite a bit of picture taking. While browsing the pictures on the laptop this morning, I noticed something a little odd.

Here's one I took yesterday from a little lookout point on the Clark Fork river:


Here's one I took when we were here last November:


Even the angle is eerily the same. Apparently, I just like that shot.

I also did the same facing the other direction from the same spot. Again, yesterday:


And last November:


I need to get moving here so we can go get breakfast and decide whether to buy a not-yet-built house. Much more to come, later.

Defending Starbucks

I've recently taken to listening to a couple podcasts. One of them is the Feast of Fools, a humorous (often hysterical) show by a Chicago gay couple.

Anyway, this episode brought up the topic of Starbucks (as in the coffee place). Apparently, the Concerned Women of America wants to boycott Starbucks because of a gay-positive quote from the author Armistad Maupin on the side of some of the coffee cups.

Anyway, this post isn't really about that part. The boycott is silly, and is unlikely to make a difference to Starbucks. In my mind, of course, that is a good thing.

During the conversation, one of them -- maybe Fausto, I'm not sure -- commented that this was funny because it now both the right and the left hate Starbucks -- the right because of this silly coffee cup issue, and the left because they are a huge, horrible corporation. Or something like that. I have heard this bit about the left "hating Starbucks" and frankly, I've never understood it.

If you don't like the taste of the coffee ("burnt" or just too strong), then fine, that is a valid reason to dislike Starbucks. All their coffee is dark roast, so you gotta like dark roast to like it. I admit I've become a coffee snob and I only like sufficiently strong coffee. I remember last November we drove out to Montana and drank hardly any coffee in the entire state of North Dakota. At all the places we stopped, it was so weak it tasted like brown-colored water. Fortunately, Montana has excellent coffee (and most of it is not Starbucks, incidentally)

But I don't understand why generally "progressive" people would dislike Starbucks. Full disclosure: Laura worked for Starbucks in Chicago (at various stores) for about 3-4 years as a low-level Barista. That's the person behind the counter who slings the coffee at you, then mops the floors and cleans the espresso machine during the slow times. She did become a supervisor for a short time before leaving, but lets be clear here -- she was not any sort of executive here.

Starbucks does all the things that I would think progressive people would like. They may be large, like Walmart, but their corporate philosophy and behavior are nothing like Walmart's:

• Starbucks entry-level wages usually start well above minimum wage. No, they don't pay baristas huge salaries. But they do pay better wages than other comparable food service and retail jobs. I am taking Laura's word on this, as she worked at a number of retail jobs before Starbucks.


• Health benefits. Starbucks provides full health benefits for part-time employees, not just full-time people. I believe this was the first job Laura ever had that paid health benefits. While she was working there, I left a Large Accounting Firm and went to a Small Software Company where we had benefits, but not as comprehensive as Laura's Starbucks benefits. Incidentally, Laura's pseudotumor episode happened while she worked there, and if it wasn't for those benefits, we'd probably still be in debt due to the hospital stays, MRIs, and spinal taps.


• Domestic partner benefits. Starbucks has provided benefits to partners of gay employees for a very long time. Laura started working there in, I believe, 1996 and this benefit was fairly well-entrenched. I realize this has become much more common in recent years (thankfully!), but Starbucks was there early on. For a few years there, I was on Laura's dental insurance until my company got around to adding those benefits as well. My own cool, small software company didn't get around to adding domestic partner benefits until around 2001.


• They support progressive causes. Hence, the gripes from the Concerned Women of America.


• Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Starbucks does make an effort to treat the coffee farmers well and pay them fairly for their beans. Go take a look at the Corporate Social Responsibility Annual Report. Incidentally, do all corporations produce such reports? I've never heard of such a thing.

Does Starbucks make a ton of money selling you overpriced coffee? Yes, they make a profit. But they could probably make much more profit if they shafted the coffee growers and paid employees minimum wage and reserved health benefits for the upper echelons of management. If anyone has any evidence of Starbucks doing such things, please let me know, because all the info I'm finding online suggests that Starbucks is operating exactly the way a progressive person would want them to.

Heck, if you don't believe what Starbucks says about themselves, then take a look at this list of the 100 Best Corporate Citizens, complied by Business Ethics. Yes, Starbucks is on it, and has been all five years the list has been in existence. Here is how Business Ethics explains what they're looking for in their list:

"While traditional measures of success focus on stockholder return, this list defines success more broadly. Using social ratings compiled by KLD Research & Analytics of Boston -- plus total return to shareholders -- our list ranks companies according to service to seven stakeholder groups: stockholders, community, minorities and women, employees, environment, non-U.S. stakeholders, and customers. Good corporate citizens serve all constituencies well. That’s the emerging definition of corporate success."

Sounds like a progressive's dream come true to me. Big business with a conscience!

