Kvetch: Denny's Octomom Special

This just in: Denny's now has a breakfast special in honor of the Octomoron. You get eight eggs without the sausage, and the guy next to you has to pay your tab.

ARGUMENT: Big Weddings are a Waste of Money

This is really more of a rant, but in case anyone really needs to be persuaded not to spend money they don't have on something as useless as a big party -- here goes nothing.
On weddings:
Young people (brides, especially) have come to confuse The Wedding with The Marriage. In fact, you can predict with amazing accuracy how short the marriage will be based on the outlandish spending of The Princess (or her family) on 'her special day'. I am all for a woman having a 'special day' but it's ridiculous to go into debt for something that's overwith in one day, especially when you don't yet have a HOUSE. Thankfully, the groom's family is generally left out of the really expensive stuff. I suppose this is because he is generally assumed to be The Main Provider and he'll have to pay for necessities like Food and Shelter. Whereas this has changed somewhat -- dual incomes are more necessary than ever -- it's still assumed that if one of the pair stays home (at least temporarily) to raise a child, it'll be the mom. Back to Bridezilla. Since weddings have largely become celebrations of The Princess and her beauty, the groom is sometimes relegated to the background, where (my guess is) he is content to be. Unless he's a closet queen, he is unlikely to care what flowers are displayed or whether the chuppah is suitable for framing. He only has to show up in a tux and bring the ring.
I found it hilariously inappropriate when I was told that a friend's future daughter-in-law had presented him a 'bill' for half of what 'her special day' was going to cost. He politely declined, earning her eternal resentment, even though he had given his son a very expensive education, which would, we assume, be used to support The Princess and her future children at some point. Never mind that my friend had gone into debt to give his son this fine education (B.A. and M.A.) so that the son would go into the working world without a monkey of debt on his back. Never mind that paying for his son's advanced education means he will probably not retire as early or as easily. That gift is something that cannot be taken away, and will not be wasted -- something much more important than what amounts to a big party (so the bride can show her friends how valued she is). By the way, from what I've heard, she is a rather nice girl -- just had her perspective warped by being a guest at too many weddings of her pals, and figuring she had to spend at least in the realm of what their families spent on their 'special days'. People talk, y'know. It just wouldn't do to have Muffy wear her mother's wedding dress, carry a modest bouquet and have punch and cake at the church -- instead of renting a hall and paying a band worthy of a Broadway show. But this girl majored in finance, fahcrissakes. She knows what things like houses and cars and babies cost.
If there's one valuable thing that may return with this depressed economy, it's a more realistic way of celebrating marriages. Before the Great Depression, my grandparents were married by a Justice of the Peace, and grandpa bought a tiny gold band (all he could afford) that my grandmother cherished all her life. She never traded in that ring for one with a big diamond. She had the real gem for nearly 50 years, and she was smart enough to know it.

ARGUMENT: Sure, I'll help you, Nadya!

The Octomoron has done what we all could've guessed -- created a website to beg for money. Mind you, nobody would mind helping her children/victims, but there's no way I'll do it through her site. I'm rather glad that it's come to light that Nadya Suleman has her six older children sleeping on dirty mattresses on the floor -- and living in a two bedroom house with a dirt yard and broken windows. CPS can now, at least, get involved and help protect them, since their mother will not, and their grandmother is so disgusted with what her daughter has done that she has washed her hands of her.
I posted a pledge on her site to help (in my own limited way) with her six older children if she would put the new eight up for adoption (possibly in groups of two or three) so they will be loved and nurtured by families desperate to have children (disabled or not). In that way, the octuplets could have a blood relation and sibling close by, and possibly keep in touch with the others as they grow up. If Nadya truly wants to prove herself worthy of the name, "mother", she will put her children's best interest first, and do what is right -- by all of them.

