Saturday, May 03, 2008


I spent the morning reading a new book by conservative comedian Julie Gorin called, Clintonisms: The Amusing, Confusing, and Even Suspect Musing, of Billary. I generally don't go for these kinds of books that make fun of various presidents but this one was sort of catchy and funny--although if you like the Clintons, you may not see it that way.

In the introduction, Ms. Gorin states that we are faced with the real possibility of a second Clinton presidency and her book "attempts to preempt that reminder and at the same time examine the pressing issues and questions that may be revisited in the event of a second Clinton presidency..."

She notes that her book is not a scholarly work and is not meant to be fair or balanced. "It's a collection of anecdotes, reportage, jokes and first, second and third-party quotes from and about the Clintons." The anecdotes, jokes and quotes range from those "Defining the Clintons" to "With Peacekeepers like These..." which focuses on disturbing sayings from the Clinton's ideas of foreign policy. The hypocrisy of many of the musings is food for thought.

The jokes are also humorous but honestly, I would rather just avoid another Clinton presidency altogether and let Clintonisms recede into the annals of history. But if you know someone--or you yourself enjoy this type of humor--the book would make a good gift.

Update: Ed Driscoll interviews Ms. Gorin about her book for PJM Political here.


Friday, May 02, 2008

Rachel Lucas says we need a "REAL WOMAN" Manifesto.
Kim du Toit makes some good points about my previous post entitled, "Soft and Aimless or Strong and Calculating?":

Myself, I think that men are neither aimless nor protecting themselves. I think they’ve just decided not to play the game.

In the meantime, they do stuff that’s pleasing to them—solitary or detached pursuits, from video games to hobbies like fishing or hunting—because those are not part of the game. So they go to work, put in the hours, and don’t care about their work, their careers or the job. They smile, go to endless meetings, work by “teaming” and in short, they do all the role-playing that they need to do in order to get by.

I agree that men are opting out of the game but I think they are finding different ways then in the past to meet their goals. Men really are going their own way these days. I used to think that it was troubling that men were "opting out" of parts of society such as marriage, college etc. but I realized that my thoughts about them doing so were wrong. I thought that men would miss out by not having a family, or by not going to college but I found out through talking with men that they are just finding different ways to meet their goals on their terms and not society's.

For example, I recently talked with my accountant, a man who is getting an advanced degree online. He didn't want to go to a PC university and sit through a bunch of professors putting down his gender or having him do ridiculous amounts of tedious and inefficient paperwork that he found boring. Instead, he is taking classes that he enjoys on his schedule. The male nurse at my doctor's office is getting his degree online because he doesn't want to deal with the "crap" that a regular university expects students to listen to on an ongoing basis. He stated that he simply reads the material and takes the tests and doesn't have to deal with the PC milieu that would leave him annoyed and disgruntled. Both of these men have successful careers and while I don't know what they make, I bet it is plenty enough to pay for whatever lifestyle they want to enjoy.

It's no wonder universities are turning into pink collar ghettos. Men are finding other avenues that are fulfilling and fit in with their lifestyle. With the rise of technology and alternative ways to make a living and live one's lifestyle, I have no doubt that most men will find what works for them.

Thursday, May 01, 2008

Soft and Aimless or Strong and Calculating?

Dr. Melissa thinks "Men Need to Butch Up":

Societally, it seems like men don't value or seem to be valued for manliness. A strong, hard-working, driven guy has been replaced with a soft, unmotivated, aimless man who can't make a declarative sentence or find the will to do what needs to be done. Basically, too many men have become pansies.

I have a question for you, Dr. Melissa. "Why should men--in your words--butch up?" Certainly women don't seem to value manliness as they once did.