Employee relations and coffee growers aside, the other big complaint against Starbucks is that they drive out more interesting local coffee shops. There is some truth to this, although again the complaint does not quite make sense.

When Walmart comes into a town, they can offer the same goods as local businesses at significantly lower prices. Hence, the local shops lose customers.

When Starbucks comes into a town, do they undercut existing businesses in the same way? Given that everyone complains about the high price of Starbucks coffee, I think the answer here is no. They don't necessarily charge less than the local coffee shops. Most likely they charge more. So how exactly do they drive out the local places?

The only answer I can find is that people start going to Starbucks anyway. And then they complain about it.

I recall a conversation with a co-worker a few years ago. She liked the Starbucks in Naperville because the baristas recognized her and remembered her preferences each day. When Laura worked at Starbucks, she worked in a very fast-paced store in downtown Chicago that was frequented by hyped-up stock traders and others on their way to high-pressure jobs. Many of these customers were regulars and Laura or one of the other employees would recognize the regulars and start making their drinks when they walked in the door. Sounds more like a friendly local place than the soulless, faceless, fast-food corporate hell critics like to describe!

Well, enough defense of Starbucks -- I need to get ready for my Missoula trip! I plan on drinking lots of great coffee while I'm there, most likely from local, downtown coffee shops.

Missoula, Montana II

If you read Laura's blog, you may already know that she has fallen in love with a not-yet-built townhouse in Missoula.

So far, I like what I've read about the builder, the neighborhood, and the remaining houses available. The overall design of the neighborhood sounds much like my current one -- mixed use, a variety of different types of houses, pedestrian friendly, etc. The advantage is, unlike my current neighborhood, you could actually walk to places like Barnes and Noble (among others). Walking distance to a bookstore...now that is a huge plus!

Ever since we started planning this move I've been looking forward to drastically slashing my car use. Telecommuting is a huge part of that of course -- losing the 50 mile-round-trip drive five days a week is going to free up a fair amount of cash I currently pump into the Civic's gas tank. Being able to walk or bicycle for other errands would also be a huge help, especially since Laura might need to drive to work, leaving me stranded at home. It would be nice to be able to run out for a sandwich at lunch without needing a car.

On the other hand, I also really like the idea of a house with mature trees, which we certainly won't get for many, many years if we build new. Alas, the pros and cons.

Anyway, since I hesitate to buy something I haven't seen, we've planned a very short visit. Laura spent God-knows how much time on her parents' computer (dialup!) and the phone rearranging her flight and arranging a flight for me so that I can fly out there and take a look.

If we do go for it, our housing situation could get very strange in the next few months. If someone buys our house soon, we would end up homeless until the townhouse is done. We'd have to get a short-term rental, or move in with family members--now that is a frightening idea! On the other hand, we could continue to wait and wait for a buyer and end up owning both houses at once. The very thing I have been striving to avoid.

Missoula, Montana

For anyone who doesn't know, Laura and I are planning in moving to Missoula, Montana just at soon as we manage to sell our house. I plan to continue working for my current company by telecommuting.

Laura is currently in Montana visiting her family. She spent Thursday and Friday in Missoula looking at houses with our realtor out there, trying to get a better idea of how much house you can get for the money in the various neighborhoods. She's going back again next week for another day or too. We're currently weighing some of our options -- new construction or existing? Which neighborhood? Etc. Laura is driving me a little nuts because she calls me and gushes about a house, then the next day calls and disses the same house. Make up your mind! I think part of the problem is that she doesn't want to get too attached to anything right now, since we don't know when our house is going to sell, so we don't know when we'll actually get to move. Many of the houses she's looking at now will probably be sold by the time we're ready to buy. I'm too chicken to put down an offer now and risk owning two homes!

Anyway, since I will eventually live in Montana (and I currently live with a Montanan in Exile), I regularly read the various Montana bloggers. Sharon at Watermark did this week's Rascal Fair, a roundup of Montana blog posts. Aside from a great list of posts, I discovered something else there -- a Flickr group devoted specifically to Missoula! There is also a Big Sky group for Montana pictures in general.

I may need join the Missoula group. I have a ton of Missoula pictures from our visit last November (a few of them are already on my flickr account, but not many...yet). And I definitely need to tell Laura about this. I think she'll enjoy looking at these pictures once she comes back, when she gets homesick for Montana and impatient for our move. I don't want to link to other people's pictures without their permission, so go to the group pool at Flickr to see them.

RIP Nicky

This is a little overdue -- I haven't been in a blogging mood lately. Laura is off in Montana visiting her family and looking at houses in Missoula. I'm here working like normal and trying to keep the house ready for showings.

Anyway, on Monday, my parents' dog Nicky died. He was an adorable shih'tzu that they've got as a puppy, along with his litter mate Alex. At the time, my mom was reading various histories and decided to name the new puppies Nicholas and Alexandra. Nicky would have been 13 years old this October.