RANT: More on the Moron with Octuplets

February 6th http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29038814/?gt1=43001Well, the Octomoron has finally sat down for an interview -- more Botoxed and limp-plumped than we've seen since Joan Rivers -- and says she wanted "just one more baby, not eight." Right. She had six embryos implanted, because "that was what was available," and "they're my children." Does that mean she wanted the rest of them to die? or just didn't care? If Nadya Suleman really wanted ALL of her frozen embryos to have a chance at life, she would've had them implanted two or three at a time, not all at once. But she would've had to become a baby-making machine for a few years to do it, and it wouldn't have made such a big news splash. Guess it was worth the risk of having them born blind, deformed or otherwise disabled to try it all at once. Next, who is the dumbass 'doctor' who implanted all these embryos, and is he willing to pay some of their medical costs? Is he off the hook just because this was a 'legal' procedure? What about the father/sperm donor? If he knows this woman and agreed to father her 'embryos' -- does he give up his parental responsibilities? Nadya Suleman's own parents have disowned her for this irresponsible act -- one of the few sources of emotional (if not financial) support she had left. If this case was REALLY about the best interest of her children, she'd never have gone through with it this way. Whereas I don't believe a woman should ever be forced to carry through a pregnancy she doesn't want -- neither do I believe in abusing one's right to reproduce. If nothing else, this case should spark debate on changing legislation for fertility doctors. If one cannot even provide for one's existing children, one should not have the option of having embryos implanted if the resulting children will have to be raised at the taxpayers' expense. These innocent victims of their mother's attention-getting fantasy should have been adopted out as embryos if she really wanted them all to have a chance at life. But it's still not too late -- she can give them to childless couples who have the sincere desire to love and raise them, not gain fame from their very existence.

RANT: We CAN pay for Healthcare in the U.S.

Here are some basics every human being needs in order to survive: Air, water, food, shelter, medical care, emotional care, knowledge. Some can be gotten for free; some need to be paid for or provided. Apparently the people to whom we hand over our taxes just don't get that. Instead, we get to pay for parks, bridges (to nowhere, sometimes), street lights, museums, etc. These same funds should pay for OUR BASIC NEEDS before they pay for ANYTHING ELSE. PERIOD.

Hasn't it occurred to the noodniks in Washington that one big reason doctors have a malpractice insurance crisis -- and we have lawsuit abuse in this country because we don't have basic healthcare paid for out of our taxes? What a change we'd see -- what a reduction in frivolous lawsuits with awards in the millions of dollars, if our medical care was initially paid for? Why are we being taxed to hell and back if it isn't benefitting us where we need it most?

We've been brainwashed into believing that our taxes would all go up to 50% if we funded healthcare nationally, but it isn't so. It wouldn't have to be if our tax dollars went for our care first, before all the pork. We've also been told our employers would take away our healthcare benefits if it became nationalized. So what? They could afford to pay more workers if that happened. Why should one's medical care be tied to their job, anyway? Are employed people more entitled to life and health than those who have a bad run of luck or lose their jobs? Yeah, yeah, this may sound like commie talk to some, but so many of our programs are already nationalized (schools, parks, libraries, etc.) that it's ridiculous that a PRINCIPAL NEED IN LIFE is completely ignored this way. Is the U.S. just too pea-brained to realize we can DEMAND this of our legislators or vote them the hell out?

We've already started a movement to provide healthcare to children. Tell me, who takes care of healthy children when their parents are disabled in an accident or get cancer and can't pay for treatment? WE do, as taxpayers, somehow. Why not just provide healthcare to everyone OUT OF OUR TAXES and cut out unnecessary programs that only a select few of us use? I don't know about you, but I'd gladly do without a space program or a funded study of bears in the wild if we had a healthcare system that worked.

I'm not saying a plan like NHS in Britian is a perfect model for us -- I know many Brits who rely on it for the basics but go to a private doctor for 'extras' because they can afford it. I have to wait in line for non-emergency care in the U.S. too, unless I go to a doc-in-the-box. In this country, even a poor illegal alien can walk into a hospital and get her baby delivered, courtesy of us middle-class 'worker bee' citizens who pay taxes -- yet we can't get the same free treatment, even if we're citizens. A prison inmate could get in line before me for a heart transplant -- and I'd have to help pay for it. Meanwhile our 'servants' -- our elected Representatives and Senators, get the best of care (on our dime, too) but we don't.

We have too many lawyers filing too many lawsuits that take too long to settle because we have not demanded a working healthcare system. People are often forced to file bankruptcy because they can't pay for their treatment (or their kids'), then the hospitals write it off -- and we who contribute to the tax rolls end up paying for it. Our healthcare should be paid for before any Bank bailout, before any Wall Street bailout, before any Auto Company bailout. Why is that so hard to understand?

Doctors, who naturally want a financial return on their hard-won education, and pharma companies are paying lobbyists to keep the status quo. I know several foreign doctors who would be glad to work at a lower rate in Podunk, Iowa to help pay off their medical school debt, and that would cost us less. I also know several docs who wouldn't have gone into the profession if not for the outstanding financial rewards. We won't necessarily lose the best and brightest doctors if we 'go national'. A certain amount of pro bono work is required of lawyers -- why not doctors? Pharmceuticals are kept at a high price -- yes, to fund the development -- but countries with nationalized healthcare seem to do pretty well preventing diseases with the drugs they have. Has it also occurred to our genius statesmen that they'd be able to outlaw dangerous substances such as cigarettes if disease prevention was a central part of our healthcare plan?
British doctors can actually get bonuses for getting folks off cigarettes. Imagine that -- being rewarded for helping a smoker break his addiction, so he'll end up costing the system less.