I have a different take on things. Say that a man works hard, and "acts like a man," rarely complaining and doing "man things." What is his reward? In your mind, it is self-worth. This is nonsense. Self-worth comes from working hard and being rewarded. Today, that man is regarded as a "chump." If a man works hard to get ahead, he puts it all at risk by having a family, in a society that says that his working means that he is now responsible for everything in a way that a woman will never be--if that man gets divorced. If he has kids, he is now responsible for their standard of living no matter what. No matter if he gets sick, no matter if his ex-wife is a spendthrift, no matter if his pay goes down, no matter what. The state puts him into indentured servitude to a family that no longer wants him as a member or wants him for four weekends a month. His life is toast, unless...he never "butches up" as you suggest. Your strategy can end in early death and a lifetime of servitude. "Soft and aimless" often ends with freedom. Which would you choose?

Say, instead, a man sits around or get some half-assed job where he doesn't make much. His wife is working and supporting the family or at least pays for more than half. He no longer has to worry about working himself into an early grave, his wife can take that risk. He can spend more time with the kids and if the marriage goes bad, he has every right to claim he was around them more and had more hands on time with them--thus gaining him a greater chance at custody or at least more visitation time. If the marriage goes well, the man wins since he gets to spend more time with his kids and avoid an early heart attack. If he does head to divorce court, even a chivalrous judge will have to admit that the father is the primary caregiver. Thus, he has more rights and privileges than his wife at that point, or at least as many. I have seen this strategy work for men firsthand.

Have men become "pansies" (your words, not mine) using this strategy? I don't think so. They have become strategic. This is different than aimless. Aimless suggests no purpose. Men may look aimless but underneath it all they actually have a purpose--to protect themselves from a society that considers men responsible for the welfare of women and children but offers them little or nothing in return. Who can blame them?

Update: Vox Day has further thoughts on the topic.


Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Reality Show Campaign Update

Glenn Sacks has an update on the "Bad Dad" protest campaign: "Last night we launched a protest campaign against Fox's new reality show Bad Dads. By 9 AM this morning, Fox had received over 3,000 letters, faxes and calls. I thank all of you for your participation, and I urge you to call Fox executives...."

If you were one of the 3000 like I was to send a letter or make a phone call, thanks!


Tuesday, April 29, 2008

Cholesterol Hell

Have you ever been bitterly disappointed in a product and wondered what the heck you were thinking when you tried it? I feel that way today. I went for my biannual ICD check-up and found out I was doing fine except for one thing--somewhat high cholesterol. My cholesterol has always been a bit high--even when I had it checked in my twenties. The funny thing is, I don't have coronary artery disease despite having had a heart attack. However, cardiologists still want cholesterol low no matter what after this type of event. I can't take statins and tried many of them including Zetia, which gave me muscle pain like all the rest.

So, anyway, for the past three months, I ordered these Caramel Benecol Smart Chews--I know, it sounds like some kind of dog treat that Rachel Lucas would give to her obese dog Sunny, but these are of the human variety and are supposed to lower cholesterol, specifically LDL. Here is the pitch from Amazon:

Start to lower your cholesterol in as little as 2 weeks with Benecol Smart Chews
Contains plant stanol esters, which are proven to reduce your LDL, or "bad" cholesterol
May be used by those taking statin medications for additional cholesterol lowering
Enjoy 2-4 delicious caramel chews twice a day with meals
More than 25 clinical studies validate the safety of plant stanol esters

I followed the directions carefully and figured if two of these things was good, four would be better. At first they tasted a little odd, but I soon got used to the taste and after a while, they tasted delicious, just as advertised. I was popping one with meals throughout the day, all the while patting myself on the back for lowering my cholesterol. Except that it didn't.

Today, when I went to the doctor's office and got my cholesterol test back, it was 11 points higher overall than it was four months before. My LDL was up 30 points. My triglycerides, a type of fat found in your blood, were up over 20 points. "Bummer," I thought. I was shelling out about 28 bucks a month for these darn chewy things and all they did was increase my cholesterol. At least I didn't gain any weight--that would have really bummed me out.

If anyone has a product other than statins--or these chewy caramels-- that they have used successfully to reduce their cholesterol, let me know. I would love to find something that works.

Update: Thanks so much to everyone so far who has commented, emailed and even posted on this important topic. All of your helpful suggestions have given me a lot to think about!