This is a picture of him I took last December, when we went to my parents' house to celebrate Christmas. He's in his favorite spot at the end of the sofa:


I suppose there is never really a "good time" for something like this, but it seems to me that the timing here was awful. Nicky had been having trouble with one foot for a while. They went to the vet and it was just an infection, so they started giving him antibiotics. Last week, my sister and her family came to visit, so the house was full of chaos for days. Neither Nicky or Alex are used to children, so they spent most of the time trying to stay out of the way.

Anyway, a few days into the visit my parents became very worried about Nicky and took him back to the vet. He had lost a significant amount of weight, too much to chalk it up to anxiety over the kids visiting (my theory). X-rays showed he had a tumor in his lungs and the bones in his foot were damaged due to bone cancer. It is unclear whether the cancer started in his lungs and spread to the bones or vice versa.

My parents tried to keep him comfortable and encourage him to eat. They mixed Ensure into water, but he would not drink it. Sometimes he seemed alert, but most of the time he was having trouble breathing. So, on Monday, the day after my sister's family left, they took him to the vet and had him put down.

Nicky's sister Alex still seems to be healthy, although she has started to mope. She's been with Nicky her whole life, so I'm sure his disappearance has affected her. This picture is from last Thanksgiving, the two of them together on the sofa:


This seems to be a bad year for dogs that I know. My good friend Jane lost her beautiful border collie Bandit in March. This is Bandit and Nicky together in my house. We dog-sat for Nicky, Alex, and Bandit last January/February.



They are all just really sweet, wonderful dogs. I have missed Bandit since she died; I know I'm going to miss Nicky as well.

Just Call Me Aunt Sara

My sister's family came to visit this past week, and now I am exhausted. Her family includes two girls, ages 5 and 7. Well, technically they are 4 and 6, but their birthdays are at the end of August and early September, so it is close enough.

Anyhow, I am wiped out. I took off Wed-Friday to spend time with them. They were all staying at my parents' house, which is about 30 minutes from where I live.

On Wednesday we (me, Laura, my sister, and my mother) took them to downtown Chicago to the American Girl Place store. Laura wrote about that here (complete with links). It was a bit overwhelming. At the risk of caving into stereotypes, I really wasn't into dolls much as a kid, so I really didn't expect to enjoy this particular excursion. It was actually quite fun, much to my surprise. I suspect much of the fun came from watching the delight of my nieces. There was no doubt that they were having a great time, even though Grandma (my mom) made them dress in matching pink dresses and hats. Well, maybe they liked the pink dresses. I would post a picture (they were quite adorable), but I think my sister would not appreciate pictures of her kids circulating on the Internet.

I suspect the commuters on the Metra train did not really appreciate the very loud singing on the way there and back that day. To anyone who rode the 10:05 AM Metra Union Pacific West line train from Geneva to Chicago last Wednesday morning -- you have my apologies for the noise. Ditto for those on the 5:32 PM train from Chicago to Geneva.

We spent a little time with them on Thursday, then all day on Friday while my sister and her husband got a full kid-free day. We watched videos (I've think I've had enough Peter Rabbit for a while. My mom started decorating the house with Peter Rabbit stuff when the older girl was born, and she has had nearly seven years to collect the stuff. The kids decided to create a "made up" uncle called "Uncle Peter Rabbit." I think that demonstrates the overabundance of Beatrix Potter stuff in my parents' house).

Anyway, we also played outside, where the older girl was fascinated by bugs, particularly this one on a tree leaf:


She kept calling it a ladybug, and I kept correcting her. Then it changed color and she decided it had made a cocoon:


She would not believe me when I said it was still a bug. Finally she ran and got Grandpa and he managed to convince her that it was still just a bug. I think Laura is appalled by this fascination with insects.

After lunch we walked the girls to a nearby park. We stupidly forgot to bring water, so we couldn't stay very long before heading back. Cricket came along on the walk, and was so exhausted that she took over the kids' doll bed:


Hey, it was the perfect size! She was rather traumatized by the small people running around shouting "Cricky!" and wanting to pick her up, so she deserved a good nap:


Saturday the kids came to my house briefly so that they could see where "Aunt Sara" lives. I think they found my house dull, because unlike Grandma's, it does not have toys hidden in every corner. We all went back to Grandma's for dinner.

It was great to see the kids. They currently live on an Air Force base in Oklahoma (my brother-in-law is in the Air Force, but no, he does not fly planes). Before that they were in Okinawa, and before that they were in New Mexico. There is a good chance that they will be sent off somewhere again, possibly overseas, or maybe to Alaska. So there is no guarantee how often they get to visit.

Catching Up

So much going on...so much NOT going on. I don't know. I see haven't posted since July 14. I have no excuses other than it is summer, I am feeling lazy, and I don't have a coterie of guest bloggers on hand to fill in for me. Anyway, a bunch of utterly unrelated thoughts...