Mr. Obama, I'm glad healthcare is at the top of your list... and I'm glad you're demanding more transparency with our legislators when it comes to lobbyists. Their own re-election should depend on it.

Rumination: Wherefore Lilly Paloma?

Because an old boyfriend pegged the nickname for me, that's why...

Song On The Radio -- Al Stewart, 1978
(Al, if you don't like me or this reference, just let me know -- I'll remove it.)

I was making my way through the wasteland,
the road into town passes through.
I was changing the radio stations,
with my mind on you.
All your friends call you Lilly Paloma,
but that's not the way that you are.
It's too much of a gentle misnomer,
for a shooting star.

But you and me baby,
I saw you there,
straight away I knew.
There's really no hiding,
I'll tell you right now what we're gonna do.
We'll go collecting the days,
putting the moments away.
You're on my mind like a song on the radio.
You're on my mind like a song on the radio.

I remember the first time I saw you,
alone in the dark with a drink.
With a candle flame burning before you,
and your thoughts closed in.
You were staring out into the distance,
not seeming to hear what I said.
Why did you put up such resistance,
like all the lights were red?

'Cuz you and me baby,
I saw you there,
straight away I knew.
There's really no hiding,
I'll tell you right now what we're gonna do.
We'll go collecting the days,
putting the moments away.
You're on my mind like a song on the radio.
You're on my mind like a song on the radio.

I don't know what it was that was painful,
but sometimes it's there in your face.
There are times when you just look disdainful,
of the human race.
Ah but then, on the wings of emotion,
we circle each other in flight.
'Til together we roll like the ocean,
in its bed at night.

'Cuz you and me baby,
I saw you there,
straight away I knew.
There's really no hiding,
I'll tell you right now what we're gonna do.
We'll go collecting the days,
putting the moments away.
You're on my mind like a song on the radio.
You're on my mind like a song on the radio.

Pontification: Michael Phelps is a Moron

Not only did he smoke pot in front of someone with a camera, he admitted it was himself in the photo, and admitted it was really pot in the bong (not some harmless hookah tobacco). This guy has potential MILLIONS in endorsements, for which he worked for YEARS to compete in the Olympics... and yet he'll risk any or all of that to take a hit off a bong amongst people who would publish a photo of him doing it? He almost qualifies for the Darwin Award for this one. Yeah, it looks like we'll still see him on the Wheaties boxes, but DAMN, if you had millions coming your way through endorsements, wouldn't you...um...get drunk and/or high in private???

Keep in mind, Michael, after a DUI and this incident, you could blow your whole nut, so next time you're in the news, SHUT UP AND LET YOUR LAWYER TALK FOR YOU -- unless you really want to coach highschool swimming for the next forty years...

Kvetch: How Did This Woman Get 8 More Kids?

In the news this week: An unemployed single woman had several frozen embryos left over from her first go-round of invitro. She somehow got an unethical doctor to implant all of them, knowing how high-risk multiple births are. She's already got six kids (ranging from 2 to 7 -- but hey, they're not babies any more, and this woman is into BABIES, not toddlers). She recently delivered eight tiny babies by C-section, all fighting for their lives in a NICU. Who gets to foot the bill for this (foolish disturbed, obsessed, selfish) woman's reproductive fantasy? You and me, Mr. & Mrs. U.S. Taxpayer. WE will pay for the millions in medical care these children will need just to survive their first year. We'll probably end up paying a huge chunk of their care and feeding after that, too, because mom is single and unemployed (but has a degree in Child Development -- and pursuing an advanced degree in COUNSELING ...(big laugh)... also on Taxpayer Dollars). AND, she will capitalize on her notariety by (you guessed it) retaining a PUBLICIST and getting herself a BOOK DEAL. Her 14 children are, of course, the real losers in this. Not only do they have a certified wingnut for a mother, she wouldn't have enough time for each of them if she was that Hindu goddess with eight arms. This woman thrives on attention, and it's all about HER; this is a textbook case of Munchausen's waiting to happen(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munchausen_syndrome ). The only good reason for anyone to buy her future 'book' is that, sadly, 14 innocent lives are dependent upon the income. If this idiot had a conscience that functioned as well as her uterus, the newborns would be adopted out into loving homes where each of them could get the attention they deserve. Better yet, the U.S. could grow up as a nation and change the law prohibiting frozen embryos from being adopted out -- implanted into infertile women (or surrogates) who would cherish a child.
But that self-deluded "supermom"-moron couldn't be a star then, could she?