Protest Fox's New Reality Show "Bad Dads"

Men's activist Glenn Sacks has put together a press release and information on how to protest Fox's New reality show, "Bad Dads." He has some good information on why the show is harmful to men and their children. Please go by and support this campaign.


Try Being Instapundit

I have to laugh when I read posts like this over at Ann Althouse's blog where she links to a blogger (don't know him or her) who says it's easy to be Instapundit. Like myself, Ann disagrees with this analysis, emphasizing that this blogging style is harder than it looks and that brevity is not always easy.

The blogger gives a few tips on how to blog in Glenn's style--citing laziness, lack of intellectualism, and easy brief links as the key to Instapundit's success. I have read over the years bloggers who talk about my husband's blogging style (usually those who disagree with him) and make fun of it. To those bloggers who feel this way, I have a challenge for you. Try being Instapundit for a while and see if you can achieve the following:

1) Keep up the sheer volume of posting daily to the tune of over 25 posts a day, perhaps more--basically blogging several times an hour. The New York Times suggests that some bloggers have heart attacks and feel stressed doing a lot less blogging than this (not that I believe this).

2) Keep up a daily average of 250,000 page views or more to your site all by yourself. That is, no daily diarists, no co-bloggers, nobody, just you. The one exception is a few times a year, you can get a few terrific guest bloggers like Professor Althouse and others to fill in for a week or so.

3) Keep up this level of interest without comments which increase page views because people keep checking back to see what others have said back to them and finally;

4) Keep this up year after year without complaining, getting upset or bothered, yelling at people, and simultaneously staying happy and doing a million other things that make the world a better place.

If you can do this, then I will eat my words and proclaim you blogger of the century. Otherwise, your criticisms are just hollow words.

Update: Katie Allison Granju agrees--it's not easy being Glenn.


Monday, April 28, 2008

Let's Hear it for Economics Professors!

Can professors turn bleeding hearts into capitalists and vice versa? It appears that they can according to an interesting article that I read in Forbes today entitled, "We Are What We Learn." Take a look and read the comments as well.

Weird Date

John Hawkins at Right Wing News has more on conservative and libertarian women and dating. I thought Megan McArdle's response to the question, "What is the weirdest date you have gone on or been asked to go on?" was pretty funny:

The weirdest date I ever went on was when I was in college. I was taken, I swear to God I am not making this up, by a guy from my Spanish class to go to the dump and shoot rats with his friends....

Hmmm, I can't top that from my previous dating days, can you? If so, share it with us in the comment section.

Sunday, April 27, 2008

America's Worst Mom?

I saw this article from Newsweek advertised at MSN with the provocative caption, "Is this America's Worst Mom? Her crime? She let her son ride the subway alone:

Would you let your fourth-grader ride public transportation without an adult? Probably not. Still, when Lenore Skenazy, a columnist for the New York Sun, wrote about letting her son take the subway alone to get back to her Manhattan home from a department store on the Upper East Side, she didn't expect to get hit with a tsunami of criticism from readers.

"Long story short: My son got home, ecstatic with independence," Skenazy wrote on April 4 in the New York Sun. "Long story longer: Half the people I've told this episode to now want to turn me in for child abuse. As if keeping kids under lock and key and helmet and cell phone and nanny and surveillance is the right way to rear kids. It's not. It's debilitating—for us and for them."

Online message boards were soon swarming with people both applauding and condemning Skenazy's decision to let her son go it alone. She wound up defending herself on the cable news networks (accompanied by her son) and on popular blogs like the Huffington Post, where her follow-up piece was ironically headlined "More From America's Worst Mom."

So, is this mom really America's worst? In my opinion, that honor should be reserved for the likes of Andrea Yates. This mom sounds like she knows her son and what he is capable of. When I was in graduate school in New York in the 80's, it was a far more dangerous place. I saw kids ride the subway all the time. No one seemed to care. Now that it's safer, no one thinks kids should come out of their homes.

Sticking the title "America's Worst Mom" on this particular mother, Lenore Skenazy, is rather ridiculous and alarmist given the things really bad mothers actually do to their children. The term should be reserved for people who deserve it.