We're still waiting for someone to buy the house. Laura decided to order a St. Joseph statue. Supposedly burying this upside down will help sell the house. I think this sounds bizarre, but who am I to argue? I am anxious to sell the house and get on with this move. It feels like we've had our lives on hold forever. Laura's place has many more posts about our impatience.

Several of the Montana Bloggers are protesting a Las Vegas businessman’s attempt to trademark the phrase “The Last, Best Place.” This is the phrase used as the title of William Kittredge's anthology about Montana. I think we own a copy of that book, actually. Anyway, to protest this, the bloggers are temporarily changing the titles of their blogs to "The Last, Best Place." It looks like Watermark has a pretty good list of participants so far.

This is a terrific post that nearly made me cry. I will only quote this tiny bit, because you really must read the whole thing:

At two years old, Christopher has the angry fuck-you attitude I still don't have, a willingness to suffer a broken nose from getting smacked with the back of a shovel if it means not losing face. I can't think of a single incident in my early childhood when I had that raw anger necessary to protect myself. Instead, I mistakenly believed if I was nice, and fair, and showed a willingness to get along, bullies would leave me alone. And if worst came to worst, I'd follow the popular advice of teachers and parents and just ignore them.

I have no idea why this advice is so popular. As adults, haven't they figured out that the joy of bullying is bullying itself? Ignoring the problem doesn't make it go away. What makes it go away is that willingness to step up to the edge and jump, even if it means getting hurt.

During the month of July, John Scalzi took a break. He DID have a coterie of guest bloggers to fill in for them, and they were all very entertaining. Which reminds me, I've added mythago to my list of links over there on the right.

Finally, there is this post from Jason at Positive Liberty (which, incidentally, has recently become a group blog). I really don't have much to add. The pictures do a terrific job of rebutting the utterly nasty e-mail Jason is recounting. I've noticed that the "ex-gay" people tend to focus mostly on men, not women, so I've never been the target of this sort of thing. Jason did a terrific job. The post has lots of great comments, too.

Odd and Ends

Some semi related items today...

First, John Scalzi's By the Way today points to a really cool picture from the Tour de France in the New York Times. I've no idea how long NYT links stay good -- hopefully it will work at least for a few days.

Second, although I still disagree with him, yesterday Eric Zorn posted an update on his Tour criticism. It is too bad that many of his detractors had to be all nasty in their replies. Fortunately, some people were a little more reasonable. Eric quotes one of his e-mails:

Bill Hannahs-- As you suggested, the Tour de France did once try sending the riders out according to their position, but it was difficult to manage and the modern stage race has evolved to be a very stable and fair playing field. Please, don't be offended when I tell you I don't think you really understand the underlying dynamics of the event.

I think your criticism is much to be blamed on the television coverage because television does not convey the wonder and awe of the event. Dismissing the Tour without seeing it in person is like dismissing Moby Dick because you didn't like the movie.

I would love to see the tour in person. This next part particularly resonated with me, given my comments regarding the team aspects the other day:

Cycling is a team sport. But unlike football or baseball, it is also an individual sport. In this respect it more closely reflects real life which is a fabric of loose alliances and individual efforts. Alliances are made and dissolved on the spot.

It is not uncommon for strange alliances to form in the middle of a race or for teammates to betray their comrades. To try and remove the team aspect of the sport would be harder than removing it from football, because not only are there teams that wear the same jersey, but there are alliances that form between teams and amongst individuals and it is fascinating to watch.

Finally, I have to make one last remark. At the end of Eric's latest entry, he says this

I watched the news reports Tuesday night of Lance Armstrong, with apparent nonchalance, let Alejandro Valverde pass him in the last meters of the day’s heat because Armstrong knew he’d already regained the right to wear the yellow jersey. Maybe that’s the way it should be. But maybe not.

Perhaps he looked nonchalant, but I'm not so sure of that. Go take a listen to Day 11 of the Sirius radio Lance Armstrong Reports podcast. It suggests that Lance was giving all he had and just couldn't manage to "lose those guys."

Finally, not really related to either of the above, Laura got about 500 hits yesterday because of a New York Times article about New Jersey bloggers. Yes, I thought it was odd too. The article makes a mention of the Rascal Fair, which is a blog carnival for Montana bloggers. Since Laura's blog has a rather unusual name, I think it caught the attention of the author. The funny thing is, of course, that at the moment Laura is a Montanan in exile here in the Midwest.

Looking at my own referral logs, most of my visitors over the last 2 days have been from Laura's site, so apparently I'm picking up some of those hits as well. Amazingly, Laura started her blog in April, I started mine last November, and she is rapidly catching up to me in number of hits.

Tour de France and Whine de Zorn

In general, I like Eric Zorn of the Chicago Tribune. I usually enjoy his column, even when I don't agree with it.

