Something to Remember

All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well…

--Julian of Norwich

Kids in Politics

Okay, in theory I think involving kids in the political process is a good thing. It teaches kids that government matters; it also educates them out of their natural self-absorption (and possibly forestalls the oh-so-jaded extended adolescent attitude of "it's all bullshit anyway"). But they shouldn't be allowed to get front and center--I get really irritated when they're used as props, obviously under the assumption that if a child says it, we're all supposed to stop and marvel at the "out of the mouths of babes" wisdom of children. Bullshit. That kind of transparent manipulation irritates me the way casting kids with speech impediments in commercials irritates me. (Speech impediments aren't cute, and kids being pumped up to be artificially cute is annoying. Kids speaking properly and articulately--that's cute. Kids just being kids is cute)

I say this because this picture yesterday sent my blood pressure skyward:


Ugh. Just ugh. I hate the scrawled crappy writing--someone should have helped that kid write the poster so it's more legible. (Oh, except that wouldn't be "childlike" and therefore by definition adorable.) It reminds me of those annoying construction site signs--"My daddy works here, please drive carefully" complete with patented backward Ses. And the argument--"what if you were Terri." Well, if I were Terri, I wouldn't know what was happening to me and therefore I wouldn't care! End of discussion.

I don't even blame the kid. As I said I think it's a good idea to expose kids to politics and making your voice heard. I blame whoever thought the rest of us would be swayed by the sight of a child in the front of the crowd waving a crappy placard with bad writing, articulating a simplistic argument. It's just annoying and manipulative.

Shallow, Clothes-Oriented Post

Today I'm all in pink and white. (I figured since it's supposed to rain the rest of the week, I should wear my less-sturdy outfit today.) I have on my pink girly-girl sweater with the relaxed neckline and the ribbons and bows with a cream-colored wool A-line skirt. For shoes, I'm wearing these darling pink tweed ankle-strapped pumps (details--ankle strap is in hot pink vynl, very rounded toe, skinny heel--very '40s looking). My hair is swept up casually and clipped in the back with a silver, old-fashioned barrette with pink stones and my earrings are my dangly, swirly ones with the hearts. Makeup is simple--teal mascara with slight teal accents around the eyes, pale pink lip pencil and liner, clear gloss. And pink powder, naturally.

This is pretty appalling...

...Now we have proof that the Senate Republicans are jumping on the Schiavo case for political gain:

(Memo circulated among Senate Republicans on the floor, excerpt from abcnews.com)

S. 529, The Incapacitated Person's Legal Protection Act

Teri (sic) Schiavo is subject to an order that her feeding tubes will be disconnected on March 18, 2005 at 1p.m.

The Senate needs to act this week, before the Budget Act is pending business, or Terri's family will not have a remedy in federal court.

This is an important moral issue and the pro-life base will be excited that the Senate is debating this important issue.

This is a great political issue, because Senator Nelson of Florida has already refused to become a cosponsor and this is a tough issue for Democrats.

The bill is very limited and defines custody as "those parties authorized or directed by a court order to withdraw or withhold food, fluids, or medical treatment."

There is an exemption for a proceeding "which no party disputes, and the court finds, that the incapacitated person while having capacity, had executed a written advance directive valid under applicably law that clearly authorized the withholding or or (sic) withdrawl (sic) of food and fluids or medical treatment in the applicable circumstances."

Incapacitated persons are defined as those "presently incapable of making relevant decisions concerning the provision, withholding or withdrawl (sic) of food fluids or medical treatment under applicable state law."

This legislation ensures that individuals like Terri Schiavo are guaranteed the same legal protections as convicted murderers like Ted Bundy.

Geez, it's worse than I thought--they lack even the courage of their convictions, it's just all for political reasons which wouldn't be so bad except that 1) they're going against their own stated party goals (smaller government) so they're hypocrites and 2) None of this is any of our business and this legislation is setting a terrible precedent. This is pretty unbelievable. As is this:

Rather than incurring the cost of flying back to Washington on Air Force One -- pegged in 1999 at $34,000 an hour -- Bush could have signed the bill in Texas a few hours later without significantly endangering Schiavo's life, critics said. Not only had doctors estimated that she could live for up to two weeks without the feeding tube, but a federal judge was not expected to hear the case until today.

"Obviously, Bush could have signed the bill in Texas," said Dan Bartlett, a senior counselor to Bush.

Oh man. This is all so disgusting. What a posturing useless drama queen. Thanks for spending untold hundreds of thousands of dollars on Air Force One all so you can sign legislation that will almost certainly be struck down as unconstitutional.

I really do feel terrible for her parents--I can't imagine being in their position. I imagine I might well want desperately to believe a miracle is possible. Which is precisely why I believe it's not for us to decide, and it's horribly inappropriate for Congress to swoop in with legislation, even if they were acting from sincere motives (which it appears they are not). This is between Michael Schiavo and Terri's parents, God bless them all.