But he lost me today with his gripe about the Tour de France, especially his apparent annoyance with the media coverage of it.

You just had to go and pick on the one sporting event that actually prompts me to look at Sports section before tossing it into the recycle bin each morning!

Harumph.

He stuck with his argument in a later update responding to his critics.

I mostly agree with Eric's critics on this one, although his responses were interesting. I do realize that the tour isn't going to grab everyone's attention and that's OK. I am somewhat...amused...by the notion that there is too much media coverage overwhelming poor Eric's delicate anti-tour ears. I mean really, Eric's own paper has been running one tour story in the Sports section each day.

Usually on page 9 or so.

I think the Tribune publishes more words about baseball in January than it has about the tour.

Yes, the Outdoor Life Network has gone on tour overdrive, but that is just one cable channel. I haven't seen a thing on network TV.

Eric's biggest complaint is that the race isn't structured as "one big race" but is instead "split up into a bunch of mini-races." Each stage has a winner, and fans "make a big deal" about who wins each stage, even though it is meaningless in the end.

Kind of the way that baseball playoffs are not one big game, but a series of games, and each individual game has a winner, and winning one game is "meaningless" since it doesn't necessarily mean your team will win the World Series. Right?

Eric wants each stage to start with physical time gaps, so if the leader is ten minutes ahead, that rider would get a ten minute head start. Which sounds to me like proposing that game 2 of the World Series begin with the same scores the teams had at the end of game 1.

Sorry for all the baseball analogies here, but really. I don't see the point of Eric's suggestion. He doesn't like the team aspect of it, which is exactly the reason that I enjoy it. The race is a unique combination of individual work and teamwork. Winning the tour requires both an incredible amount of individual ability and the support of a great team. The team leader must have the ability to inspire his teammates to forgo their own glory and work for him. As many have noted, Lance would not have won the tour six times in a row without a terrific team. He knows it; they know it. In today's stage, it was fascinating to watch Lance's former teammate Roberto Heras drop off the back as Lance and Team Discovery accelerated up the mountain. A few years ago, Heras was one of those team members up front, setting the pace for Lance. The man is obviously capable of riding at such a pace, so what happened? I believe one of the commentators made the point that riding the tour as a team leader is entirely different than riding it in support of a team leader.

At any rate, as of right now, the "keep the tour as it is" option on Eric's click poll is winning:

• 10.9% - Yes, jazz it up. Make it more like one long race. (38 responses)
• 69.9% - No, it's good the way it is. (244 responses)
• 19.2% - I don't care a fiddler's fig about the Tour de France (67 responses)

Of course, it is early in the race, so that doesn't mean anything and the final results could change.

More Garden Blogging

Just trying to keep my flowers alive as temperatures stay high and rain continues to not fall. Here's the weather report from my backyard:


Anyway, my flowers and plants are doing quite well, though the lawn has turned a distinct shade of brown. Normally I wouldn't care about the brown lawn, but of course this year is different since the house is on the market. I've set up the sprinkler in the backyard and am hoping that the grass recovers. At least no one else's looks any better.

By the way, once we move, I really want one of these so that I don't have to waste so much water out of the tap or worry about watering restrictions.

Getting back to the gardening successes...here are some pictures I took just this morning:

The impatiens in baskets out front. This is a great improvement over 2 weeks ago - nice and bushy, plenty of blooms.


What can I say? I like flower close-ups. I particularly like the second one here since I prefer the bright orange flower color. These are actually not from the hanging baskets -- we ended up with a bunch of leftover impatiens after filling up the baskets, so there are two ordinary pots living on the front porch.




The basil has just shot up. I think we need to cook something that needs lots of basil soon to use up some of this.


So far I've harvested several leaves of mint for iced tea, but the plant is so bushy you can't even tell.

Survey

Laura did it, so I'm doing it too.

Memories of London

I can't even begin to think of what to say about the attacks. Many other bloggers are doing a far better job than I could. So far, the best post I've read is from Jason at Positive Liberty in which he discusses the absurdity of terrorism.

I can't quote from it because you really have to read the whole thing.

I have very little to add about the attacks, but this incident did prompt me to think about the week I visited London during my senior year of high school. I am finding it hard to remember. 1989 seems like a terribly long time ago, but 16 years is really not that long. Somewhere, probably buried in my parents' house someplace, are the prints from the six rolls of film I shot over there. Other details are fuzzy, but the six rolls of film are not. I am positive it was six. Strange how that detail is so solid and clear when the rest is a blur. Perhaps it is because the camera was new, a gift specifically desired for this trip, and I worried about taking that damn film through airport security on the way there and back. That camera held up pretty well -- I still have it, it still works just fine, and I only replaced it this past October because I wanted to go digital.

We crammed a great deal into one week. It was a trip with others from my English and World Literature class, led by our teacher and her husband who had been doing this for years and knew London as well as their own backyard. My mother was there as well, as one of the adult chaperones, mostly because she loved British history. At one point she was a member of the The Richard III Society. I shared my hotel room with one of my classmates.

I remember visiting St. Paul's Cathedral and climbing steps forever to the top. I remember Westminster Abbey. We had a terrific tour guide at one of those places, but now I can't remember which one. I think we went to several museums. We saw four plays. I don't remember the name of the first one, but the others were "Chess," "Starlight Express," and "Metropolis." I think I was the only one in our group who liked "Metropolis." I have the London cast recording of it loaded on my iPod and still listen to it occasionally. I never claimed to have normal taste in theatre.

We took the tube everywhere. It was the first time I had ever been on a subway. After college I lived in Chicago for a few years and took the Red Line to work everyday and riding a subway became a boring, everyday experience to be endured. In London it was all new and exciting, an experience to be relished. Somewhere I have a tea towel with a map of the London Underground on it. I'm amazed we were able to find our way through that maze of colorful lines and never once get lost. The Chicago CTA map is pathetic in comparison, with its few train lines all going into the Loop, nothing but buses everywhere else, and constant service cuts.

My mom discovered tea time in the hotel restaurant. We discovered pubs and fish and chips and some sort of sparkling lemonade that I still remember fondly. Once we ate in a Greek restaurant near the hotel and I remember an appetizer that looked like small fish, with the heads still on. We had continental breakfast delivered to the room every morning -- big, crusty rolls and hot tea. Or did I drink hot chocolate instead? I think that was before my caffeine addiction. I do remember giving the delivery person an excessively large tip the first day because I was in a hurry to make him leave before my classmate came out of the shower and flustered with the exchange rates and the unfamiliar heavy coins that seemed quite aptly named "pounds."

I wish I could remember more specifics. We saw the
crown jewels. We saw the changing of the guard, I think. We walked for what seemed like miles and we ate once at the Hard Rock Cafe, London. I have long since lost the T-shirt and it wouldn't fit now anyway. I mailed postcards to my high school boyfriend back home and the hardware store where I worked. I never imagined that sixteen years later I would love another woman and plan to move to Montana with her.

At the time, I thought I would remember the trip forever. I attempted to keep a travel journal but failed, writing only the first entry about the flight from O'Hare to Heathrow. I constantly worried about losing my passport, which has long since expired and not been renewed. We bought books. A group of my classmates wanted to go out to a club one night. I spent the evening with the only other two who weren't interested in an expensive cover charge and loud music and we browsed in bookstores. Alright, I don't remember what kind of store it was, just that we went there and I strongly suspected that at least one of my companions was gay. I remember their high school faces, but not their names.

I wish I could find all those pictures. Perhaps then I would be able to remember more.

Saturday Garden Blogging

Two weeks ago we finally got around to buying some flowers and plants. In past years I usually did this in May, but I guess I was just somewhat lazy this year. Anyway, I drove down the street to The Growing Place (Aurora branch). It is actually within walking distance, but lugging home several plants and a big bag of potting soil would be rather difficult, so I drove. Laura stayed home to be ready to haul the dogs away in the event of a showing. So I had free reign at the gardening center, which is always fun. Laura doesn't really get into the gardening thing that much anyway.

I bought:

• A full flat of impatiens for the two hanging baskets out front ("Accent Sunrise Mix," a mix of apricot, orange, salmon, and white flowers). We planted the extra ones in small pots for the front porch. I've always gotten good results with impatiens on the porch since they like the shade.


• A gerbera daisy for a pot out back ("Festival Scarlet with Eye")


• Two basil plants for a cedar box on the backyard picnic table ("Greek Columnar Basil"). We plan to use this one for cooking.


• Two spearmint plants for a cedar box on the picnic table. We use these for cooking as well, although they probably get the most use in iced tea.

This is similar to the last few summers, with the notable exception of tomatoes, which I used to plant in pots. Since the house is currently on the market, we will probably not be here in August when tomatoes would be ready to harvest. I'm going to miss the homegrown tomatoes this year. I don't have an actual in-ground garden, so I would always plant them in pots, which actually works quite well.

We planted everything in the hottest part of a hot, humid weekend. Ugh.

Anyway, the plants have all done great the last couple weeks. I took pictures the day we planted everything and again today, just two weeks later. The herbs have grown quite a bit, despite the fact that we've snipped off a few leaves to use already.

The gerbera flower, close up:

The full plant:


The basil today:

The day we planted it:


The mint today:

The day we planted it:


Hanging basket today. I find it hard to get a good angle to photograph these:

The same basket the day we planted the flowers, looking a little scrawny:


This is the flower from a potentilla plant we have in a large pot. We've had this one since the first summer we lived here (2001). One year it looked pretty much dead, with just one branch still hanging in there. It then recovered and has been doing great ever since. Two weeks ago it was covered with these little yellow flowers.

Weather

Well, I've been a blog slug lately. Haven't posted in weeks. I don't have any great excuses. Busy with work, busy waiting for the house to sell, busy wasting time watching television. I did go on a short business trip this week, which is somewhat unusual (the last time I traveled for work was eight years ago).

Laura posted today complaining about the summer weather we're having. Yesterday afternoon around 4 I checked the current weather at Weather.com:

• In Oak Brook (where I work), it was 96 degrees and humid.


• In Aurora (where I live), it was 95 degrees and humid. (yeah, that one degree makes a huge difference!)


• In Missoula (where I will live...once we sell the house) it was 75 degrees.

And people ask me why I want to move to Montana!

Bunny Update

Just a couple quick pictures from this evening. They are getting a bit camera-shy and skittish.

Fortunately, the zoom on the camera helped with this one.


This one didn't want me to get too close.


This morning I counted five...so three of the original eight have vanished. BUT last I looked this evening, there were six...so apparently one came back. Or I am just going crazy.

Laura has a whole series of pictures from the weekend, including one of my favorites:

Imposing One's Views

In responding to this column, Andrew Sullivan succinctly expresses a view I've held for years that seems consistently lost on those so-called Christians trying to influence politics:

Secularism allows Christians, and any other religious faith, to affirm religious values, live exactly as they see fit, and avoid such moral outrages as abortion and gay civil unions in their own lives, if they so wish. All secularism does is say that as a political matter, there will be as much government neutrality as possible because the government should represent all citizens; that the Church and the state shall coexist, but independently of each other.

I will never understand those who wish to write the dictates of their religion into law. I just don't get it. To me, laws banning abortion or gay marriage are no different than laws forbidding the eating of pork because it is against certain religions. Your religion says "don't eat pork"? Then don't do so. That's your business and your dinner plate you're talking about. I don't have the right to come to your house and stuff pork sandwiches down your throat. But you have no right to turn around and tell me -- someone who doesn't share your faith -- that I can't legally eat pork.

Many Christians seem to have a victim complex whereby they believe they are being picked on if the government doesn't do special favors for them.

Even way back in the dark ages, when I went through my own fundamentalist Christian phase, I thought that some of the battles being fought were silly. For example, prayer in public schools. I never understood why Christian parents would want to grant schools this power over their children. It is all well and good when your own faith is in the majority, but what if you win, and then the demographics change? All of a sudden your community is majority Muslim and the teachers are leading your kids in prayers to Allah rather than reciting the Lord's Prayer. Does anyone believe that Christian parents would be fine with that for half a second? Then why expect Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, and agnostic parents to be fine with starting the day by reciting "Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name."

Both the column and Andrew's response mention abortion, which is an excellent example of how political opponents redefine words to mischaracterize their opponent's true position. Redefine "secular" to mean "anti-Christian." Redefine "pro-choice" to mean "pro-abortion." This is supremely dishonest. Once can be personally opposed to abortion while at the same time maintain that it should be legal. It is highly unlikely that I would ever choose to have abortion myself (setting aside the fact that pregnancy isn't something that is going to just happen to me under normal circumstances here). If, say, one of my young nieces came to me for advice about an unplanned pregnancy, I would probably emphasize other options if possible. Ditto for any of my female friends. To me, pro-choice means just that...choice. The choice the woman makes does not have to be abortion. It is completely consistent and pro-choice to choose one of the other options in this situation.

In other words, forcing an abortion on a woman is just as appalling as forcing her to carry the baby to term. Both are examples of "imposing ones views" on another person.

Runaway Bunnies

We've been monitoring the bunnies in the backyard the last few days. I am guessing that they were very newly born when we found them last week. They appear to be growing up fast!

On May 28 it looks like their eyes are still closed:


Two days later, still closed. I like the way they line up facing opposite directions in this one:


Finally, yesterday evening we saw that their eyes had opened:


Which leads me to the title of this post...never mind the runaway bride, we have runaway bunnies! When we checked on them yesterday evening, I noticed that one seemed to be a bit more active than the others. He's the one on the far right side of the picture:




After a few seconds of hopping, he succeeded in jumping right after the nest and took off across the lawn! We tried to herd the bunny back to the nest, but that didn't work. Laura scooped him up and put him back the nest. He didn't like that much and tried to escape again. Covering the nest back up with the fur and grass, then gently holding it down for a second seemed to settle everyone down.



Before all the excitement, I did manage to get a pretty close look and I'm fairly convinced that there are six bunnies in the nest. I originally though there were only four, but I got a pretty good look at them this time. At one point, I could clearly see four on top, and two more buried below the others.

The saga continued today. At one point, Laura noticed what appeared to be a hole in the nest covering, suggesting that one of the bunnies was out and about. We are being very cautious about the dogs now -- I really don't want to have to pry a baby bunny out of Cricket's mouth!

This evening I decided to go check on them. I opened the back door without looking first and was startled to see the nest already exposed...and the mother bunny there with the babies! She took off immediately. I dashed for the camera and managed to get one shot, which did not turn out very good because the flash reflected against the screen door:


We watched for her to come back, but she didn't. I hope she got a chance to feed the babies at some point today. I normally peer out the door to check before opening.

Anyway, here is the final picture, about an hour or so after the mother bunny took off. Everyone seems pretty calm.

Award for the Most Creative Complaint About Same-Sex Marriage

Award for the Most Creative Complaint About Same-Sex Marriage

Jesse at Pandagon effectively attacks a ridiculous article by someone named David R. Usher claiming that same-sex marriage is a feminist plot designed to snatch control of children away from men, while somehow forcing the men to pay for it.

I think this is my favorite quote from the article:

In terms of economics, same-sex marriage creates three unequal classes of marriages. Marriages by two women have six sources of income -- the incomes of two women, two sets of child support (with hidden alimony), and two sets of welfare entitlements. Heterosexual marriages only have two incomes. Marriages between two men are likely to be paying child support and hidden alimony.

Um, OK. Somehow I have been terribly cheated. My lesbian relationship has exactly ONE income -- mine. Granted, we have no children, so I guess we don't fit into his odd little world.

Some good friends of ours, however, do have two children they adopted. The biological fathers of those children do not pay any child support or "hidden alimony", seeing as they signed away their parental rights when the children were born. That couple also has ONE income, since one of the women stays home to take care of the kids.

At any rate, this one is so strange that it seems almost silly to respond to it. Jesse summed it up pretty well with this comment:

In a society where gay men were allowed to marry other men rather than duck into straight marriages in order to seem "normal", why would they be paying child support or "hidden" alimony? I hate to be the one to break this out, but when you don't stick your sperm rod into someone's baby hole, it's really hard to think of any outcome which would result in you paying child support. In much the same way, a lesbian who legally obtains donor sperm (which negates any right the donor has to a legal claim of parenthood for the child) cannot actually get child support or alimony from anyone.

Exactly. There are of course cases in which the sperm doner is some the couple knows and he might have some sort of parenting role, but in that case it is usually a mutually-agreed on arrangement.

Regarding the odd comments on welfare, Jesse also points out that this notion that heterosexual married families can't get welfare is also false. I don't have any direct experience in with the welfare issue myself. Somewhere around my house (probably packed up in a box in the garage) I have an old copy of A Legal Guide For Lesbian & Gay Couples. I recall reading a discussion of legal issues if you were living with a welfare recipient, and it made it pretty clear that the income of an "unrelated adult female" living in the house certainly could be considered when calculating welfare benefits. Women don't get welfare because they are women. They get welfare based on their income (or lack therof).

Furthermore, by his own definitions here, a heterosexual marriage could have extra income as well...if a divorced woman with children remarries, the father of her children is still going to be paying child support. So this hypothetical family will have three sources of income, plus possibly welfare as well.

Mr. Usher also makes this interesting observation:

Marriages involving two women have full parental rights and control of children by presumption of women’s sexual birth function. Heterosexual marriages also have full parental rights and control of children. Marriages involving two men are unlikely to have children. When they do, the men are unlikely to have any substantive parental rights, if any at all.

It is touching that Mr. Usher is so concerned about the legal protection for the children of gay male couples. Oddly enough, adoption laws exist to ensure that parents have parental rights for their children, and these laws can work just fine for all sorts of families, provided the religious right doesn't succeed in stripping them away.

Although I don't know for certain, I suspect Trey and his partner (see Daddy, Papa, and Me) both have legal rights to their adorable daughter Emma. If anything, same sex marriage would increase the legal protection of their family, not distract from it.

Like I said, I feel somewhat silly taking the time to respond to this one. Alas, I could not help myself.

This is too funny

I work in the software industry (although I'm not a developer), so I can relate to this post from A Secular Franciscan Life.

Flopsy, Mopsy, and Cottontail Update

The baby rabbits we found the other day appear to be doing well. Their mother must be coming into the yard to feed them when we're not looking. I did see a rabbit dashing across the alley the other evening. It looked like she came from the general vicinity of my back fence.

This picture isn't great, but you can see that they now have some fur.


One of the bunnies decided to pose for the camera here:


We have reached an understanding with Cricket. She is still allowed in the backyard when supervised. If she approaches the rabbit nest, we shoo her away from it. So far this seems to be working, although I don't think Cricket is very happy about it.


I am assuming that the mother rabbit won't be concerned about the scent of dogs in the backyard, seeing as that scent was all over the place before she decided to have her babies there in the first place.